Ryerson University AE8129 ROCKET PROPULSION

Analysis of a rocket using liquid propulsion v/s electrical propulsion

Shail Oza 500143796

Table of Contents
Abstract ......................................................................................................................................................... 3 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 4 Mission .......................................................................................................................................................... 6 1. Rocket using Liquid Propulsion ................................................................................................................. 8 2. Electrothermal thruster (Resisto Jet) ................................................................................................... 14 Final Selection ............................................................................................................................................. 19 References .................................................................................................................................................. 20 Appendix ..................................................................................................................................................... 20

Abstract
A parametric study was performed to choose the best type of propulsion system for the following mission: A satellite is to change from circular to an elliptical orbit such that after the burn is performed and the orbit transfer is complete, the minimum amount of propellant left over for future manoeuvres (such as station keeping or attitude control) is at least 50% of the fuel before the burn. The propulsion mechanism is already mounted on the satellite, and the system simulates the performance of rockets. The two types of propulsion systems studied for this mission were: 1. Thrusters using liquid propellant (fuel and oxidizer combination) for combustion 2. Thrusters using electrical propulsion, specifically, a resisto-jet, using only a propellant and no oxidizer Through the study, it was understood that the mass flow rate inside the chamber and the amount of power delivered to the system greatly influence the performance of the system. It was also established that the liquid fuelled system was the best suitable for this design as it provided a high amount of propellant savings, without compromising the effect of other essential parameters such as thrust, burn time and exhaust velocity.

Introduction
The useful life of a satellite is determined by the amount of propellant it carries with it. Once in orbit, the satellites are subject to some very thin atmospheric drag that may alter the orbit of the satellite during a certain period of time. Thus, a boost, or an impulse may be needed to account for the slight change in orbit. In addition, attitude control and station keeping for a satellite are also of prime importance, i.e. the satellite needs to maintain a certain position and attitude with respect to the body it is observing. This desired location can also be obtained by providing an impulse to the satellite, thus changing its speed and direction. In addition to station keeping and attitude control, instantaneous impulses can also be used to change the orbital parameters of a satellite, by changing its orbital radius. Thus, the amount of propellant is of prime importance in determining the usefulness of a particular satellite. As already mentioned, all of these manoeuvres require an impulse, i.e. an instantaneous change in the velocity of the spacecraft, represented by v. This v can be calculated using the following formula:

Where m = the mass of propellant used during the burn m = mass of spacecraft g = acceleration due to gravity (9.81 m/s) Isp = specific Impulse

[eq. 1]1

If, however, the change in the orbital radii from the original orbit to the new orbit is already known, then the v can be calculated using relations from orbital mechanics. (See Appendix for detail) The time required to perform this burn can be calculated by the following [eq. 2]2 where m = mass of the spacecraft ve = exhaust velocity P = power required to perform the burn
1 2

Curtis Howard, Orbital Mechanics for Engineering Students, 1 . Edition, pg. 256 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_equation

st

The power P can be calculated using the following equation where F is the net thrust achieved from performing the burn: [eq.3] The exhaust velocity ve is just the product of specific impulse and the gravitational acceleration, [eq. 4] ve can also be calculated using the following: [eq. 5]3 where Cf = thrust coefficient (constant in space Cf = 2.25) c* = characteristic velocity of the rocket, can be calculated using the following:

[eq. 6] Where M represents the molecular weight of the fuel-oxidizer mixture, R represents the universal gas constant (8.314 x 103 J/molK) and Tc is the combustion temperature inside the thrust chamber. is the adiabatic heat constant, which is approximately 1.2 for space. One can thus see that the characteristic velocity will depend on the molecular weight M of the propellant, and the maximum temperature inside the chamber Tc. It is important to note that for orbital manoeuvres that require a v > 1 km/s, the m is usually 25% of the spacecrafts mass. The most important quantity in the above equation is the specific impulse Isp. The specific impulse represents the change in momentum, per unit of fuel. In simpler terms, the specific impulse can help calculate the amount of propellant that will be used up while performing a manoeuvre. A high Isp would reduce the amount of propellant required to perform the burn, and would thus leave more propellant for future manoeuvres, thus increasing the useful life of the satellite.

Martin Turner, Rocket and Spacecraft Propulsion: Principles, Practice and New Developments, 3 edition, pg. 79

rd

Mission
A satellite of mass 100 kg (including mass of payload and mass of propellant) is in a circular orbit of radius (rp) 480 km, and now needs to be moved into an elliptical orbit to increase its coverage over a certain point on earth. The new orbit is to have a perigee radius rp = 480 km, and apogee radius ra = 16000 km. The burn (v) is to be performed at the perigee, and the most important restriction is that at the end of the burn, the satellite needs to maintain at least 50% of its propellant for future manoeuvres (i.e. m/mduring the burn < 0.5).

The mechanisms required to perform this burn are already fitted on the satellite, and the choice of which mechanism to use needs to be based on a parametric study. A motor is fitted on the satellite such that it can provide the thrusters with a maximum power of 1kW. The two available mechanisms are as follows: 1. Thrusters that use liquid propellants (carried from earth, stored on the satellite) 2. Thrusters using electric propulsion (electrothermal thrusters) Of these two options, the one that has the highest Isp needs to be chosen such that fuel savings are maximized. The v required to attain the required orbit can be calculated using relations from orbital mechanics, and for this mission the v = 1.7225 km/s (see Appendix for calculations). Based on this requirement and the requirement for the amount of propellant left over, one can calculate the minimum Isp of the thrusters being used (see Appendix for calculations). Thus,

Isp > 253 s The following table summarizes the constraints and the requirements for certain parameters, and the parametric study needs to be performed keeping in mind these stipulations. Parameters Max. Power Available (watts) v (m/s) m/m Isp (seconds) Required/specified value 1000 1722.5 <0.5 >253

Table 1. Specified values for different paramters based on the mission requirements

1. Rocket using Liquid Propulsion

Figure 1. A schematic of a rocket engine4

The above figure represents a system that uses a mixture of a fuel and an oxidizer to generate thrust and therefore providing an impulse to the system.

Figure 2. Supersonic Nozzle used for rockets5

This type of a rocket is essentially a heat engine as it converts the heat generated by burning the propellant and the oxidizer into kinetic energy of the emerging exhaust gas. This energy of the
4 5

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/pao/History/conghand/propulsn.htm rd Martin Turner, Rocket and Spacecraft Propulsion: Principles, Practice and New Developments, 3 edition, pg. 75

exhaust provides the rocket with the momentum it needs, i.e. its thrust. The thrust chamber is just a converging-diverging nozzle, which allows the exhaust gas to expand and this expanded gas does work against the walls of the nozzle, thus producing thrust needed to accelerate the rocket. This thrust force (F) can be calculated using the following equation [eq. 7]

where is the mass flow of the expanded gas, ve is the exhaust velocity, the quantities Ae and pe, p represent the exit area of the nozzle, and the exit pressure and ambient pressure respectively. The first quantity on the right hand side of the equation ( ve) represents the momentum thrust of the rocket, and the second quantity on the right side of the equation represents the pressure thrust. For the purpose of this mission, the manoeuvres are to be performed while the satellite is already in orbit, and thus it is safe to assume vacuum conditions. As a result, the pressure thrust term drops out. Thus, in space:

In the case of thrusters attached to the orbiting satellite, the propellant choice is an important step in evaluating the performance of the system. The following table lists some propellants and their properties

Table 2 Properties of different oxidiser-fuel mixtures

Based on the formulae outlined above, the following considerations need to be made for propellant choice: 1. Combustion Temperature: As one can see from equation 6, the characteristic velocity is proportional to the square root of the combustion temperature, Tc. A higher temperature implies a higher energy, and this translates to a greater value for thrust. 2. Molecular Weight: The lighter the propellant, the greater the characteristic velocity (and therefore the exhaust velocity). A low molecular weight, however, would also result in a lower
6

Martin Turner, Rocket and Spacecraft Propulsion: Principles, Practice and New Developments, 3 edition, pg. 127

rd

value for mass flow rate, and this can further reduce the thrust. A higher molecular mass will result in a lower exhaust velocity, but if one wished to raise a rocket off the launch pad, the greater thrust provided by the higher molecular weight would be necessary. 3. Physical Properties: This is perhaps the most important characteristic of a propellant, since it can determine things such as volume for the fuel tank, the mass of the fuel tank i.e. the dead weight (once the fuel has been used up). A low density gas (such as hydrogen) would require a larger tank volume compared to a high density propellant, and this can result in a higher mass that now needs to be moved from one orbit to another. In addition to its low density, hydrogen can be very volatile at certain temperatures, making them harder to handle. As such, a storable propellant (such as hydrazine) can be used instead, so that the demands on tank volume and ease of handling are not too taxing. Based on these criterion, the best choice of propellant for this mission would be a high density (easier to store), high molecular weight (thus providing higher thrust) combination of Monomethyl Hydrazine (fuel, CH3N2H3) and dinitrogen tetroxide (Oxidizer, N2O4). The molecular weight for this combination is 138 g/mol, and it has a Tc of 3398 K The characteristic velocity can be calculated using the formula mentioned above. c* = 1724 m/s Knowing c* and Cf = 2.25 in vacuum, ve = 1724*(2.25) = 3879 m/s As a result, the specific impulse Isp for this combination is 395 seconds This value for Isp is higher than the required value (253 s). This combination results in 64% of propellant left over for future manoeuvres (calculated using equation 1). We can now move on to further analyses. Using this specific impulse, one can calculate the thrust required for performing the manoeuvre.

One can plot the above equation to obtain a graph of mass flow as a function of power supplied.

10

1.4

x 10

-4

1.2

Mass flow (kg/s)

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

100

200

300

400

500 600 Power (W)

700

800

900

1000

Figure 3 Mass flow rate as a function of Power

Based on this equation, and knowing that the maximum power obtained from the motor is 1000W, once can see that the highest mass flow rate that can be achieved is 1.3 x 10-4 kg/s. Based on this mass flow rate, the highest thrust for the system would be 5.2 x 10-1 N. The amount of time required to carry out this impulsive manoeuvres can now also be calculated using equation 2. t = 3.86 days Thus, given the highest mass flow rate and the maximum thrust produced from it (i.e. ideal conditions), one can see that the time required to provide the impulse to the satellite is 3.86 days.

As previously mentioned, Since the maximum power reaching the thrusters is 1kW, the above relation can be simplified for the ideal case to obtain

11

The above equation can be represented graphically as follows:

9000

8000

Characteristic velocity c* (km/s)

7000

6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

3 4 mass flow (kg/s)

6 x 10

7
-5

Figure 4 Characteristic velocity as a function of mass flow rate

Thus, as the mass flow rate increases, the characteristic velocity (and therefore the exhaust velocity) decreases. Thus, it is necessary to pay attention to the mass flow rate inside the chamber. It is important to note that = uA, with u being the local velocity, and A being the local area of the nozzle. Since the cross sectional area cannot be varied during flight, the only way to affect the mass flow rate is to change the chamber pressure. Doing so would require a variable supply of propellant into the tank, assuming the temperature inside the chamber is still Tc. This assumption, however, is incorrect, since increasing the supply of propellant would increase the flow of hot gas, thus resulting in an increase in Tc, thus increasing thrust as well. Complete combustion can occur inside the chamber only if the chamber volume is sufficient enough for the evaporation and mixing of droplets produced by the injector. As such, if the injection rate is too high, the combustion could become unstable, whereas a very low injection rate would mean insufficient thermal input for droplet evaporation. It is therefore important to choose the right mass flow rate, such that complete combustion inside the chamber can occur as efficiently as possible, while at the same time maintaining an exhaust velocity necessary for orbit transfer.

12

Since the v required to perform the orbit transfer will be known, and since ve = g(Isp), one can calculate the exact ve that may be necessary to maintain a certain amount of propellant for future manoeuvres. The only limitation here is the power required to perform the transfer, since the maximum amount of power generated by a motor will be a set value. In addition to this, not all the power from the motor might reach the thrusters (due to inefficiencies), further reducing the thrust produced by the system. As a result, when deciding on the right exhaust velocity for achieving orbit transfer, it would be feasible to pick a higher mass flow rate to work with, such that the thrust produced is close to the theoretical value. Through the above analysis, one can see that if the amount of propellant left over after a burn needs to be maximized in a liquid fuelled system; then the main parameters that need to be considered are the power being delivered to the thrusters and the supply of the propellant (i.e. the mass flow rate and the O/F ratio)

13

2. Electrothermal thruster (Resisto Jet)

Electrothemal thrusters use the principal of electric propulsion to deliver thrust to the spacecraft. The most basic form of electric propulsion, the resisto-jet, consists of a nozzle with a high expansion ratio connected to a chamber in which the propellant is heated by flow of electric current through a wire. To attain a high exhaust velocity, the pressure and temperature of the gas entering the nozzle needs to be high, thus implying efficient heating. Gases, however, are bad conductors of electricity, and thus, only a thin layer close to the wire gets hot resulting in a loss of power. To prevent his loss of power, thermal shields are sometimes attached to the outer layer of the heater coil, as demonstrated below.

Figure 5 Diagram of a resisto-jet7

The equations governing the thrust and exhaust velocity for a resistojet are similar to that of the compressed air rocket. The exception here is that since there is no combustion, there is no need for an oxidizer, and only a propellant (with a high heat conductivity) is required to produce a thrust.

Thus, the characteristic velocity, once again, depends on the molecular weight of the propellant and the temperature inside the chamber.

Martin Turner, Rocket and Spacecraft Propulsion: Principles, Practice and New Developments, 3 edition, pg. 194

rd

14

The following equations represent the efficiency in converting the electrical power to thrust, and the mass flow rate, where Mp = mass of propellant and t = burn time.

As such, one can see that the electrical efficiency and the burn time are related to the mass flow rate. It is also apparent from the above equations that the exhaust velocity is no longer a free parameter; it is fixed by the mass flow and the power, along with the efficiency of power conversion to thrust. Thus, increasing the exhaust velocity (or conversely a decrease in mass flow) requires an increase in power supplied to the thrusters, and a lower mass flow rate results in an increase in burn time t. Meanwhile, the objective of this mission still is to determine the lowest amount of propellant required for the burn, and once again, the specific impulse Isp will help determine of this type of propulsion system is appropriate for this mission. Though the use of hydrogen gas for such a system would result in a high C* and provide a high ve (due to its low molecular weight), a more practical choice (for the same reasons as in the case for liquid fuelled system) of propellant would be hydrazine. Its chemical formula is N2H4, it has a molecular weight of 32 g/mol, and is denser compared to hydrogen, thus allowing for easier storage. A typical Fakel resisto-jet8 using an electrical graphite resistance heater can heat the heater element up to 2500 K. Given this information, the characteristic velocity for this thruster can be calculated to be c* = 1243 m/s Multiplying c* with Cf = 2.25, we obtain ve = 2796 m/s. Using this ve, we can obtain Isp by dividing ve by 9.81. Thus, the specific impulse for this system is Isp = 285 s, It is important to note that this Isp value is slightly lower than the one obtained for the liquid bipropellant configuration.

http://www.lr.tudelft.nl/en/organisation/departments-and-chairs/space-engineering/space-systemsengineering/expertise-areas/space-propulsion/propulsion-options/thermal-rockets/resistojets/configurations/

15

Given these parameters, the m/m value for this case reduces to 0.46, implying that after the burn, approximately 54% of the propellant will still be left over for future purposes. Furthermore, the burn time for electrothermal thrusters can be calculated using the same formula for the compressed air case. Thus, t = 2.8 days, a lower value than the one obtained for the liquid propellant Lets define the actual power output P as the product ()Pe. Assuming that the electrical efficiency is 1, i.e. the actual power output is 1000W, the maximum mass flow rate is = 2.55 x 10-4 kg/s. The thrust for this ideal case is thus F = case, as expected. = 7.1 x 10-1 N, higher than the liquid propellant

In an ideal scenario, however, the electrical efficiency will not always be 1, and as a result, the true mass flow rate may be different. For such a case, mass flow rate becomes a function of power output, as follows

Thus, for a lower power output, the mass flow will also be lower, which in turn will reduce the thrust.

16

x 10

-4

Mass flow (kg/s)

1 0 0

100

200

300

400

500 600 Power (W)

700

800

900

1000

Figure 6. Mass flow rate v/s Actual power for electrothermal thrusters

As was the case with the compressed gas system, as actual power decreases, the mass flow rate decreases, i.e. as the electrical efficiency decreases, the mass flow rate decreases, but the burn time increases. For electrochemical thrusters, the maximum temperature is no longer specified by the nature of the propellants (as in the previous case), but it depends on inversely on the flow rate. As a result, a very low flow rate would result in a very high temperature, which may destroy the thrusters completely. The two important factors to consider here are temperature limit on the heaters filament, and the temperature limit for the chamber walls. Due to this, the mass flow to power ratio is fixed depending on the construction of the chamber. If one were to examine the relationship between exhaust velocity and mass flow to power ratio, the following graph can be obtained

17

15

x 10

Exhaust velocity (m/s)

10

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8 1 1.2 1.4 Mass flow to power Ratio

1.6

1.8 x 10

2
-8

Thus, as the mass flow to power ratio increases, the exhaust velocity decreases dramatically. Thus, one might be tempted to fix the mass flow to power ratio such that for a given power output, the mass flow rate is as low as possible. This can be achieved by using a propellant with a very low molecular mass, such that it has a high characteristic velocity. This may increase the exhaust velocity; however, this may also increase the burn time by a significant amount. Thus, when designing an electrothermal thruster, the right balance between the exhaust velocity and the burn time for a specific manoeuvre needs to be achieved.

18

Final Selection
Comparing the two propulsion systems ideal performance (i.e. all efficiencies = 1), one can see that the liquid fuelled system produces a higher specific impulse resulting in a higher amount of leftover propellant, but with a longer burn time. The thrust provided by the thrusters using liquid propellants, however, is lower than the thrust provided by the resistojet (0.516 N v/s 0.715 N). This can be a good thing though, as the lower thrust might mean that the system is easier to control, such that there is no instantaneous overshoot. The following table summarizes the performance of the two systems under ideal conditions. Propulsion System Exhaust velocity (m/s) Specific impulse (s) Burn time(days) Thrust produced (N) Propellant Mass leftover after the burn Liquid Propulsion 3879 395 3.9 0.516 64% Resisto-Jet 2796 285 2.8 0.715 54%

Table 3. Comparison of the two propulsion systems

For this particular mission, lower the burn time, the better the system. Since the burn time for the resistojet is lower than the liquid propellant case, intuition might lead one to believe that the resisto-jet thrusters are better suitable for this type of orbit transfer. A more careful examination of the two systems, however, may lead to a different answer. Though the burn time for the liquid system may be high, simply using a propellant with a higher molecular mass would solve this problem. A higher molecular mass would result in a lower characteristic mass, as demonstrated by equation 4, which in turn will lead to a lower exhaust velocity. This lower velocity may reduce the specific impulse by a slight amount, but this may not be an issue at all since the Isp obtained through liquid propulsion (395 s) is larger than the required Isp for this mission (253 s). As a result, mass savings for the liquid case will still be higher than the resisto-jet. The lower exhaust velocity will help cut down the burn time for the orbit transfer, while keeping the rest of the parameters well within the specified requirements. Also, one must remember that the above analysis was carried out assuming the ideal case (all efficiencies = 1), and this is an unlikely scenario. Since the weight savings provided by the resisto-jet are already so close to the required value, accounting for the actual efficiencies/losses might cause that value to fluctuate below the required Isp. Thus, one can see that for the specified mission, the liquid propulsion system would clearly be a better choice over the resist-jet thrusters, as it will guarantee a higher weight saving for the propellants, thus increasing the useful life of the satellite.

19

References
Martin Turner, Rocket and Spacecraft Propulsion: Principles, Practice and New Developments, 3rd edition, Curtis Howard, Orbital Mechanics for Engineering Students, 1st. Edition, pg. 256

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/pao/History/conghand/propulsn.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_equation

Appendix
Calculation of v: In orbital mechanics, the position of an orbiting body is defined by ; where e = eccentricity of the orbit, = angle from perigee; h = angular momentum, = Gravitational constant for earth =398600 Using this relation, and knowing that eccentricity for a circular orbit is 0, one can calculate angular momentum h if the radius of the orbit is known. Furthermore, the velocity at the perigee point = h/r The same two formulae can be applied now for the second (elliptical) orbit, where e = (ra + rp)/ (ra - rp) Since rp and ra are known (480km and 16000km respectively), e can be calculated, and using this e one can calculate h for the elliptical orbit. Substituting the h back into the velocity formula, the velocity of the perigee point of the elliptical orbit can be found. Since the perigee points for the elliptical and circular orbit coincide, the change in velocities at that point gives us the v. v = vp@orbit 2 - vp@orbit 1 For the given orbit dimensions, using theses formulas yields a v of 1.7225 km/s = 1722.5 m/s

Calculating minimum Isp:

20


According to mission requirements, m/m < 0.5 0.5 <

ln(0.5) < Substituting g = 9.81m/s and v = 1722.5 m/s, we get: Isp > 253 seconds

Sample M-file for plotting different parameters

function power p=0:50:1000; m = (1/7523320).*p; plot(p,m); ylabel('Mass flow (kg/s)') xlabel('Power (W)') end

21