Is Nuclear Power the Future of Space Propulsion?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Winzer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Nuclear
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the potential use of nuclear power for space propulsion, exploring various concepts, research efforts, and challenges associated with this technology. Participants examine different types of nuclear propulsion systems, including ion drives, and consider the feasibility and implications of using nuclear energy in space missions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Experimental/applied

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants indicate that there is ongoing research into nuclear power for space propulsion, but funding is limited and priorities may shift within organizations like NASA.
  • One participant suggests that a nuclear-powered ion drive could be a simpler form of nuclear propulsion to develop, noting that ion drives require electricity and have been proven to work.
  • Another participant raises concerns about the thrust of ion drives being smaller compared to chemical engines, while also acknowledging the sustainability of nuclear power in space.
  • References to upcoming talks at the ANS meeting about nuclear and emerging technologies for space suggest that there may be new developments or papers to consider.
  • One participant mentions a fellow undergraduate working on a project related to developing nuclear power for space at Idaho National Laboratory.
  • There is a discussion about the propellant requirements for ion drives, with some participants debating the advantages of different ions based on mass and ionization potential.
  • One participant proposes an alternative engine design, referencing the Farnsworth-Hirsch Fusor, as a potential concept for nuclear propulsion.
  • Concerns are raised about the logistics of carrying enough gas for long-term missions, though it is noted that engines would not be continuously burning during the journey.
  • Another participant discusses the trade-offs between different propellants, highlighting the challenges of using hydrogen due to its high ionization potential and low density.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the feasibility and practicality of nuclear propulsion, with no clear consensus on the best approach or the current state of research. Some agree on the potential of nuclear-powered ion drives, while others raise concerns about thrust and practical implementation.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations regarding funding and shifting priorities within space agencies, as well as the unresolved technical challenges related to propellant selection and engine design.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying aerospace engineering, nuclear engineering, or anyone involved in space exploration technologies.

Winzer
Messages
597
Reaction score
0
Is there any research being done for: using nuclear power for space propulsion?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Winzer said:
Is there any research being done for: using nuclear power for space propulsion?
In short yes, but the funding is very limited, and NASA and others have other priorities.
 
The simplest form of nuclear propulsion to develop would be a nuclear powered ion drive. Ion drives work and just need electricity, so I'm not sure there would be that steep of a curve to develop one...there'd just have to be a need.
 
russ_watters said:
The simplest form of nuclear propulsion to develop would be a nuclear powered ion drive. Ion drives work and just need electricity, so I'm not sure there would be that steep of a curve to develop one...there'd just have to be a need.
Those are interesting, but the thrust is small compared to a chemical engine, or maybe for our theoretical nuclear engine.

It just seems to me nuclear power in space fits. It is definitely sustainable. The reaction itself on a spacecraft would be dangerous though.
 
I think the upcoming ANS meeting in June will have a talk about NETS (nuclear and emerging technologies for space). You could probably find out which papers will be discussed and get a copy if you have access to academic journels at your university.
 
One can find links to space nuclear power here, including some papers in pdf.

http://anstd.ans.org/ [Mentors' note - this is a correction to a broken link]

Project Prometheus was the latest NASA/DOE program in an attempt to achieve something along the lines of nuclear propulsion in space. But coming as it did after the loss of Columbia, and when O'Keefe was given the directive to reduce cost, it was one of the programs to be indefinitely deferred. Nuclear power (and propulsion) is at the bottom of the list at NASA.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
One of my fellow undergraduates is currently working with Idaho National Laboratory (INL) on a project having to do with developing nuclear power for space
 
russ_watters said:
The simplest form of nuclear propulsion to develop would be a nuclear powered ion drive. Ion drives work and just need electricity, so I'm not sure there would be that steep of a curve to develop one...there'd just have to be a need.
Ion drives also need a bottle (or many bottles) of xenon gas or other high mass ion for consumption as the propellant. To understand the advantage of ion mass,

Energy E = (1/2) m v2.
Momentum p = m v
Therefore p = sqrt(2 m E)

So you get more thrust from a high mass ion.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_engines#Propellants
 
  • #10
Over a long term mission that seems like it would be a bit of a large load. Carrying enough gas for a several month journey.

Although you wouldn't be constantly burning the engines the whole way to your destination.

How about an engine design like this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farnsworth-Hirsch_Fusor
 
  • #11
With respect to energy requirements of ion propulsion, it is actually preferable to use ions of least mass in order to maximize ion speed/velocity.

let qV = 1/2 mv2, where q is the charge, V is the accelerating potential, m is the ion mass, and v is the exhaust velocity

then v = sqrt(2qV/m).


Xe is preferable from the standpoint of it's low ionization potential compared to other gases, but the trade off is low Isp. And actually, Cs is perhaps even better from the standpiont of ionziation potential.

Hydrogen would be ideal for Isp, but it has high ionization potential (13.6 eV) and low density in gas and liquid form, and liquid is disadvantageous from the standpoint of cryogenic systems.

Diborane B2H6 would be an interesting propellant, but it's very explosive in air.
 
  • #12
Although seeing as the air in space is so thin that wouldn't be a problem. The tanks would just have to be atmospherically isolated from the rest of the ship. Kept in an unpressurized section.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
639
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K