08-14-2021, 11:46 AM
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: SC Lowcountry
Posts: 1,795
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, 12:25 PM
|
#2 (permalink)
|
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: northwest of normal
Posts: 27,650
Thanks: 7,764
Thanked 8,575 Times in 7,061 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
____________________
.
."We're deeply sorry." -- Pfizer
Last edited by freebeard; 08-14-2021 at 02:02 PM..
|
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to freebeard For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
08-15-2021, 01:42 PM
|
#3 (permalink)
|
|
Somewhat crazed
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: 1826 miles WSW of Normal
Posts: 4,061
Thanks: 467
Thanked 1,111 Times in 980 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, 10:59 AM
|
#4 (permalink)
|
|
Thalmaturge
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: The edge of nowhere
Posts: 1,156
Thanks: 763
Thanked 637 Times in 424 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, 12:54 PM
|
#5 (permalink)
|
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: northwest of normal
Posts: 27,650
Thanks: 7,764
Thanked 8,575 Times in 7,061 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
____________________
.
."We're deeply sorry." -- Pfizer
|
|
|
|
|
08-16-2021, 01:47 PM
|
#6 (permalink)
|
|
Somewhat crazed
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: 1826 miles WSW of Normal
Posts: 4,061
Thanks: 467
Thanked 1,111 Times in 980 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, 03:07 PM
|
#7 (permalink)
|
|
Administrator
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Germantown, WI
Posts: 11,203
Thanks: 2,501
Thanked 2,585 Times in 1,553 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, 05:07 PM
|
#8 (permalink)
|
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: northwest of normal
Posts: 27,650
Thanks: 7,764
Thanked 8,575 Times in 7,061 Posts
|
__________________
.
.Without freedom of speech we wouldn't know who all the idiots are. -- anonymous poster
____________________
.
."We're deeply sorry." -- Pfizer
|
|
|
|
|
08-16-2021, 07:38 PM
|
#9 (permalink)
|
|
Somewhat crazed
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: 1826 miles WSW of Normal
Posts: 4,061
Thanks: 467
Thanked 1,111 Times in 980 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, 09:47 AM
|
#10 (permalink)
|
|
Administrator
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Germantown, WI
Posts: 11,203
Thanks: 2,501
Thanked 2,585 Times in 1,553 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?
|
|
|
|
|
