Rocket fuel efficiency and payload capacity rule of thumb

AI Thread Summary
A ten-percent increase in rocket fuel efficiency can potentially double the payload capacity of a rocket. The discussion highlights the importance of understanding the effective exhaust velocity and specific impulse when calculating payload changes. A formula is provided to model these relationships, emphasizing the mass ratios before and after stage separation. The payload capacity is influenced by the number of rocket stages, initial specific impulse, and overall rocket mass. Increases in efficiency lead to significant improvements in payload, aligning with the initial rule of thumb.
jonesclai
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
"A rule of thumb is that for every ten-percent increase in efficiency for rocket fuel, the payload of the rocket can double.”

Can someone assist me with a simple formula to model this rule-of-thumb?
What happens to the payload if the rocket fuel efficiency increases twenty to thirty percent?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm not sure what you mean by "efficiency" of the rocket fuel.

At any rate, what you are going to be looking for is rocket formula.

v_f = v_i + v_p ln\left(\frac{m_i}{m_f}\right)

This applies to a single stage. mi is the total mass of the rocket when the stage engages, and mf is the total mass right before the stage separates, or the final weight if this is the final stage or single stage rocket. Both of these include payload.

vp is the effective exhaust velocity. It is also the specific impulse (ISP) per mass of propellant. If specific impulse is given per weight of propellant (s-1 units), you have to divide it by 9.8m/s² to get the effective exhaust velocity.

10% increase in efficiency might mean a 10% increase in vp. Or it can mean a 10% increase in fraction of kinetic energy that goes into exhaust, in which case, you are only looking at 5% increase in vp. Or it could be something entirely different.

The effect on the payload will depend on the number of stages, the mass of the rocket itself, and on the specific impulse you started out with.

For insertion at LEO, the rocket needs to achieve approximately 9km/s, including losses to gravity and drag. A good fuel, like cryogenic H2 with O2 oxidizer, with good engine will have ISP of a little over 3km/s. So the mi/mf is roughly exp(3), or around 20. Because of the engines, tanks, and all the other heavy junk you need for rocket to fly, payload fraction ends up closer to 1:100. In other words, only about 20% of the mass that's being lifted is in the payload. This is neglecting all the complexity of the rocket actually being multi-stage, but it is good for an estimate.

Suppose I increased vp by 10%. The ratio goes down from 20 to 15. Assuming that the weight of the rocket itself did not have to be increased, all this goes into payload. So if before for every unit of payload, you needed 4 units of rocket mass and 95 units of fuel, now the same 95 units of fuel will lift 5.8 units, of which 4 are still the rocket, and you end up with 1.8 units of payload.

This is very close to doubling the payload that the rule of thumb suggests, so I suspect that this is what it is all about. Hopefully, you can follow all this logic to see what would happen with 20% and 30% increase.
 
I think it's easist first to watch a short vidio clip I find these videos very relaxing to watch .. I got to thinking is this being done in the most efficient way? The sand has to be suspended in the water to move it to the outlet ... The faster the water , the more turbulance and the sand stays suspended, so it seems to me the rule of thumb is the hose be aimed towards the outlet at all times .. Many times the workers hit the sand directly which will greatly reduce the water...
Back
Top