See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/289405360

Parametric investigation of a hybrid motor using paraffin and nitrous oxide

Article · January 2014

CITATIONS READS
2 3,134

2 authors, including:

Alon Gany
Technion - Israel Institute of Technology
204 PUBLICATIONS   2,789 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Energetic materials science and technology View project

Energetic enhancement of solid propellants View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Alon Gany on 24 January 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International Journal of Energetic Materials and Chemical Propulsion, 14 (4): 331–345 (2015)

COMBUSTION OF PLAIN AND REINFORCED

PARAFFIN WITH NITROUS OXIDE
Shani Sisi∗ & Alon Gany
Faculty of Aerospace Engineering, Technion—Israel Institute of
Technology, Haifa 32000, Israel
∗
Address all correspondence to Shani Sisi E-mail: shanicc@tx.technion.ac.il

Hybrid rockets may present a good propulsion alternative for different missions, particularly for the
emerging field of space tourism, mainly due to the safety of the motor both during development and
operation. Nevertheless, for certain applications the low regression rate of conventional polymeric
fuels implies too low of a thrust. In recent years, paraffin (wax)-based fuels have been investigated
because of their much higher regression rate compared to that of polymeric fuels. Paraffin, however,
presents relatively poor mechanical properties. The motivation of this research is to acquire data on
pure paraffin (wax) and mixed paraffin- polymer (HTPB) fuels and to compare their actual energetic
performance (mainly C*), regression rate, and certain mechanical properties. Polymethylmethacrylate
(PMMA, Plexiglas) fuel was tested as well, as it is the most used hybrid fuel in laboratory experi-
ments and can serve as a reference to other works. A comparison to results from the literature for
similar fuels with oxygen as the oxidizer was also done to identify the influencing properties of the
specific oxidizer. It was found that the regression rate of paraffin is about 5 times higher than that of
PMMA (polymer). A mixed paraffin-polymer (HTPB) fuel gives a lower regression rate than pure
paraffin, yet it is higher by about two- or threefold than that of PMMA. C* efficiency obtained was
in the range of 80%–100%, with an average of about 90%.

KEY WORDS: hybrid motor, hybrid propulsion, hybrid rocket, paraffin fuel, re-
gression rate, wax

1. INTRODUCTION
A hybrid rocket motor consists of a combination of a solid fuel and a liquid or gaseous
oxidizer. Hybrid rockets have different advantages, such as safety, simplified structure
compared to liquid rockets, combustion products of lower ecological impact (no HCl),
ability to control the thrust, ability to shut down and restart the motor, and typically
a higher specific impulse than that of solid rockets. The safety feature of the hybrid
rockets, both during development and operation, results from the separation of the fuel
and the oxidizer, which is one of their main advantages, making hybrid propulsion a
preferred alternative for the emerging field of space tourism. An overview and history of
hybrid propulsion is presented by Altman and Holzman (2007).
One of the main disadvantages of hybrid motors is the low regression rate of con-
ventional hybrid fuels (typically polymers), implying low thrust. Paraffin is a good

2150–766X/15/$35.00 © 2015 by Begell House, Inc. 331

332 Sisi & Gany

NOMENCLATURE

C∗ characteristic velocity ṙ regression rate (mm/s)

(m/s) tb burn time (s)
Cd discharge coefficient ρ density (kg/m3 )
d grain port diameter (m) ηC ∗ C ∗ efficiency
G mass flux (kg/m2 s) ηIsp Isp efficiency
Isp specific impulse (s)
l motor length (m) Subscripts
m mass (kg) f final
ṁ mass flow rate (kg/s) in initial
O/F oxidizer-to-fuel ratio ox oxidizer
P pressure (atm) tot total

alternative to increase the regression rates by 3–5 times compared to polymeric fuels.
In recent years, research has focused on paraffin (wax)–based fuels. The most extensive
experimental and theoretical work on paraffin fuels has been conducted at Stanford Uni-
versity by Karabeyoglu et al. (2002, 2004). They found that the use of liquefying fuels
increases the burning rate of hybrid systems significantly, as a result of mass transfer by
mechanical means due to droplet entrainment to the gas stream from the melt surface
layer, in addition to the mass transfer by gasification of the fuel. Weinstein and Gany
(2011, 2012) have demonstrated that melt flow along the surface may be yet another
mechanism for significant mass loss, as well as reduction in motor efficiency in paraffin
fuel.
Nitrous oxide (N2 O), commonly known as laughing gas, is a colorless gas at stan-
dard temperature and pressure. N2 O is a safe oxidizer and is not flammable at room
temperature. In addition, N2 O can be stored as a liquid at a pressure of 50–58 atm (its
equilibrium vapor pressure at room temperature), providing also self-pressurization of
the oxidizer tank. Properties and applications of N2 O are presented in the ESDU’s Ther-
mophysical Properties of Nitrous Oxide Report (2006) and in Karabeyoglu et al. (2008).
Table 1 summarizes the main physical properties of N2 O. The enthalpy and density val-
ues have been used in the thermochemical as well as energy-density calculations.
Because of its convenient and safe storage and use, N2 O is the preferred oxidizer for
space tourism programs, which are based on hybrid motors. The main objective of this
study is to investigate experimentally the energetic performance and fuel regression rate
of a hybrid rocket motor employing paraffin (wax)–based fuels and nitrous oxide N2 O
oxidizer. Due to the relatively poor mechanical properties of plain paraffin, preparation
and combustion characteristics of paraffin reinforced by hydroxyl-terminated polybu-
tadiene (HTPB) mixed fuel were investigated as well. Tests were also conducted with

International Journal of Energetic Materials and Chemical Propulsion

Combustion of Plain and Reinforced Paraffin with Nitrous Oxide 333

TABLE 1: Properties of nitrous oxide N2 O

Melting point –90.86◦ C
Normal boiling point –88.48◦ C
Critical temperature –36.42◦ C
Critical pressure 71.56 atm
Critical density 452 kg/m3
Density 743.9 kg/m3 (25◦ C)
Heat of fusion 1.563 kcal/mol (–90.86◦ C)
Heat of vaporization 3.956 kcal/mol (–88.48◦ C)
Enthalpy of formation 19.61 kcal/mol (25◦ C)

polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA, Plexiglas), as this fuel is largely used in laboratory

experiments and can serve both as a reference and for comparison to data from the lit-
erature. Theoretical energetic performance calculations (characteristic velocity C ∗ and
specific impulse Isp ) vs oxidizer-to-fuel ratio (O/F) were performed using the thermo-
chemical propellant evaluation program (PEP) (Cruise, 1979). The theoretical data were
used to calculate the motor efficiency.

2. EXPERIMENTAL
The experimental part of the study consisted of more than 150 static firing tests using a
laboratory-scale hybrid rocket motor system. The experimental system includes a com-
bustion chamber, where a single-port solid fuel grain is placed, an aft mixing chamber to
complete the chemical reaction, a converging nozzle, a nitrous oxide tank, and pressure,
thrust, and flow rate measuring gauges. The experimental system is presented in Figs. 1
(schematic) and 2 (picture).
The static firing tests include comparison between three types of fuel: pure paraf-
fin wax PW-624 (melting temperature 62–66◦ C), a mixed fuel consisting of synthetic
paraffin (PX-105, melting temperature 105◦ C, obtained from Bazan Industries, Israel)
with HTPB polymer; and PMMA. Gaseous N2 O was used as an oxidizer. The density of
those fuels is presented in Table 2.
Initial experiments used PMMA fuel grains, 190 mm long and 21.5 mm internal
diameter. The following experiments used paraffin grains of the same dimensions. The
latter were prepared by casting molten paraffin into a vertically positioned motor casing.
The port was created by placing a cylindrical pin at the center of the casing during
casting. At the end of the process additional molten paraffin was added to the grain
because of shrinking of the paraffin during cooling and solidifying. The paraffin fuel
grains resulted in a low O/F ratio range during firing in comparison to the stoichiometric
ratio because of the high fuel regression rate. To extend the O/F ratio range, shorter fuel
grains of 60 and 95 mm length were used as well.

Volume 14, Number 4, 2015

334 Sisi & Gany

FIG. 1: Schematic of the experimental system.

FIG. 2: Image of the experimental system.

TABLE 2: The density of the fuels

Fuel ρ (kg/m3 )
PW-624 834
PX-105 + HTPB (1:1) 847
PMMA 1180

International Journal of Energetic Materials and Chemical Propulsion

Combustion of Plain and Reinforced Paraffin with Nitrous Oxide 335

In order to improve the elastic properties of the paraffin fuel as well as the fuel grain
integrity at elevated temperatures, a mixed fuel consisting of an HTPB polymeric matrix
filled with small solid particles (about 0.5 mm diameter) of synthetic paraffin PX-105
at a ratio of 1:1 was prepared [similar to the inclusion of ammonium perchlorate (AP)
particles within the binder matrix in solid propellants]. The two components were first
mixed when the HTPB was in the form of a prepolymerized liquid. The polymerization
took place at room temperature. The reason for not using synthetic paraffin PX-105 for
the pure paraffin grains was that casting molten paraffin of this type resulted in sub-
stantial cracking upon cooling and solidification, in contrast to the paraffin wax PW-624
which formed intact grains. Figures 3 and 4 present compression experiments conducted
with an Instron machine at a displacement rate of 5 mm/min. The tested samples where
cylinders of 30 mm diameter and 50 mm length. As can be seen, the addition of HTPB
resulted in a substantially better elasticity of the grain. This is a desired mechanical prop-
erty. As will be elaborated later, it also reduced the accumulation of molten material in
the aft mixing chamber during firing.
Figure 5 shows grains (within the casing) of the three fuel types before firing. The
ignition process of the motor was accomplished by momentary introduction of a small
amount of ethylene gas flowing with the oxidizer over a spark plug. The oxidizer mass
flow rate (ṁox ) was measured by a choked nozzle at the oxidizer supply line and deter-
mined by the regulated upstream pressure (fixed at a test) according to Eq. (1):
Cd · Pox · At,ox
ṁox = ∗
(1)
Cox

FIG. 3: Compressive loading experiments for paraffin wax PW-624 at displacement rate
of 5 mm/min.

Volume 14, Number 4, 2015

336 Sisi & Gany

FIG. 4: Compressive loading experiments for paraffin and HTPB mixture at displace-
ment rate of 5 mm/min.

(a) (b) (c)

FIG. 5: Fuel grains of (a) paraffin wax PW-624, (b) mixed paraffin-polymer (HTPB),
and (c) PMMA, before firing test.

where Cox∗ relates to the cold (room-temperature) oxidizer gas in the feed line. The

nozzle discharge coefficient was taken as Cd = 0.97.

The nitrous oxide tank is self-pressurized to the equilibrium vapor pressure of N2 O,
which is typically about 50–58 atm, according to the ambient temperature. The achiev-
able oxidizer mass flow rate in this system was as high as approximately 26 g/s, yielding
maximum mass flux of about 50 kg/(s m2 ) for the internal port diameter mentioned above
(21.5 mm). To extend the oxidizer mass flux range, grains (of both PMMA and paraffin)
having a reduced internal port diameter of 12.4 mm with a length of 190 mm were tested
as well.

International Journal of Energetic Materials and Chemical Propulsion

Combustion of Plain and Reinforced Paraffin with Nitrous Oxide 337

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

During every static firing test the following parameters were directly measured contin-
uously and recorded via a LabView computerized data acquisition software: thrust F ,
chamber pressure Pc , and oxidizer mass flow rate ṁox . Fuel grain mass before and after
the test was measured as well to get the amount of fuel burned.
Based on the measurements, O/F, C ∗ , Isp , and fuel regression rate ṙ could be ob-
tained, as well as C ∗ efficiency and Isp efficiency, which were calculated by comparing
the experimental data to theoretical values received from PEP thermochemical program.
The fuel mass flow rate was calculated as the difference between the mass of fuel
before and after the combustion, divided by the burning time:
mi − mf
ṁf uel = (2)
tb

The burning time of each firing test was 5.5–7.5 s. The characteristic velocity was cal-
culated according to Eq. (3):
Pc At
C∗ = (3)
ṁtot
where
ṁtot = ṁox + ṁf uel (4)
The specific impulse was calculated according to Eq. (5):

F̄
Isp = (5)
ṁtot g0
The regression rate was calculated using the following equations:
df − di
ṙ = (6)
2tb
where s
4 (mi − mf )
df = + d2i (7)
πlρf uel
Comparison between theoretical and experimental results of C ∗ and Isp for the three
types of fuels together [paraffin wax PW-624, paraffin PX-105 + polymer (HTPB) 1:1
mixed fuel, and PMMA] is presented in Figs. 6 and 7, respectively. The C ∗ efficiency
for PW-624 and paraffin-polymer mixed fuel was within the 80%–100% range. The fig-
ures reveal that for higher O/F ratios C ∗ values tend to level off while the efficiency
decreases. One may assume that at low O/F ratios (large excess of fuel), the reaction ef-
ficiency is higher because the relatively small amount of oxidizer has enough residence
time and distance to mix and react almost completely with the fuel vapors that continue
to be generated downstream. In the opposite case of large O/F ratios (excess oxidizer),

Volume 14, Number 4, 2015

338 Sisi & Gany

FIG. 6: Characteristic velocity C ∗ vs oxidizer-to-fuel ratio O/F for paraffin wax PW-
624, paraffin PX-105 + polymer (HTPB) 1:1 mixture, and polymer PMMA fuels with
N2 O oxidizer, Pc = 6 atm.

FIG. 7: Specific impulse Isp vs oxidizer-to-fuel ratio O/F for paraffin wax PW-624,
paraffin PX-105 + polymer (HTPB) 1:1 mixture, and polymer PMMA fuels with N2 O
oxidizer, adjusted to standard conditions [sea level, Pc = 1000 psia (68 atm), adapted
nozzle].

International Journal of Energetic Materials and Chemical Propulsion

Combustion of Plain and Reinforced Paraffin with Nitrous Oxide 339

some oxidizer might not have sufficient time for mixing and reacting with fuel vapors
emerging further downstream and possibly escaping beneath the flame zone. Hence, ef-
ficiency gets lower and C ∗ increases only slightly. One may notice that the theoretical
performance of paraffin and HTPB is almost identical, whereas PMMA shows a some-
what different curve. The estimated possible error in C ∗ and Isp is about ±4% based on
a standard error analysis accounting for the different measurement and instrumentation
uncertainty.
For certain missions, particularly for volume-limited systems, the density-specific
impulse may be significant. Figure 8 shows a comparison between the theoretical and
experimental results of the density-specific impulse. One can see that the density-specific
impulse of systems based on liquid nitrous oxide is relatively low, mainly due to the low
density of nitrous oxide (about 0.74 g/cm3 ). The average density of wax/nitrous oxide
hybrid propellant combination is lower than 1 g/cm3 , compared to a density of about
1.8 g/cm3 of solid propellants, hence yielding density-specific impulse in the order of
one-half compared to that of solid rocket motors.
Figure 9 shows the empirical regression rate correlation for the paraffin wax PW-
624, paraffin PX-105 + polymer (HTPB) 1:1 mixture, and PMMA fuels versus N2 O
oxidizer mass flux. The correlations obtained are as follows, where ṙ is in mm/s and Gox
in kg/s m2 :
ṙparaf f in = 0.104G0.67
ox (8)
ṙmixture = 0.061G0.59
ox (9)

FIG. 8: Density-specific impulse vs oxidizer-to-fuel ratio O/F for paraffin PW-624,

paraffin PX-105 + polymer (HTPB) mixture, and polymer PMMA fuels with liquid N2 O
oxidizer, adjusted to standard conditions [sea level, Pc = 1000 psia (68 atm), adapted
nozzle].

Volume 14, Number 4, 2015

340 Sisi & Gany

FIG. 9: Comparison of experimental regression rate vs nitrous oxide mass flux for paraf-
fin wax PW-624, paraffin PX-105 + polymer (HTPB) 1:1 mixture, and polymer PMMA
fuels.

ṙPMMA = 0.033G0.49
ox (10)
As can be seen, the regression rate of pure paraffin is higher than that of PMMA
by about fivefold. Paraffin-polymer–mixed fuel has a lower regression rate than plain
paraffin, but it is higher than that of PMMA by about 2.5-fold. Such behavior is also
reported by Lee and Tsai (2006, 2009), Weinstein and Gany (2011), and Scaramuzzino
et al. (2013) for both nitrous oxide and oxygen oxidizers.
As mentioned before, paraffin has relatively poor mechanical properties. In addition,
after firing tests with pure paraffin, a certain amount of unburned fuel was found inside
the aft mixing chamber due to substantial melting. Such phenomenon was also reported
by Weinstein and Gany (2011). For the calculation of energetic performance (C ∗ and Isp )
as well as efficiency, only the fuel mass expelled from the motor was taken into account,
whereas for the regression rate calculation the mass loss of the fuel grain was considered.
It is noted that in experiments with a mixed paraffin-polymer fuel, no unburned fuel
residue was found inside the aft mixing chamber. Figure 10 shows the final state of
motors employing pure paraffin, the paraffin-polymer mixture, and PMMA, respectively,
after firing.
Compared to a PMMA fuel, the exhaust flame created by using paraffin fuel is much
larger, as can be seen in Fig. 11, indicating that a large amount of unburned fuel leaves
the combustion chamber and burns outside the chamber. This is a result of the low O/F
ratio and may also be due to paraffin droplets escaping the combustor.

International Journal of Energetic Materials and Chemical Propulsion

Combustion of Plain and Reinforced Paraffin with Nitrous Oxide 341

(a) (b) (c)

FIG. 10: Motors employing (a) paraffin wax PW-624, (b) mixed paraffin-polymer
(HTPB), and (c) PMMA, after firing test.

(a) (b)
FIG. 11: Firing tests of a hybrid motor with two fuels: (a) paraffin wax PW-624 and (b)
PMMA, with nitrous oxide oxidizer.

4. COMPARISON TO FUEL/OXYGEN HYBRID SYSTEMS

This section aims at comparing the characteristics of the nitrous oxide–based hybrid sys-
tems investigated in this research to similar hybrid systems based on oxygen as the ox-
idizer. Oxygen is an alternative oxidizer in hybrid propulsion, whose main advantage is
its superior energetic performance. Though in the lab it is convenient to use gaseous oxy-
gen, practical hybrid systems would typically employ cryogenic liquid oxygen (LOX),
which is nonstorable and lacks the convenient features of nitrous oxide. Figures 12 and
13 present the theoretical C ∗ and standard Isp , respectively, of both N2 O-paraffin and
O2 -paraffin hybrid systems versus O/F ratio, revealing about 10% higher peak values for
the oxygen-based system.
With regard to the regression rate, since the melting and evaporation mass loss con-
tributions to the overall fuel regression rate are dependent on the heat transfer to the fuel
surface, which is dominated by the temperature difference between the gas-phase flame
and fuel surface, one would conclude that combinations giving higher flame tempera-
ture should yield a higher fuel regression rate. Figure 14 presents a comparison of the
theoretical flame temperature of paraffin and PMMA with N2 O oxidizer, and paraffin
and PMMA with O2 oxidizer versus O/F ratio. Since hybrid combustion is characterized

Volume 14, Number 4, 2015

342 Sisi & Gany

FIG. 12: Theoretical C ∗ vs O/F ratio for paraffin-N2 O and paraffin-O2 systems, Pc = 6
atm.

FIG. 13: Theoretical standard Isp vs O/F ratio for paraffin-N2 O and paraffin-O2 systems.

by a diffusion flame, the peak temperature at the stoichiometric ratio is an indication of

the flame temperature. In both paraffin and PMMA fuels one sees that the oxygen-based
system yields higher peak temperature by about 200 K than the nitrous oxide systems,
leading to a conclusion that the O2 system should yield a higher regression rate. Fig-
ure 15 compares the regression rate results obtained in our N2 O-based systems for plain

International Journal of Energetic Materials and Chemical Propulsion

Combustion of Plain and Reinforced Paraffin with Nitrous Oxide 343

FIG. 14: Theoretical flame temperature vs O/F ratio for paraffin with N2 O, PMMA with
N2 O, paraffin with O2 , and PMMA with O2 .

FIG. 15: Experimental data of fuel regression rate vs oxidizer mass flux for paraffin,
paraffin + HTPB, and PMMA with N2 O (this research), and paraffin, paraffin + HTPB,
and PMMA with O2 (Weinstein and Gany, 2011).

Volume 14, Number 4, 2015

344 Sisi & Gany

paraffin, mixed paraffin-polymer (HTPB), and PMMA fuels with their counterparts of
oxygen-based systems as presented by Weinstein and Gany (2011) at the same labora-
tory test system. In all cases the oxygen-based system demonstrated higher regression
rates than the N2 O-based system. Table 3 summarizes the regression rate empirical cor-
relations.

5. CONCLUSIONS

This paper presents firing test results of paraffin-based and polymeric fuels with gaseous
nitrous oxide (N2 O) oxidizer. Plain paraffin demonstrates regression rates as high as 5
times those of PMMA polymer. Reinforced fuel by mixing synthetic paraffin (PX-105)
solid particles within an HTPB polymeric matrix improves the mechanical properties
compared to plain paraffin. Although its regression rate is lower than that of plain paraf-
fin, it is still two- to threefold higher than that of PMMA. Hence such a mixed fuel
may be a good choice for hybrid propulsion systems, exhibiting relatively high regres-
sion rates along with improved mechanical properties. As shown, C ∗ efficiencies of
80%–100% with a typical experimental spread have been obtained for all fuel–oxidizer
combinations.
Oxidizer property effects on fuel regression rate were considered by comparing the
experimental results of this investigation for nitrous oxide oxidizer with Weinstein and
Gany’s (2011) results for gaseous oxygen with the same fuels. As expected, oxygen-
based systems exhibit higher regression rates than nitrous oxide–based systems, pre-
sumably due to the higher flame temperature of the former. Nevertheless, in practical
systems oxygen is typically used as a cryogenic liquid, lacking the long-term storage
capability. Nitrous oxide, on the other hand, is a storable and safe oxidizer; hence it is
the preferred choice for hybrid propulsion launchers of the planned space tourism pro-
grams.

TABLE 3: Comparison of fuel regression rate empirical correlations of

N2 O-based systems (this research) and oxygen-based systems (Weinstein
and Gany, 2011) for plain paraffin, mixed paraffin + HTPB, and PMMA
fuels. ṙ in mm/s and Gox in kg/s m2
Oxidizer
Fuel N2 O Gaseous oxygen
(Current research) Weinstein and Gany (2011)
Plain paraffin ṙ = 0.104G0.67
ox ṙ = 0.324G0.42
ox
Paraffin + HTPB ṙ = 0.061G0.59
ox ṙ = 0.22G0.33
ox
PMMA ṙ = 0.033G0.49
ox ṙ = 0.05G0.44
ox

International Journal of Energetic Materials and Chemical Propulsion

Combustion of Plain and Reinforced Paraffin with Nitrous Oxide 345
View publication stats

REFERENCES
Altman, A. and Holzman, A., Overview and history of hybrid rocket propulsion, in Fundamentals
of Hybrid Rocket Combustion and Propulsion, Chiaverini, M. J. and Kuo, K. K., Eds., Prog.
Astronaut. Aeronaut., vol. 218, pp. 1–36, AIAA, Reston, VA, 2007.
Cruise, D. R., Theoretical Computation of Equilibrium Composition, Thermodynamic Proper-
ties, and Performance Characteristics of Propellant Systems (PEP Code), Naval Weapons
Center, China Lake, CA, 1979.
Karabeyoglu, M. A., Altman, D., and Cantwell, B. J., Combustion of liquefying hybrid propel-
lants, Part 1. General theory, J. Propul. Power, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 610–620, 2002.
Karabeyoglu, M. A. and Cantwell, B. J., Combustion of liquefying hybrid propellants, Part 2.
Stability of liquid films, J. Propul. Power, vol. 18, no. 3. pp. 621–630, 2002.
Karabeyoglu, M. A., Zilliac, G., Cantwell, B. J., DeZilwa, S., and Castellucci, P., Scale-up tests
of high regression rate paraffin-based hybrid rocket fuels, J. Propul. Power, vol. 20, no. 6, pp.
1037–1045, 2004.
Karabeyoglu, M. A., Dyer, J., Stevens, J., and Cantwell, B., Modeling of N2 O decomposition
events, AIAA-2008-4933, AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE, The 44th Joint Propulsion Conf. and
Exhibit, Hartford, CT, July 21–23, 2008.
Lee, T. S. and Tsai, H. L., Fuel regression rate in a paraffin-HTPB/ gaseous-oxygen hybrid
rocket, The 5th Taiwan-Indonesia Workshop on Aeronautical Science, Technology and In-
dustry, Tainan, Taiwan, Nov. 13–16, 2006.
Lee, T. S. and Tsai, H. L., Fuel regression rate in a paraffin-HTPB nitrous oxide hybrid rocket,
The 7th Asia-Pacific Conf. on Combustion, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan, May
24–27, 2009.
Scaramuzzino, F., Carmicino, C., Festa, G., Russo Sorge, A., and Viviani, A., Fuel regression-
rate characterization on a lab-scale hybrid rocket burning N2 O and paraffin-based propellants,
AIAA-2013-4039, AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE, The 49th Joint Propulsion Conf., San Jose, CA,
July 14–17, 2013.
Thermophysical Properties of Nitrous Oxide, ESDU 91022, ESDU International, London, 2006.
Weinstein, A. and Gany, A., Investigation of paraffin based fuels in hybrid combustors, Int. J.
Energetic Mater. Chem. Propul., vol. 10, pp. 277–296, 2011.
Weinstein, A. and Gany, A., Testing and modeling liquefying fuel combustion in hybrid propul-
sion, Prog. Propul. Phys., vol. 4, pp. 63–76, 2012.

Volume 14, Number 4, 2015