08-14-2021, 12:46 PM
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: SC Lowcountry
Posts: 1,796
Thanks: 226
Thanked 1,353 Times in 711 Posts
|
The Genius of 3D Printed Rockets
.
The Genius of 3D Printed Rockets
Why am I posting this on ecomodder...???
Well, it is transportation oriented...
Manufacturing eco also....
And...
I think it’s pretty cool... 😎
>
.
__________________
Woke means you're a loser....everything woke turns to ****.
Donald J Trump 8/21/21
Disclaimer...
I’m not a climatologist, aerodynamicist, virologist, physicist, astrodynamicist or marine biologist..
But...
I play one on the internet.
|
|
|
|
 Today
|
|
|
|
Other popular topics in this forum...
|
|
|
|
|
08-14-2021, 01:25 PM
|
#2 (permalink)
|
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: northwest of normal
Posts: 28,847
Thanks: 8,188
Thanked 8,963 Times in 7,403 Posts
|
When I saw the title, I thought it would be about Integza. I've been following his experiments with vortex hybrid rockets and 3D printed solid fuel. The latest:
_______________
I watched the video. That kid is the founder of the company?!?
edit: If you want something to make you think more, try Sabin-a Hossenfelder: Physicist Despairs over Vacuum Energy
__________________
.
.Without freedom of speech we wouldn't know who all the idiots are. -- anonymous poster
Last edited by freebeard; 08-14-2021 at 03:02 PM..
|
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to freebeard For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
08-15-2021, 02:42 PM
|
#3 (permalink)
|
|
Somewhat crazed
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: 1826 miles WSW of Normal
Posts: 4,459
Thanks: 549
Thanked 1,216 Times in 1,073 Posts
|
Depending on thrust and oxidizer requirements, fuel can be just about anything. Printing it is odd, but why not? Easier/faster to use the motor tube as a form and a center insert for burn formation, however. Unless you drop it.
__________________
casual notes from the underground:There are some "experts" out there that in reality don't have a clue as to what they are doing.
|
|
|
|
|
08-16-2021, 11:59 AM
|
#4 (permalink)
|
|
Thalmaturge
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: The edge of nowhere
Posts: 1,167
Thanks: 769
Thanked 646 Times in 431 Posts
|
They'll have a big second-mover advantage WRT reusable launch vehicles vs SpaceX.
I also like that their production easily scales in a linear fashion... add more machines, build more in parallel. But at the same time, they won't enjoy the economies of scale SpaceX can do. He even mentions this in the video. I wonder what the failure rate for their "one big part" is vs traditional methods... like, porous spots in the print, etc?
Sam
|
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to samwichse For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
08-16-2021, 01:54 PM
|
#5 (permalink)
|
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: northwest of normal
Posts: 28,847
Thanks: 8,188
Thanked 8,963 Times in 7,403 Posts
|
IMHO if they get the first layer to stick they're half the way there.
__________________
.
.Without freedom of speech we wouldn't know who all the idiots are. -- anonymous poster
|
|
|
|
|
08-16-2021, 02:47 PM
|
#6 (permalink)
|
|
Somewhat crazed
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: 1826 miles WSW of Normal
Posts: 4,459
Thanks: 549
Thanked 1,216 Times in 1,073 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by samwichse
I wonder what the failure rate for their "one big part" is vs traditional methods... like, porous spots in the print, etc?
Sam
|
Probably the same for the solids on the shuttle, statistically 1 failure per 100 launches.*
Porous just makes the burn accelerate in odd ways and can lead to skin burn throughs: so boom , too much thrust, not enough thrust, asymmetric thrust, whatever.
__________________
casual notes from the underground:There are some "experts" out there that in reality don't have a clue as to what they are doing.
|
|
|
|
|
08-16-2021, 04:07 PM
|
#7 (permalink)
|
|
Administrator
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Germantown, WI
Posts: 11,203
Thanks: 2,501
Thanked 2,589 Times in 1,555 Posts
|
I watched this last week and thought it was also very interesting. Being aerospace I'd imagine their quality control has to be pretty ridiculous. They probably x-ray these parts before anything is put in use or even tested.
|
|
|
|
|
08-16-2021, 06:07 PM
|
#8 (permalink)
|
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: northwest of normal
Posts: 28,847
Thanks: 8,188
Thanked 8,963 Times in 7,403 Posts
|
__________________
.
.Without freedom of speech we wouldn't know who all the idiots are. -- anonymous poster
|
|
|
|
|
08-16-2021, 08:38 PM
|
#9 (permalink)
|
|
Somewhat crazed
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: 1826 miles WSW of Normal
Posts: 4,459
Thanks: 549
Thanked 1,216 Times in 1,073 Posts
|
Fwiw, we did ultrasound only on the shuttle solid boosters, nitroglycerin mixed with aluminum chlorhydrate and a rubber binder/filler is a wee bit unstable to be putting much energy into. They did withstand rail and truck transport but not dropping
Since everyone was paranoid about propellant but not temps or o rings this kinda worked
Those were fun days.
__________________
casual notes from the underground:There are some "experts" out there that in reality don't have a clue as to what they are doing.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Piotrsko For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
08-18-2021, 10:47 AM
|
#10 (permalink)
|
|
Administrator
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Germantown, WI
Posts: 11,203
Thanks: 2,501
Thanked 2,589 Times in 1,555 Posts
|
They mentioned a 10-15% (if I recall correctly) weight penalty. That seems significant to me, but perhaps its not for the rocket as a whole?
|
|
|
|
|
