Subject: Space-tech Digest #160

Contents:

   Alternative oxidizers for pressure fed rockets (3 msgs)
   isp program available for anonymous ftp (3 msgs)
   P2 technical issues (2 msgs)

------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Jul 93 23:29:28 -0400
From: dietz@cs.rochester.edu
To: space-tech@cs.cmu.edu
Subject: Alternative oxidizers for pressure fed rockets

I was playing with the ISP program Bruce sent me (it will be available
for anonymous ftp as soon as I can figure out how to load MS DOS files
through a sparcstation), and compared some alternate oxidizers to
peroxide for use with RP-1.

Burning with RP-1 at a chamber pressure of 1000 psia and nozzle exit
pressure of 14.7 psia, the maximum Isp and corresponding propellant
bulk density for the oxidizers was:


Oxidizer			 Isp (SL)		Bulk Density
----------------------------------------------------------------------
nitric acid			    263 sec		  1.31 g/cc
100% hydrogen peroxide		    278 		  1.31
chlorine trifluoride		    258			  1.39
perchloryl fluoride (ClO3F)	    283			  1.22 (1.38)
perchloric acid			    274			  1.44
Cl2O7				    285			  1.42
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Some of these oxidizers are very unpleasant.  Chlorine trifluoride,
for example, causes asphalt to burn on contact, and has a low boiling
point (and its lack of oxygen makes it perform poorly with a
carbonaceous fuel like RP-1).  Perchloric acid is very corrosive and
somewhat unstable.  Cl2O7, an oily liquid with a boiling point of 82 C
and a density of 1.82 g/cc, can explode when heated and decomposes
slowly at room temperature (but otherwise its high Isp and density
seem attractive for pressure-fed rockets).

Perchloryl fluoride is the most stable of the bunch.  Indeed, this gas
has been proposed for use in high voltage transformers, as it is
noncorrosive (at least when dry) and resists electrostatic breakdown.
Unlike some other fluorine/chlorine compounds, it does not etch glass,
even when the glass is heated to near the softening temperature.  Its
boiling point is -46.8 C, but it can be liquified under pressure at
room temperature (1.392 g/cc at 25 C).  At its boiling point at 1 bar,
its density is 1.66 g/cc, giving a denser mixture (1.38 g/cc) than
peroxide/RP-1.  There are steels that have adequate toughness at the
boiling point (HY 130, for example), and the absolute temperature
is not so much lower (225 K) that helium requirements would be greatly
increased.

The drawbacks of perchloryl fluoride would be: possible ozone
depletion potential, higher combustion temperature, and cost (unlike
peroxide, there is no very large terrestrial market, and its
manufacture involves electrolysis of perchloric acid dissolved in
anhydrous hydrogen fluoride).  Perhaps it would be useful in an upper
stage.

	Paul F. Dietz
	dietz@cs.rochester.edu

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Jul 93 21:43 PDT
To: space-tech@cs.cmu.edu
Subject: Alternate oxidizers for pressure fed rockets
From: Bruce_Dunn@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Dunn)

Regarding alternate oxidizers Paul Dietz writes:
> Perchloryl fluoride is the most stable of the bunch.  Indeed, this gas
> has been proposed for use in high voltage transformers, as it is
> noncorrosive (at least when dry) and resists electrostatic breakdown.
> Unlike some other fluorine/chlorine compounds, it does not etch glass,
> even when the glass is heated to near the softening temperature.
>

     Clark, in his book "Ignition" says that "PF" was much admired by the
people who had to do actual motor testing, as it was so benign a compound
that the worst thing that you could do to hurt yourself would be to drop a
cylinder of it on your foot (but don't breath the exhaust).

     Paul mentions ClF3 as a oxidizer, and notes that it performs poorly with
a carbon containing fuel.  The drill then is to use a mix of ClF3 and PF,
which if I remember are miscible.  Even better is a mixture of ClF5 and PF,
particularly with a fuel rich in hydrogen such as propane.  The ultimate in
performance for upper stage work is to get rid of the carbons and burn N2H4
burned ClF5, or even better with N2F4 (dinitrogen tetrafluoride, often called
tetrafluorohydrazine).
    These oxidizers all deserve respect.  Clark relates an incident where a
steel cylinder was pre-chilled before being filled with ClF3 (if I remember
correctly).  The steel was brittle, and the cylinder cracked, dumping its
load of oxidizer on the floor where it promptly ate through a considerable
amount of concrete.
     Clark mentions that nitric acid and kerosene, while appearing attractive
because of cost, is a difficult mixture to get ignited and is plagued by
combustion problems unless a lot of work has been put into chamber and
injector development.  A lot of work was put into trying to find additives to
get kerosene to burn nicely with nitric acid.  The best bet was to add some
form of hydrazine to the kerosene. I think a couple of early missile systems
used kerosene/hydrazine mixes with nitric acid.  However, the hydrazine
performed so much better than the kerosene that people lost interest in
kerosene, and simply went to various hydrazine mixtures (formulated to have
low freezing points for military purposes).


        While the fluorine containing oxidizers give good performance, the
combustion temperature is frightfully high, requiring good cooling systems
for the injectors, chamber and throat.

--
Bruce Dunn    Vancouver, Canada   Bruce_Dunn@mindlink.bc.ca

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Jul 93 14:26:28 -0400
From: dietz@cs.rochester.edu
To: space-tech@cs.cmu.edu
Subject: perchloryl fluoride

I wrote:
> its manufacture involves electrolysis of perchloric acid dissolved in
> anhydrous hydrogen fluoride)

This is incorrect: it involves electrolysis of sodium perchlorate in
anhydrous HF.  A good thing, as perchloric acid is much more expensive
and not available in bulk.

One can estimate the cost of the stuff by the cost of the feedstocks.
Sodium perchlorate for blasting cost $.41/kg in 1979, which would be
roughly $.40/lb today.  Hydrogen fluoride costs about $1/lb, I think.
Electricity for electrolysis, amortization of the plant and operation
cost would increase the cost of PF above that of the feedstocks, but
it looks like it could be made for not too much more than peroxide.

	Paul F. Dietz
	dietz@cs.rochester.edu

------------------------------

To: dietz@cs.rochester.edu
Cc: space-tech@cs.cmu.edu, gwh@soda.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: Alternative oxidizers for pressure fed rockets 
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1993 21:57:50 -0700
From: George William Herbert <gwh@soda.berkeley.edu>

I also recieved a copy of the program, and will by week's end have it
at a nearby FTP site and probably at ftp.isunet.edu as well... 8-)

-george

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 21 Jul 93 13:40:26 -0400
From: dietz@cs.rochester.edu
To: space-tech@cs.cmu.edu
Subject: isp program available for anonymous ftp

Look in the directory pub/isp on cayuga.cs.rochester.edu.
The files are copied directly without changes from
the MS DOS diskette, so their carriage return/linefeeds
look strange under UNIX.

	Paul

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 28 Jul 93 22:23:10 -0400
From: dietz@cs.rochester.edu
To: space-tech@cs.cmu.edu
Subject: Fun and games with the Isp program

I've been playing a bit with the AF Isp program Bruce sent me
(remember, it is available by anonymous ftp in /u/ftp/pub/isp
on cayuga.cs.rochester.edu).  Lots of fun.  Here are some
interesting things I found.  All of the following are for
optimal expansion (shifting) to 14.7 psia.

  Hybrid rockets with peroxide...  there are many possibilities here.
One of the more interesting is peroxide/magnesium hydride.  MgH2 is a
fairly unreactive powder that is stable in dry air.  It is made by
heating magnesium to several hundred C and cooling it 1 bar of
hydrogen (I think some small amount of nickel speeds up the reaction,
but it not strictly necessary).  MgH2 has a density of 1.45, about the
same as peroxide.  Isp is good (ratio of 1.5 MgH2 to 1 H2O2):

	Chamber Pressure	   Isp (opt)
	------------------------------------------
	   200 (psia)		   228 seconds
	   300			   244
	   400			   254
	   500			   261
	   750			   274
	   1000			   283

Magnesium is more expensive than hydrocarbon fuels, but less
expensive than hydrazine-based fuels.  Commodity Mg sold
for $1.43/lb as of 1991; I don't know what the recent price
behavior is but I have heard that Russian exports are driving
down the price of many metals, including perhaps magnesium.
(George, do you have a more recent number?)

Even better performance can be obtained from peroxide + MgH2 +
polyethylene.  At a ratio of .44 H2O2 + .48 MgH2 + .08 PE (density
1.38):

	Chamber pressure	Isp (opt)
	----------------------------------------
	  200			234	
	  300			250
	  400			260
	  500			268
	  750			280
	  1000			288

Even better Isp can be obtained using the strong reducing agent
lithium aluminum hydride.  This reagent is expensive, however, and
use in rocketry would probably require a dedicated production
plant to supply the necessary volume.  LiAlH4 is made by reaction
of lithium hydride with aluminum chloride.  It has been studied
before for use in peroxide hybrids, back in the 1960s.
At a mixture ratio of .48 peroxide to .52 LiAlH4 (bulk density
1.11):

	Chamber pressure	Isp (opt)
	----------------------------------------
	  200			248
	  300			265
	  400			276
	  500			284
	  750			298
	  1000			307


  George was discussing magnesium/nitric acid as a fuel.  The Isp on
this is not high.  Interestingly, both the Isp and bulk density are
increased (from 1.55 to 1.81-1.84) by adding teflon to the mix.
			 
   Chamber Pressure	Isp (with teflon)   Isp (w.o.)
   ----------------------------------------------------------
	200		186		    177
	250		193		    184
	300		199		    189
	350		203		    193
	400		207		    197
	500		214		    203
	750		224		    212
	1000		225		    219

Teflon helps because magnesium fluoride has a high heat of formation
(-268.5 kcal/mole at 25 C), and because the C-F bond in teflon is not
terribly strong (heat of formation is -97.6 kcal/mole, where the
formula = CF2).  Even without the oxidizer, Isp at 1000 psia is
surprisingly high.

  Composition			Isp		Bulk Density
  -------------------------------------------------------------
   .34 Mg, .66 teflon		181		2.08
   .2 Mg, .42 teflon, .38 polyethylene
				196		1.38
   .42 MgH2, .58 teflon		201		1.85
   
Teflon's density suggests alloying it with a lighter plastic, say
polyethylene, until its density is the same as peroxide (1.4422),
then forming a monopropellant with a suspension of the particles
in the oxidizer.  (The question here is can the particles be made
small enough to burn efficiently without being so small as to
react while in suspension, or sustain detonation.)  The
ratio is 62% PTFE, 38% PE, to 314% peroxide, for an Isp of 268
seconds at 1000 psia.

A similar scheme with 56% aluminum and 44% PE yields better Isps
(again, in peroxide).

	Pressure	Isp
	------------------------------
	200		230
	300		246
	400		255
	500		262
	1000		283

This is several seconds higher than peroxide/RP-1 (278 at 1000 psia).
One would want to make PE/aluminum pellets containing very small
flakes of aluminum powder, so they could burn effectively while in the
motor.  A long motor would be better, to give the plastic more time
to evaporate.

	Paul

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 6 Aug 93 23:01:17 -0400
From: dietz@cs.rochester.edu
To: Bruce_Dunn@mindlink.bc.ca, space-tech@cs.cmu.edu
Subject: Re:  P2 Technical Issues

Bruce Dunn wrote (some time ago) on the subject of LOX
for P2, and materials for the pressurized tank:

 > > You're using a high nickel steel.  Aren't there high nickel steels
 > > that do not suffer from embrittlement at low temperature?  I know
 > > stainless steel is used for terrestrial LOX tanks.

 > I just dug up some information on stainless steels for cryogenic use,
 > and the yield strength of these materials is dismal.  Compared with
 > George's cheap steel at 689 MPa and maraging steel at 1700 MPa,
 > cryogenic grade stainless steels have a yield point of 150 to 200 MPa
 > at room temperature.  At liquid oxygen temperature the ultimate
 > tensile strength gets quite high (1200 to 1500 MPa) but the yield
 > point is still poor (maximum of about 650 for some alloys).  Trying to
 > employ the cryogenic strength of the steel would require that the
 > whole tank be insulated so that no part of the wall warms up.  Even
 > assuming that this could be done, the resulting tank mass would take
 > away any advantage for liquid oxygen as an oxidizer.


I think Bruce overlooked something here.  Austentic stainless steels
are indeed the steels rated down to near absolute zero, and they
aren't very good.

But down to LOX temperature, there is another possibility: ferritic 9%
nickel steel (ASTM A553).  Steel of this kind is used in LNG tankers,
and maintain adequate toughness down to the boiling point of liquid
nitrogen.  The ASTM standard for this steel specifies a minimum yield
stress of 80 ksi (550 MPa), I believe at room temperature.  This steel
has a fracture toughness at 77 K comparable to the fracture toughness
at room temperature of some of the ultrahigh strength steels Bruce is
considering.

Bruce mentioned the problem of keeping the tank cold.  A way to help
do this is to wrap the tank in fibers.  We've been discussing (off
line) use of fiberglass and other fibers for reinforcing cylindrical
tanks.  These composites typically have thermal conductivity much
lower than that of steel (kevlar in particular has a very low thermal
conductivity), so most of the temperature drop from the tank to the
outside will be in the composite, not the metal.  This also requires a
composite with good properties at low temperature, but I believe some
exist.

	Paul F. Dietz
	dietz@cs.rochester.edu

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 7 Aug 93 19:45:00 -0400
From: dietz@cs.rochester.edu
To: Bruce_Dunn@mindlink.bc.ca, dietz@cs.rochester.edu, space-tech@cs.cmu.edu
Subject: Re:  P2 Technical Issues

I wrote:

> nitrogen.  The ASTM standard for this steel specifies a minimum yield
> stress of 80 ksi (550 MPa), I believe at room temperature.  This steel
> has a fracture toughness at 77 K comparable to the fracture toughness
> at room temperature of some of the ultrahigh strength steels Bruce is
> considering.

In more detail...  "class 8" 9% nickel steel has a yield strength of
90 ksi at room temperature and 135 ksi at 77 K.  Its Charpy V-notch
impact energy is 25 ft-lb at 77 K, vs. 14 ft-lb for D6a at room
temperature.

	Paul F. Dietz
	dietz@cs.rochester.edu

------------------------------

End of Space-tech Digest #160
*******************
