JOURNAL OF SPACECRAFT AND ROCKETS

Vol. 55, No. 2, March–April 2018

Hybrid Experimental Rocket Stuttgart: A Low-Cost

Technology Demonstrator

M. Kobald,∗ U. Fischer,† K. Tomilin,† and A. Petrarolo‡

DLR, German Aerospace Center, 74239 Hardthausen, Germany
and
C. Schmierer§
Stuttgart University, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany
DOI: 10.2514/1.A34035
On 8 November 2016 at 1030 hrs, the Hybrid Experimental Rocket Stuttgart (HEROS) 3 was launched from the
European Space and Sounding Rocket Range (ESRANGE) Space Center to an apogee altitude of 32,300 m
(106,000 ft). This set a new altitude record for European student and amateur rocketry and a world altitude record for
hybrid rockets built by students. The 7.5-m-long rocket was using nitrous oxide (N2 O) and a paraffin-based fuel to
produce 10,000 N of thrust. The dry mass of the rocket was only 75 kg thanks to a carbon fiber structure for the most
Downloaded by 151.68.26.87 on November 20, 2023 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/1.A34035

part. The rocket performed the record-breaking flight at perfect weather and visibility conditions, reaching a
maximum airspeed of 720 m∕s and Mach 2.3. The rocket performed a soft landing with two parachutes and can be
reused. Flight data and engine performance data are published and analyzed. The flight data show excellent stability
of the rocket. Engine performance data prove very high efficiency and stable combustion. The subsystem design and
verification before the launch is reported. Engine and flight trajectory simulations show very good agreement with the
flight data. Furthermore, the overall project, rocket design, and subsystems, as well as the launch campaign,
are presented here in detail.

I. Introduction
H YBRID engine development (HyEnD) is a student-based project
located at the University of Stuttgart, founded in 2006. In the years
from 2006 to 2012, HyEnD focused on developing its own hybrid rocket
engines in different scales from 250 to 2000 N thrust [1]. In 2012,
the project Studentische Experimentalraketen (student experimental
rockets) STERN was initiated by DLR, German Aerospace Center
(DLR) and HyEnD applied for it with the Institute of Space Systems.
The experience and knowledge of HyEnD in developing and testing
hybrid rocket engines was the foundation to develop, construct, and
build its own experimental hybrid sounding rocket within the STERN
project.
In September 2012, the rocket development began, starting from
scratch. The previous experience with hybrid rocket engines was the
basis for the project. Within the first year, the concept of the rocket
Hybrid Experimental Rocket Stuttgart (HEROS) was developed.
Simultaneously, a smaller demonstrator rocket, Micro-Rakete
Stuttgart (MIRAS), was initiated to test all subsystems in a smaller
scale before the launch of HEROS in 2015. HEROS was targeted to
have a thrust of 10 kN and to reach an altitude of more than 20 km. A
smaller scale was applied for MIRAS, which reaches altitudes of
around 2 km with a 500 N engine. This allows test flights of the rocket
on German launch sites. Both MIRAS and HEROS use a hybrid rocket
engine with a paraffin-based fuel and liquid N2 O as oxidizer. More than
150 hot-fire tests have been performed in the HyEnD project so far. The
design of the HEROS hybrid sounding rocket is presented in detail
herein. A lot of improvements were made to the design of the different
subsystems during the development of the MIRAS demonstrator, which
were applied to the HEROS rocket design until the end of the second
year. At that time, HyEnD also passed the critical design review. The
review board included experts from DLR Mobile Rocket Base, DLR
Space Agency, and DLR Institute of Space Propulsion. Six reviews
were passed in total during the project. In early 2015, the MIRAS
demonstrator rocket was launched successfully, proving that the
baseline concept is working. In the summer of 2015, a second flight of
MIRAS was done before the launch campaign of HEROS 1 in October
2015. All HEROS flights took place at the European Space and
Sounding Rocket Range (ESRANGE) near Kiruna, Sweden. A project
timeline is given in Table 1. The first launch of HEROS 1 in October
2015 ended prematurely due to combustion instability and a
burnthrough of the combustion chamber. Low temperature N2 O was the
cause of the failure. However, a project extension for one year for a
failure analysis was granted. After the successful failure analysis review,
it was decided to build and launch the slightly improved rockets HEROS
2 and 3. Next to the engine, more improvements were made with an
advanced onboard measurement system and a new telemetry (TM)
system and power control unit [2].

Presented as Paper 2017-4902 at the 53rd AIAA/SAE/ASEE Joint

Propulsion Conference, Atlanta, GA, 10–12 July 2017; received 22 July 2017;
revision received 9 October 2017; accepted for publication 13 October 2017;
published online Open Access 28 November 2017. Copyright © 2017 by
Mario Kobald. Published by the American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Inc., with permission. All requests for copying and permission
to reprint should be submitted to CCC at www.copyright.com; employ the
ISSN 0022-4650 (print) or 1533-6794 (online) to initiate your request. See
also AIAA Rights and Permissions www.aiaa.org/randp.
*Group Leader, Institute of Space Propulsion, Propellants Department,
DLR Lampoldshausen; also Stuttgart University, Institute of Space Systems,
70569 Stuttgart, Germany. Member AIAA.
†
Research Scientist, Institute of Space Propulsion, Propellants Department,
DLR Lampoldshausen, 74239 Hardthausen; also Stuttgart University,
Institute of Space Systems, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany.
‡
Ph.D. Candidate, Institute of Space Propulsion, Propellants Department,
DLR Lampoldshausen, 74239 Hardthausen; also Stuttgart University,
Institute of Space Systems, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany.
§
Ph.D. Candidate, Institute of Space Systems.
484
II. State-of-the-Art Hybrid Rocket Propulsion
A. Liquefying Hybrid Rocket Fuels
Hybrid rocket engines have distinct advantages [3–5] compared
with classical solid- [6,7] or liquid-propellant rocket engines [8,9]. The
interest in hybrid rocket engines is quite high, which is indicated by the
number of publications during the last years. In comparison with
solid rocket engines, their TNT equivalent of zero offers huge safety
advantages during storage and handling. These advantages lead to
reduced total costs of such a hybrid rocket engine. Controllable thrust,
including shut off and restart capability, are further advantages. Less
pipings and valves due to only one liquid component introduce less
complexity and reduced costs compared with liquid rocket engines.
Applications, especially in space tourism like SpaceShipOne some
years ago, clearly show the potentials of hybrid rocket engines. One of
the disadvantages might be the use of polymeric fuels. These fuels,
like hydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene (HTPB) or high-density
 KOBALD ET AL.
Table 1 Timeline of the HyEnD-STERN project at University of
Stuttgart
Date Event
June 2006 Foundation of HyEnD
July 2008 First hybrid rocket engine test campaign
Sept. 2012 Beginning of STERN project funding
Sept. 2013 Beginning of MIRAS 500 N engine test campaign
Dec. 2013 Preliminary design review
Nov. 2014 Beginning of HyRES 10000 N engine test campaign
Nov. 2014 Critical design review
Feb. 2015 First launch of MIRAS
May 2015 Integration progress review
Aug. 2015 Second MIRAS launch
Sept. 2015 Rocket acceptance review
Oct. 2015 Flight readiness review
Oct. 2015 HEROS 1 launch
Nov. 2015 Postflight analysis
April 2016 Project extension
June 2016 Failure analysis review
July–Sept. 2016 Assembly of HEROS 2 and 3
31 Oct. 2016 HEROS 2 launch
7 Nov. 2016 ESRANGE safety board: go for return to flight
Downloaded by 151.68.26.87 on November 20, 2023 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/1.A34035
8 Nov. 2016 HEROS 3 launch
polyethylene, show relatively low regression rates, which result in the
necessity for multiport fuel grains for high-thrust applications. The
multiport design increases the residual mass of unburnt fuel and
thereby decreases the delivered specific impulse. Instabilities are also
more likely with this type of design.
Liquefying hybrid rocket fuels were investigated in the last years.
Cryogenic solid n-pentane showed regression rates 5–10 times higher
than polymeric hybrid fuels [10]. Following these studies, tests were
done at Stanford University with long chain hydrocarbons that are
solid at ambient temperature [11,12]. These fuels are paraffin-based
and show a 3–5 times higher regression rate than polymers at similar
mass fluxes. This is achieved by a different combustion mechanism.
Paraffin fuels form a liquid layer on the fuel surface during the
combustion [11]. It is expected that the low viscosity and low surface
tension of the liquid fuel enable an additional mass transfer by
entrainment of liquid droplets. The gas flow over the surface induces
liquid layer instabilities, which produce the droplet entrainment [13].
The classical hybrid boundary-layer combustion was analyzed
already around 1960, also with schlieren imaging [14,15]. Recently,
this technique was also applied to liquefying hybrid fuels [16,17].
Optical results of the entrainment process of low-viscosity liquefying
fuels are shown in detail in [18,19]. Novel automated data evaluation
techniques to characterize frequencies and wavelengths of the
entrainment process are presented in [18,20]. Scale-up tests were
done and confirmed that the theory is also applicable for engines at
larger scale [21]. Recent tests with different paraffin-based fuels and
gaseous oxygen showed an exponential relation between the liquid
layer viscosity and the overall regression rate [22,23]. Numerical
analysis of the liquid layer instability was done in [24].
B. Recent and Current Programs
Hybrid rocket engines are the focus of research at several institutions
and universities worldwide. They are well suited for educational
purposes with students due to their aforementioned inherent safety.
Especially, small-scale combustion experiments are widely available
and described in detail in the literature. At larger scales, the number of
experiments and available data are much smaller. Their good
performance, depending on the chosen propellant combination, makes
hybrid rockets attractive for sounding rockets and microlaunchers. The
throttling and restart capability are further advantages of hybrid rocket
engines.
The biggest operational hybrid rocket engine was realized within
the Hybrid Propulsion Demonstration Program in the United States
[25]. The engine was based on HTPB and liquid oxygen (LOX) with a
thrust of 250 klb. Subscale tests were successful, although the full
thrust engine still suffered from instabilities. Different flight tests
485
have also been performed, with the exception of SpaceShipOne,
mostly with problems [26]. Recent efforts from NASA Ames
Research Group, Stanford University, and the Space Propulsion
Group, Inc. (SPG) were aimed at developing the Peregrine sounding
rocket in a joint program. It uses a hybrid rocket engine with N2 O and
a paraffin-based fuel to launch a 5 kg payload to an altitude of more
than 100 km. The development of the engine was challenging
due to the occurrence of low-frequency instabilities based on feed
system coupling and acoustic instabilities [27]. The low-frequency
instabilities were partially related to the injection conditions of the
N2 O, especially its vapor pressure [28]. The latest tests showed stable
operation at high efficiency. In the last years, SPG developed a high-
performance hybrid rocket engine with LOX and paraffin-based fuels
as propellants [29]. Its application was proposed as an upper stage
engine with an extrapolated vacuum specific impulse of 340 s. The
technological challenges of combustion instabilities, which often
arise with LOX hybrid rocket engines [30], were said to be solved
only by advanced combustion chamber and injector design and
passive devices. These instabilities were only solved partially in
previous engines by injecting pyrophoric liquids, which increased the
complexity and decreased the inherent safety of hybrid rocket
engines [31]. Often, low-frequency instabilities can arise in hybrids
[32], which are based on a coupling between thermal transients in the
fuel grain and transients in the boundary layer. The Japan Aerospace
Exploration Agency is investigating a wide field of different hybrid
rocket propulsion concepts. This includes the work on a 5 kN
swirling oxidizer flow hybrid rocket engine [33]. SpaceShipOne and
SpaceShipTwo are still the most well-known examples of flight-
tested hybrid rocket engine applications. A suborbital hybrid
sounding rocket is in development by the Norwegian company
Nammo [34]. The engine uses an HTPB fuel and hydrogen peroxide
(H2 O2 ) as oxidizer. The Jet Propulsion Laboratory is evaluating
hybrid rocket propulsion as a technology for a Mars ascent vehicle
[35]. It shall use a wax-based fuel formulation from SPG, which has a
lower glass transition temperature than HTPB and a wide operating
temperature range from −100 to 50°C. Thereby, it is attractive for
this application on Mars, where high-temperature variations on the
surface exist.
III. HEROS Key Technologies
The sounding rocket HEROS is shown in Fig. 1. Its main
dimensions, components, and subsystems are shown in Fig. 2. In
addition to the rocket systems, a lot of work and effort has been
invested in the ground support equipment (GSE). It was used at
ESRANGE to load or unload the oxidizer, supply the rocket with
power while on the launch pad, operate the onboard electronics and
the cameras, and provide a remote connection to the control room at
the launch site. The most important rocket subsystems are described
in the following.
A. Hybrid Rocket Engine
Stable and efficient combustion in the rocket engine is mandatory
for a sounding rocket that shall reach high altitudes. A hybrid rocket
engine was chosen due to its good performance and inherent safety.
The oxidizer was N2 O and a solid paraffin-based fuel. The usage of
liquefying fuels enables a simple single-port fuel design and a
higher fuel utilization compared with low regression rate fuels like
HTPB. The application of a self-pressurizing oxidizer permits a
simple propulsion system with good performance, without external
pressurization. The fuel of the Hybrid Rocket Engine Stuttgart
(HyRES) was designed for having high performance in regression
rate and mechanical properties [23]. Furthermore, a lot of effort was
given to achieve a high combustion efficiency. It can be low for
hybrid rocket engines, if the combustion chamber design is not
optimized. The reason for this is that the fuel and oxidizer do not
mix completely directly after injection, because the fuel mass flow
is distributed over the length of the chamber. This typically forms a
layered flow structure with an oxidizer-rich core and a fuel-rich
outer periphery. Additional time and effort is needed to melt and
evaporate the solid fuel and to evaporate the liquid oxidizer.
 486 KOBALD ET AL.
Downloaded by 151.68.26.87 on November 20, 2023 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/1.A34035
Fig. 1 HEROS mounted on the launcher.
Different injectors, operating conditions, and combustion chamber
layouts were investigated to optimize this. Table 2 shows the key
operational data of HyRES. A hot-fire test at the DLR Lampoldshausen
test site M11.5 is seen in Fig. 3.
B. Oxidizer Tank
The largest single component of the rocket is the oxidizer tank. It has
a volume of 130 liters and a length of about 4 m. It contains up to 80 kg
of N2 O in liquid state at about 60 bar. HEROS uses the ability of self-
pressurization of the N2 O, without a pump or secondary pressurization
with a gas. The vapor pressure of N2 O is at about 55 bar at an ambient
temperature of 25°C [36]. According to the safety requirements of
ESRANGE, a safety factor of at least two has to be applied to all
pressurized systems. From these requirements, it was concluded at the
beginning of the design of the rocket that the oxidizer tank needs to
be optimized regarding lightweight construction. Initially, a simple
aluminum tank was analyzed. It was a feasible option, but to reduce the
dry mass, a tank of smaller size should have been chosen, resulting in a
shorter burning time of the engine. Even then, the dry mass of a smaller
aluminum tank would have been 35–40 kg. Therefore, the next step
was taken to design a carbon-fiber reinforced plastic (CFRP) tank [37].
There were problems identified with the compatibility of N2 O and the
organic components of CFRP resins. It is not proven that CFRP and
N2 O are compatible, and there are results indicating that parts of the
organic resin dissolves over time into the N2 O. This lowers the
temperature of self-ignition drastically and thereby affects the safety
[38,39]. This is also a problem with some commercially available liner
materials for CFRP tanks, which are mostly polymers. Instead, a
compromise regarding the system weight and safety was found by using
a welded aluminum liner and reinforced with CFRP. Thus, the total mass
of the oxidizer tank was reduced to about 25 kg, and at the same time, the
volume was increased to 130 liters. The welded aluminum liner was
produced out of four parts: two tubes of 1.85 m length (1.5 mm thick)
and two end caps with integrated threads for adapters. The 1.5-mm-thick
aluminum tubes were bent from sheet metal and welded with a
longitudinal welding seam. Future tanks could be produced by using
thinner sheet metal to save more weight, but the manufacturing process
would get more expensive. This might not be the most cost-effective
design for a prototype tank in an experimental rocket, but it is the best
approach concerning safety and feasibility. Figure 4 shows the welded
aluminum liner during the wrapping with CFRP.
C. CFRP Main Rocket Structure
The entire airframe of the rocket uses lightweight fiber-reinforced
plastic materials to reduce the dry mass. Elastic properties of the rocket’s
structure and fins were analyzed regarding possible dynamic and
aeroelastic effects that the rocket can encounter during flight. Fin flutter
and pitch oscillation related bending effects were studied with finite
element methods and analytic calculations to ensure structural integrity
in all flight phases. All parts made of fiber-reinforced plastic materials
use specially designed fiber layups. Filament wound CFRP tubes
optimized for maximum stiffness and good buckling performance are
used for the engine and recovery segment. The fins consist of a CFRP/
foam sandwich that is designed with high torsional and bending
frequencies to avoid aeroelastic flutter phenomena during flight. The
main design requirement was that the velocity of the rocket is below the
flutter velocity and the divergence velocity of the fins at any time during
flight.
The tubes were produced using the fiber winding process. The
orientation and thickness of the laminate layers were customized to
withstand the occurring loads during the burn and recovery phases.
The laminate had an overall thickness of 1.8 mm at an inner diameter
of 220 mm. The laminate was also optimized for the use of bolt
connections that are needed to join the rocket parts. Connector tubes
were used to conduct bending moments between sections to prevent
the bolts from getting asymmetrically loaded over the circumference
of the rocket’s body. The self-made connections at the tank are seen in
Fig. 5. Aluminum rings were fitted inside the connector tubes and
were tightened with radial screws. As a result, a relatively small
amount of screws was needed for the assembly, which decreases the
failure probability due to hole bearing or due to contact pressure in the
CFRP. The fins of the rocket are shown in Fig. 6. They were produced
with CFRP in the sandwich construction type, which leads to highly
lightweight but also stiff structures. The fins were directly laminated
with CFRP on the hull segments.
D. Pyrotechnical Valve
Almost no small-scale sounding rockets like HEROS exist.
Therefore, there is no commercial off-the-shelf valve available for this
rocket size. HEROS needs an oxidizer mass flow of around 4 kg∕s at
about 55 bar. Commercially available valves suitable for this mass flow
are much too heavy for the rocket. This was the reason for HyEnD to
use a custom-designed valve. The design of HyEnD’s pyrotechnical
valve includes a burst disk, which withstands the pressure of N2 O with
a safety factor of more than two. In other setups, the propellant is often
pressurized to open the burst disk, but this requires a higher operating
pressure in the tank, which results in a greater dry mass due to thicker
walls. Instead, a pyrotechnical charge is ignited to open the main valve
for the start of the engine. The opening time is below 0.1 s. Another
benefit of this valve design is that no hot gas gets in direct contact with
the N2 O. Thereby, the valve also allows for higher safety with the N2 O.
Two pyrotechnical valves are used in HEROS. The main valve is used
to open the mass flow into the combustion chamber for ignition.
 KOBALD ET AL. 487
Downloaded by 151.68.26.87 on November 20, 2023 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/1.A34035

Fig. 2 Overview of HEROS rocket and its subsystems.

A second, smaller valve is used as an emergency purge valve in case of enables a wide recovery envelope. A brake drogue parachute opens
a countdown abort. This smaller valve was qualified as the main valve first at the apogee to decelerate the rocket vehicle to a lower airspeed
in the demonstrator rocket MIRAS. at which the toroidal main parachute is safely opened. Because of the
high descent rate in the drogue phase, the influence of jet streams and
E. Recovery System the wind drift is minimized so that a close proximity recovery is
performed. All parachutes are ejected from the rocket through a side
A two-stage recovery system, shown in Fig. 7, was designed to
door, as seen in Fig. 8.
decelerate the entire vehicle to a suitable landing speed. The system
comprises two types of parachutes with increasing drag area and
F. Electronics and Telemetry Systems
One goal of the STERN program was to include a telemetry
downlink from the rocket to a ground station. This was realized with a
Table 2 HyRES performance data commercially available flight computer, which is used mainly for high-
power model rocketry. This flight computer measures the rocket’s
Property Value acceleration along three axes and its rotation rate around three axes, as
Nominal thrust 10,000 N well as the ambient pressure. The attitude and altitude of the rocket is
Nominal burn time 20 s automatically calculated with this sensor onboard. Additionally, the
Nominal mass flow 5–5.5 kg∕s GPS position is recorded and transmitted to the ground station.
Chamber pressure 30–35 bar However, the GPS signal is restricted on the velocity of the rocket due
Solid paraffin-based fuel 12.5 kg to the Coordinating Committee for Multilateral Export Controls
Combustion efficiency >98% (COCOM) limit. This requires the use of additional sensors and a
Dry mass 21 kg
Length 1,300 mm
Kalman filter for evaluation of the inertial measurement unit (IMU)
Fuel outer diameter 175 mm data to receive the rocket position. Link budget calculations showed
that more transmitting power was needed than the flight computer
 488 KOBALD ET AL.

Fig. 3 HyRES ground test.

Fig. 7 Recovery system and parachute.

Downloaded by 151.68.26.87 on November 20, 2023 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/1.A34035

Fig. 4 Carbon fiber structure of the tank.

Fig. 8 Recovery system bay.

Fig. 5 CFRP main structure at the tank.

Fig. 6 CFRP fin assembly.

could provide. Thus, the data signal was amplified and then sent via a
rod antenna over a frequency in the 70 cm band.
In the rocket, a redundant configuration of two independent
branches was integrated, each containing one flight computer
sending its position data to the ground station. The ground station is
shown in Fig. 9, where one Yagi antenna per flight computer was Fig. 9 Yagi antenna setup.
 KOBALD ET AL.
Fig. 10 Power control and distribution unit.
Downloaded by 151.68.26.87 on November 20, 2023 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/1.A34035
Fig. 11 Electronics and telemetry system.
used. The most important task of the flight computers is the ejection
of the drogue parachutes at the apogee as well as the main parachute
near the ground. The electronic section also contained two onboard
video cameras. A power control and distribution unit, as shown in
Fig. 10, was designed for controlling the flight computer, as well as
the onboard cameras and the payload before the launch from the
GSE. During the flight, it supplies constant output voltage despite
the decreasing input voltage from the lithium polymer batteries. For
safety and stability reasons, the electronic components were integrated
in special casings and the whole electronics system was mounted on a
special rapid prototyping structure. The whole system integrated in the
rocket is shown in Fig. 11.
G. Measurement System
A self-built measurement system recorded pressure, temperature,
and IMU data during the flight for postflight analysis. Usual flight
instrumentation units can be quite extensive, depending on the mission
[40]. The system was designed at low cost and consisted of three
Genuino microcontrollers, located in the lower segment of the rocket,
between the combustion chamber and the tank (shown in Fig. 12). All
the software programming was done with the Arduino software
environment. Combustion chamber, injector, and tank pressure were
measured at 1000 Hz to provide performance data and combustion
stability analysis of the engine. Temperatures were measured at 2 Hz in
the injector, tank, rocket fin (2), and CFRP tank structure. A Bosch
BNO055 IMU sensor measured the rocket attitude in Eulerian
angles during the flight. Additionally, this sensor delivered the raw
acceleration data, gravitational acceleration, magnetic field data, and
rotation rates. Each of them were given in three-body axes at a
frequency of more than 90 Hz. Data of each Genuino were saved on
489
Fig. 12 Measurement system.
micro-SD cards during the flight and were then analyzed after the
flight. Temperature data, tank pressure, and Genuino status signals
were monitored in real time from the launcher before liftoff and were
transmitted to the GSE. Proper temperature and pressure of the N2 O in
the rocket tank was one of the main “go/no-go” criteria for a launch. An
N2 O tank temperature above 25°C was the go criterion and a tank
pressure of more than 60 bar. The pressure was higher than the
corresponding N2 O vapor pressure, because the tank was slightly
supercharged with He before the launch.
H. Payload
A payload compartment was located in the nose cone of the rocket.
A small satellite student experiment from Stuttgart University, Mikro
Rückkehrkapsel (MIRKA), was given a free-flight opportunity.
This electronic system provided additional flight data as well as
positioning data via the Iridium network for recovery.
I. Ground Support Equipment
The GSE is a mobile and versatile setup, which can be used at
different launch sites. It consists of a remote-controlled LabVIEW-
based measurement and control system. Heated intermediate tanks
were used for the oxidizer loading process. The oxidizer was
transferred using a loading arm that could be retracted with the
LabVIEW system. A video system, consisting of seven cameras,
recorded video material of the launch. A live feed was available to
verify the retraction of the loading arm. The loaded amount of N2 O
into the rocket was measured redundantly: The intermediate tanks as
well as the rocket on the launcher were mounted on two separate load
cells. This additional measurement was used because load cell
measurements can be sensitive to temperature shifts and ambient
conditions, which could make them inaccurate. The connecting line
between the rocket and the intermediate tanks was equipped with a
Coriolis flow meter. This redundancy enables a high accuracy, which
is important for verifying the engine’s flight performance and the
rocket’s altitude simulations. Because the oxidizer temperature is
critical for the engine’s performance, both intermediate tanks and the
rocket itself were heated before launch. Heating bands were used for
the heating of the intermediate tanks that could be switched via the
GSE. An air-heated Styrofoam box served as a housing for the rocket
on the rail. Several temperature measurement points at the tanks and
the rocket were used to monitor the heating process during the
countdown. Safe-arm connectors were used for the pyrotechnical
valves and the recovery system. They were removed during the
countdown and thereby the corresponding systems were armed.
J. Safety During Handling and Project Costs
The inherent safety of the hybrid rocket propulsion allowed
preparation and assembly of the complete rocket system at the launch
site with much fewer safety requirements in comparison with solid
 490 KOBALD ET AL.

Table 3 Costs for HEROS 3 Table 4 HyRES engine test matrix

Item Cost, Euro Test no. Configuration Time, s Comments
Nose cone 700 i-0 Igniter test 2 Injector only
Electronic/TM system 2,000 0 N2 O cold flow, 5 kN 3 Injector only
Recovery system 2,000 injector
CFRP tank 3,500 1 5 kN injector 5 Successful first test
CFRP structure 4,500 2 5 kN injector 5 Ignition improved
Measurement system 600 3 5 kN injector 10 Thermal design test
Pyrotechnical valve 500 4 5 kN injector 5 Increased efficiency
HyRES engine 6,000 5 10 kN injector 5 Reduced chamber pressure
Additional parts 4,200 6 10 kN injector 5 Design conditions from here
Total Σ 24,000 on
7 Design conditions 3 Regression rate and efficiency
8 Design conditions 12 Increased N2 O tank at test
bench
rockets. The only potentially dangerous items of the rockets were the 9 Flight tank in 4 Reduced pressure
solid-propellant igniters for the main engine, with about 100 g. blowdown
Because the N2 O was loaded directly before launch, during the 10 Flight tank in 7 Modified injector
countdown, no risks were associated with having a hazard during the blowdown
rocket assembly. Because the empty rockets are very safe to handle, it 11 Flight tank in 5 Repeated test
was possible to assemble both rockets at the same time and place. blowdown
12 Flight chamber 5 Increased efficiency
Even multiple hybrid rockets could be prepared for launch, which
Downloaded by 151.68.26.87 on November 20, 2023 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/1.A34035

13 Flight chamber and 12 Flight-weight system test

reduces the operational costs greatly. This is not possible at the tank in blowdown
moment for solid rockets at ESRANGE. Also, no special storage is 14 HEROS 1 flight 5.5 Feed-system-coupled
needed for the fuel and the rockets loaded with the fuel, which instability
reduces the costs even further. Furthermore, the disposal of unused 15 Heavyweight chamber 10 Efficiency and stability
hybrid rocket motors is simple and cheap thanks to the nonexplosive 16 Flight tank in 5 Feed-system-coupled
nature. This is very different in comparison with solid rocket motors, blowdown, 14°C N2 O instability
which have to be fired at the site with special precautions. This is 17 Flight tank in 15 Stable combustion
especially dangerous for old solid rocket motors, which were stored blowdown, 24°C N2 O
18 Flight tank in 20 Stability over long burning
for a long time or when the storage life is already expired.
blowdown time
Electrostatic discharges, which happen often it the dry atmosphere 19 Flight chamber and 25 Combustion until liquid N2 O
at ESRANGE, are always a huge risk during all the time when tank in blowdown is emptied
handling a solid rocket motor. On the contrary, the risk is very small 20 HEROS 2 flight 15 Stable combustion
for a hybrid rocket. Therefore, the handling can be done without 21 HEROS 3 flight 15 Stable combustion and data
special antistatic clothing and without grounding of the personnel for recovered
most of the time, except when working with sensitive electronics.
Thanks to safe hybrid rocket propulsion, it was even possible to
generate voltage currents in lines and sparks next to the rocket on the
efficiency of the engine were gradually increased during the campaign.
launcher. This was done for the failure analysis of the electronics
The corresponding test matrix is shown in Table 4.
during the HEROS 2 launch (see also Sec. V.A).
Test number 3 was done with 10 s of burning time to verify the
The budget for the overall project was rather restricted. However,
thermal design of the engine. A modification in the postcombustion
thanks to the simple but efficient hybrid propulsion technology and
lightweight CFRP structures, costs could be minimized successfully. chamber was introduced in test 4 to increase the c
efficiency. As a
All three rockets were identical and therefore used identical parts, next step, the full mass flow injector was used for test 5 and later tests.
enabling further savings, because larger quantities of every part Test 8 was at the design condition of the engine with a burning time of
could be bought. The costs for HEROS 3 are shown in Table 3. 12 s. The rocket’s flight tank, using the self-pressurization of N2 O,
Concerning the propellants, paraffin-based fuels offer very low costs was evaluated in tests 9–12. Test 13 was the final test before the
in combination with easy manufacturing and safe handling. A very launch of HEROS 1 with the flight-weight combustion chamber. The
high fuel utilization was possible, thanks to their single-port design. failure of the combustion chamber during the flight of HEROS 1 was
No dangerous materials or such with export restrictions were used. assumed to be caused by a low-frequency combustion instability
N2 O as an oxidizer is readily available at low costs compared with due to insufficient heating of the N2 O in the rocket. Other test
H2 O2 . Moreover, the transportation and handling of N2 O is much programs also experienced similar issues in ground tests [27,28].
simpler than that of cryogenic substances and also solid propellants, This assumption was proven successfully after the failure analysis
which further reduced handling and operational costs [36]. review in ground tests 16, 17, and later. Test 16 showed unstable
combustion exactly due to a low N2 O temperature. On the contrary,
test 17 showed very stable combustion with the same test settings,
IV. Subsystem Qualification Testing except for a higher initial oxidizer temperature. The remaining tests
A. HyRES Engine Tests were focused on high stability and efficiency over long burning times.
The time for the HyRES engine development and the test campaign Such a stable combustion is seen in test 18 in Fig. 13. This test
was rather limited, due to the short overall project time frame. was with the flight engine configuration in blowdown mode. The
Therefore, an extensive test campaign was realized with the subscale corresponding thrust is shown in Fig. 14. It was slightly lower than
500 N hybrid rocket engine. This enabled a high number of tests at low normal due to increased cavitation of the N2 O in the injector, caused
cost and a short time between two tests. More than 100 tests have been by a higher initial temperature of the N2 O in this test.
performed with this engine, including two flight demonstrations with Concluding, some of the most important results of the testing are the
the MIRAS rocket. Several important results were achieved that were characterization of combustion behavior of a wide number of different
used directly for the design of the scaled-up HyRES engine. The tests paraffin-based fuels. A tradeoff was made between regression rate and
were done at the same test facility and, if possible, under similar the mechanical strength. Special care was taken concerning the stability
operating conditions as in the 10,000 N tests. Thanks to these tests, of the combustion process. Combustion instability lowers the
many optimizations have been incorporated already into the first performance and increases the loads on the rocket structure and
design of the HyRES engine. Eighteen hot-fire tests on the ground payload. In general, the injector and precombustion chamber
were conducted with the 10 kN engine. The performance and configuration determine the stability of the motor [41]. An injector
 KOBALD ET AL. 491

Normalized Pressure [-]

0.5

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Time [s]
Fig. 13 Combustion chamber pressure of HyRES hot-fire test 18.

1
Normalized Thrust [-]

0.5
Downloaded by 151.68.26.87 on November 20, 2023 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/1.A34035

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Time [s]
Fig. 14 Thrust profile (filtered) of HyRES hot-fire test 18.

with proper atomization of the oxidizer and sufficient pressure drop is
needed to avoid feed-system-coupled instabilities. Vortex shedding is
often linked to the formation of instabilities [42,43]. The combustion
chamber was optimized to provide a high c
efficiency. All this
summarized knowledge enabled the successful design of this large-scale
engine with a very low number of tests, which also reduced greatly the
overall project costs.
B. Telemetry Tests
Range tests were conducted in August 2016 to verify the
performance of the telemetry system. The transmitter position was on
top of one of Stuttgart University’s highest buildings. The receiving
antennas were positioned at Castle Teck and Castle Staufeneck with a
distance of 32.2 and 49.1 km from the transmission site, respectively.
The transmission was reliable for both distances and there were only
3 dB additional loss between the shorter and the longer distance, as
calculated beforehand in the link budget. The additional noise
background in Stuttgart compared with the north of Sweden was a
rather conservative approach. The transmitting telemetry system
showed no strong directional radiation pattern and the free-space
losses were within the preliminary calculations. MIRKA 2, which
serves as a small payload for both HEROS 2 and 3, was also switched
on during the test. No significant interference could be measured,
showing the compatibility of the telemetry system and the payload.
The maximum transmission range was extrapolated to be 125 km
with those measurements. The dedicated power source of the
telemetry system also showed sufficient capacity.
C. Thermal Tests of the Fins
The expected strong heating of the CFRP structure due to
aerodynamic drag and convective heating from the compressed air in
regions of Mach 2 or higher was known to be important beforehand.
Therefore, a heating test with the air heater at the test bench M11.1 of
the DLR Lampoldshausen was conducted. Five thermocouples were
placed inside a model of the rocket fin. An array of tests was conducted
with different total temperatures, total pressures, and test durations.
The measurements of the most representative test are displayed in
Fig. 15. These are crucial data to outline the maximum performance of

350

T1: leading edge

300
T2: 2mm under CFRP
T3: 2 mm under CFRP
250
T4: surface
Temperature [°C]

T5: 2mm under CFRP

200

150

100

50

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time [s]
Fig. 15 Temperature measured at the five measurement points (Tt
600 K, pt
10 bar, t
15 s, M
2.5).
 492 KOBALD ET AL.
Fig. 16 Heated fin sample at air heater M11.1 after the test.
Downloaded by 151.68.26.87 on November 20, 2023 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/1.A34035
Fig. 17 Schlieren image of fin sample during hot-air test.
the structure concerning thermal stress. The resin in the CFRP will get
soft above a certain temperature, thereby debilitating the structure. The
total temperature and total pressure for the actual flight conditions
could not be reached exactly, but the data gave good estimations for the
flight and also served as a comparison for numerical simulations.
Thermocouples in the rocket recorded the actual heating process
during the flight. Additionally, high-speed videos and schlieren videos
were taken to analyze the test. The fin sample, mounted at the test
bench, is shown in Fig. 16. An image from the schlieren test is shown in
Fig. 17. Oblique shock waves are clearly visible, which are induced at
the front and at the fin angles. The test data gave good insight into the
conduction of heat through the rocket’s structure, and were the basis for
the decision to fill the oxidizer tank to only about 70% of its capacity,
thereby limiting the thermal heating.
D. Hybrid Propulsion System Simulations with European Space
Propulsion System Simulation
A very important step during development of a high power hybrid
rocket engine was the usage of state of the art simulation tools and the
0.8
Normalized Pressure [-]
0.6
0.4
Tank Pressure (Measured) Test 19
0.2
Tank Pressure (Simulated) Test 19
Postchamber Pressure (Measured) Test 19
0 Postchamber Pressure (Simulated) Test 19
-0.2
0 5 10
Time [s]
Fig. 18 Measured combustion chamber pressure of HyRES hot-fire test 19 and comparison with simulated data.
creation of models that represent our propulsion system and test
bench very precisely. One major difficulty for the simulation of the
hybrid rocket engine HyRES was the modeling and prediction of the
tank pressure during self-pressurization and blowdown of the N2 O.
The software EcosimPro with the library European Space Propulsion
System Simulation (ESPSS) was used to simulate rocket engine
cycles. It was developed by Empresarios Agrupados on behalf of the
ESA. A newly added component for hybrid rocket engines is
available and, together with the tank and pipe models, a complete
model of HyRES at the test bench as well as an in-flight configuration
were created [44]. To the authors’ knowledge, to date no model for
the self-pressurization of N2 O for hybrid rocket engine applications
was producing completely satisfying and reliable results (see also
[45]). The one-dimensional simulation of the oxidizer tank in ESPSS
included many processes that have high impact on the tank’s states
during blowdown: 1) volume nodes for liquid and gaseous oxidizer,
in combination with noncondensable gas (helium); 2) heat and
mass transfer between the nodes via conduction, convection, and
vaporization; 3) temperature stratification during tank loading and
emptying; 4) correct simulation of boiling in the volume, boiling at
the wall, and velocity of rising vapor bubbles; 5) heat transfer to tank
walls; 6) two-phase flow in tank and pipes; and 7) mechanical
expansion of the tank under pressure.
The simulation results with ESPSS were in very good agreement
with the measurements of a blowdown test at M11.5, when a tank
model with high enough resolution was used. Figure 18 shows the
simulation results for test 19 in comparison with the measurements
for the pressure. It is remarkable how well the tank pressure fits the
real behavior. In the beginning, the pressure in the tank is dropping
faster, because the gas was warm at 30°C and therefore the ullage was
supercharged to 62 bar. The liquid N2 O had an initial temperature of
21.75°C. Then, the oxidizer temperature falls steadily as more and
more N2 O vaporizes. Therefore, the tank pressure drops. After 22.5 s,
the liquid N2 O is depleted and only gaseous oxidizer leaves the tank
outlet. It depletes roughly 0.4 s later in the simulation. The
hybrid rocket engine continues burning with the gaseous oxidizer
flow until the main valve of the test bench is closed at 23.5 s. The
simulated combustion chamber pressure is very close to the measured
combustion chamber pressure. Because of the one-dimensional
discretization of the ESPSS component, the combustion processes
in the chamber can be simulated in high detail. For example,
pressure drops over the precombustion chamber, fuel grain, and
postcombustion chamber can be included. Here, a small fuel port can
generate higher pressure drops than a large fuel port. The liquid
oxidizer is simulated in two-phase flow, and the vaporization of the
two-phase fluid after injection is simulated along the fuel grain
length. The thrust of test 19 is compared with the simulated thrust in
Fig. 19. The simulated thrust curve is in very good agreement with the
experimental measurement. It is slightly underestimated in the
simulation after 23 s for the gaseous oxidizer phase.
15 20 25
 KOBALD ET AL. 493

1 Filtered Thrust Measurement Test 19

Normalized Thrust [-]

Simulated Thrust Test 19

0.5

0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Time [s]
Fig. 19 Dimensionless thrust profile (filtered) of HyRES hot-fire test 19 and comparison with simulated data.

The accuracy of the simulation is influenced by the following 35

factors. The initial temperature stratification inside the tank has the
highest influence on the simulation and on the pressure curves. The 30
tank model also includes bubble boiling, wall boiling, and two-phase
phenomena. These parameters need to be refined with several test
Downloaded by 151.68.26.87 on November 20, 2023 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/1.A34035

data. The first simulations without refining the parameters for the 25
N2 O and the tank modeling had a deviation of about 25%. The

Altitude [km]
burning time until N2 O depletion varied between 2 s for a 20 s test. 20
Similar results have also been achieved for other tests, as well as
the flight data of HEROS 3. During the flight, other effects also play a
significant role: The high acceleration increases the tank outlet 15
pressure. Therefore, the gas phase in the tank outflow has a much
smaller mass fraction of the total mass flow. This raises the oxidizer 10
density at the injector and thereby increases the total mass flow
through the injector. This effect cannot be reproduced at a test bench,
5
and therefore, the ESPSS simulations brought new understanding of
the processes in the propulsion system during flight. It is now
possible to predict the performance of a hybrid propulsion system 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
with self-pressurizing N2 O. This is an enormous advantage to
develop and design future hybrid rocket engines. Future ESPSS Time [s]
updates will have further improvements of the two-phase flow Fig. 20 Altitude simulation with ASTOS.
modeling, which could improve the simulation capabilities of N2 O
even more.

E. Flight Trajectory Simulation with ASTOS 68.4

ASTOS was used for the purpose of trajectory simulation; it is a
commercial tool developed by Astos Solutions, GmbH and was
provided for HyEnD as a student group for educational purposes. 68.3
Trajectory simulation played an important role in various stages of
the project. During the development phase, parameter studies were
68.2
done to get references for design loads as well as estimations of the
Launch position
Latitude [°]

overall rocket performance. Furthermore, wind requirements for the

launch were defined so that HEROS would land inside ESRANGE’s Nominal landing
68.1
designated impact area. Also, nonnominal impacts in case of a Wind speed 1 m/s
recovery system failure were simulated. Additionally, the wind speed Wind speed 2 m/s
would have to be low enough to ensure a high initial flight-path angle 68
and thus limit the apogee speed. This was critical for drogue-chute
deployment. More detailed wind profiles and weather forecasts were
taken into account for the simulation during the launch campaign at 67.9
ESRANGE. This happened in real time during the countdown to
make a go/no-go decision and give an estimation of possible landing
and impact locations. Figure 20 shows an altitude simulation for 67.8
20.6 20.8 21 21.2 21.4 21.6
HEROS 3 made with ASTOS. The influence of different wind
conditions on the impact points of this trajectory is shown in Fig. 21. Longitude [°]
Fig. 21 Landing area with wind influence.

V. Flight Campaign and Data Evaluation

A. HEROS 2 Flight
HEROS 2 was launched from the mobile rocket launcher (MRL) in
ESRANGE at 1200 hrs on 31 October 2016. The countdown went
very smoothly: The tank filling with N2 O was quickly done and the
heating system ensured an appropriate temperature of the N2 O,
despite the cold outside temperature. The ground and onboard
electronics worked flawlessly during the countdown. A lot of great
video material of the liftoff and the ascent into the clouds was
recorded by the ground camera system. The liftoff is shown in Fig. 22.
It is nicely seen that the rocket plume is very clear, without soot,
which shows the high efficiency of the engine.
However, an electronic interference right at T-0 of the countdown
caused a failure of the onboard electronics and telemetry system.
Without a telemetry signal, it was not possible to get any information
about the position during and after the flight of HEROS 2.
 494 KOBALD ET AL.
Downloaded by 151.68.26.87 on November 20, 2023 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/1.A34035
Fig. 22 HEROS 2 at liftoff.
The recovery system was most likely affected by the failure as well. A
helicopter team searched at the nominal impact point, but due to the
weather and sight conditions, it was impossible to find the rocket. The
video material and sound recordings were analyzed and all evidence
suggests that the hybrid rocket engine HyRES worked nominally
during the whole ascent of the rocket. In the following days, the
failure was investigated in detail and it was shown that an electronic
interference with the main ignition impulse induced a voltage in
the connecting line between the ground support computer and the
rocket’s onboard electronics. This voltage was high enough to
generate a shutoff signal in the command line. Several successful
improvements were made to prevent this malfunction for the third
HEROS flight.
B. HEROS 3 Flight
On 8 November 2016 at 0930 hrs, the hybrid sounding rocket
HEROS 3 was launched from the ESRANGE Space Center to an
apogee altitude of 32,300 m (106,000 ft). This set a new altitude
record for European student and amateur rocketry and a world
altitude record for hybrid rockets built by students. An onboard
camera image is shown in Fig. 23 from the flight at apogee. Launch
permission was given by the ESRANGE safety board after an
extensive failure analysis of the HEROS 2 launch. The remaining
launch window was open just until 9 November. The rocket
configurations and the launch conditions are given in Tables 5 and
6, respectively. The loaded oxidizer mass in Table 5 corresponds to
a filling level of only about 70% N2 O in the oxidizer tank.
Moreover, the relatively flat launch angle of 80 deg further
decreased the apogee altitude. This low angle was chosen by
ESRANGE for increased safety during the launch, to let the rocket
move away quickly from the launch site. Thereby, a significantly
higher apogee is possible with HEROS 3, by loading more
oxidizer and using a steeper launch angle. A detailed timeline of
the flight is seen in Table 7. The measured wind speeds for the
 KOBALD ET AL. 495

Fig. 23 HEROS 3 onboard picture at 32,300 m apogee.

launch are shown in Fig. 24. According to these measurements, illustrated in Fig. 25. GPS data are shown, as well as the simulated
shortly before launch, the flight-path calculations were updated as trajectory from ASTOS.
well as the launcher settings. The trajectory of the flight is
Downloaded by 151.68.26.87 on November 20, 2023 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/1.A34035

C. Flight Data Analysis of HEROS 3

All onboard measurements and sensors (shown in Table 8) worked
Table 5 HEROS 2 and 3 launch configuration successfully and were analyzed after the recovery in detail. This
includes data of the dedicated measurement system (shown in
HEROS 2 HEROS 3
Sec. III.G), as well as the two redundant flight computers (described
Length 7.5 m 7.5 m
in Sec. III.F).
Diameter 223 mm 223 mm
Dry mass 75 kg 75 kg The combustion chamber pressure during the flight is seen in
Loaded oxidizer mass 72 kg 74 kg Fig. 26. It was very stable as had been already demonstrated in the
Oxidizer tank pressure 61.5 bar 65.6 bar ground tests. Pressure and thrust buildup was very rapid and stable,
Fuel mass 12 kg 12 kg ensuring a good initial acceleration on the launcher. A very smooth
Liftoff mass 159 kg 161 kg transition to the gas-phase combustion of N2 O is seen at 15 s
when the pressure drops. Residual thrust, which is balancing the
aerodynamic drag, was sustained for almost 50 s, which is indicated
in the acceleration data shown later. The positive x axis is along the
Table 6 Launcher configuration and weather data for rocket’s longitudinal axis in-flight direction; the plane of the y and z
HEROS 2 and 3 axis is perpendicular to the x axis, building a Cartesian coordinate
HEROS 2 HEROS 3 system.
Launcher MRL MRL
The actual and simulated flight trajectories are shown in Fig. 25.
Elevation 80 deg 80 deg GPS data were gathered during the rocket’s flight except the time
Azimuth 0 deg 0 deg frame between T  11 and T  41 s. The COCOM limit of the GPS
Launch date 31 Oct. 2016 8 Nov. 2016 modules was exceeded during this period. The data of all GPS
Launch time, coordinated 1200 hrs 0930 hrs modules show good consistency. The measured apogee heights are
universal time within 15 m of each other. The rocket could be located and was
Weather conditions Cloudy, slightly foggy Clear sky recovered within 2 h due to the maintained GPS log and telemetry
Wind speeds, 0–1 km 2.1 m∕s 6.3 m∕s
link during the entire flight. The GPS height compared with the
Wind directions, 0–1 km 30 deg 160 deg
Ground temperature 0°C −18°C calculated height of the IMU data, as well as the rockets velocity, are
shown in Fig. 27.

Table 7 HEROS 3 final countdown and flight timeline

Event Time, s Acceleration, m∕s2 Velocity, m∕s Altitude, km Ground range, km
Fueling arm retracted −390 9.81 0 0 0
Remove electrical umbilical −389 9.81 0 0 0
Motor ignition −3 9.81 0 0 0
Main valve opening 0 9.81 0 0 0
Leaving rail 0.5 70 27 0.01 0
M1 5.5 65 325 0.94 0.2
Loss of GPS signal 11.5 51 570 3.4 1
Burnout (liquid N2 O) 15 55 720 5.7 1.4
First GPS signal received 45 <0.5 475 22.7 7
GPS signal stable 45–551 —— —— —— ——
Burnout 50.5 0 430 25 7.5
Apogee 89 0.2 190 32.3 14.65
Drogue parachute activation 97 0.2 205 32 15.9
Drogue parachute opening 98 10 210 31.95 16
Main parachute activation 472 10 35 2.45 19.5
Loss of telemetry signal 551 9.81 5 0.2 20
Touchdown 551 9.81 5 0.2 20
 496 KOBALD ET AL.

Wind Speed [m/s]

-2
North
East
-4

-6

-8

-10
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Altitude [m]
Fig. 24 Measured wind speeds between 0 and 1 km altitude of HEROS 3 launch.
Downloaded by 151.68.26.87 on November 20, 2023 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/1.A34035

Fig. 25 HEROS 3 flight: trajectory simulation (plain) and measured GPS flight data (contoured) (data shown in Google Earth).

The flight computer recorded IMU data consisting of are plotted in Fig. 28, as well as the same angles according to the
acceleration along three axes as well as the rotation rates around ASTOS simulations. It is clearly seen that the simulated and
the same. Using these data, the rockets attitude was calculated with a measured results fit almost perfectly. This confirms the applicability
self-developed MATLAB tool. The calculated yaw and pitch angles of the simulations and the used software tools. The main flight
events with the corresponding flight parameters are also shown in
Table 7.
The rocket acceleration along its three axes is shown in Fig. 29.
Table 8 HEROS 3 onboard sensors The liquid thrust phase and acceleration until 15 s is seen clearly.
Then, the acceleration was reduced due to the gas-phase
Sensor Amount combustion of N2 O. The rocket was in free-flight conditions, with
9-Degrees-of-freedom IMU sensors 4 very low residual accelerations after 40 s into the flight. Initially,
3-Axes magnetometers 4 the acceleration showed some vibrations up to 5 s. This was likely
Analog barometric sensors 4 related to structural vibrations inside the rocket at the mounting
Digital barometric sensor 1 structure of the sensor, because the combustion chamber pressure
Pressure sensors 3
GPS modules 3
data showed very stable combustion for the whole liquid burning
Temperature sensors 7 time (see also Fig. 26). The rocket was reaching supersonic
velocity at around 5.5 s. This is also the time when the oscillations
 KOBALD ET AL. 497

Normalized Pressure [-]

0.5

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time [s]
Fig. 26 HEROS 3 flight combustion chamber pressure.
Downloaded by 151.68.26.87 on November 20, 2023 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/1.A34035

Fig. 27 GPS altitude, calculated altitude, and velocity of the rocket.

100

50
IMU1
Pitch [°]

IMU2
0
ASTOS
-50

-100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Time [s]
200
IMU1
100 IMU2
Yaw [°]

ASTOS

-100
0 10 20
50 30
60 40
70 80 90 100
Time [s]
Fig. 28 Rocket’s flight attitude, calculated from the onboard measurements, and the corresponding simulation results from ASTOS.

were decreasing. The rotation rates around the rocket’s main axes
are shown in Fig. 30. The maximum rotation rate around the
longitudinal axis was at 0.5 Hz at liquid N2 O burnout. After that
time, the roll rate was decreasing steadily until the apogee at
around 90 s. The decrease in roll rate around this axis at 5.5 s is the
time when supersonic velocity was reached. There are several
factors influencing the rotation of the rocket. In our case, thrust
misalignment seems to play a minor role because the decreasing
engine thrust does not influence the rotation rate (see Figs. 29 and
30). The rotation rate around the x axis is almost proportional to
the velocity of the rocket. Therefore, the cause for the rotation is
dominated by aerodynamic misalignment.
 498
100
50
Acceleration [m/s2] 0
-50
-100
0 5 10 15
Fig. 29 Acceleration in rocket-fixed coordinates.
Downloaded by 151.68.26.87 on November 20, 2023 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/1.A34035
50
0
Rotation Rate [°/s]
-50
-100
-150
-200
0 10 20 30
Fig. 30 Rotational rates in rocket-fixed coordinates.
VI. Conclusions
Three Hybrid Experimental Rocket Stuttgart (HEROS) hybrid
sounding rockets were developed, built, and launched within just four
years project time. The development involved the design of the
complete rocket system, including the propulsion system, flight-
weight valve, rocket engine, tank, electronics, data acquisition,
recovery system, and rocket structure. The rocket itself, subsystems,
qualification, and launch campaign were presented in detail herein.
Despite drawbacks with the HEROS 1 and HEROS 2 launch, the
project was continued and successfully completed; HEROS 3 was
launched to 32,300 m (106,000 ft) and included a small student satellite
experiment. Detailed flight data and engine performance data were
published and analyzed. This is the first time that such detailed data
have been published for a hybrid sounding rocket flight. Also, the use
of a complete carbon-fiber reinforced plastic structure in such a hybrid
rocket flight to this altitude is a novelty and a great technology
demonstration. The rocket showed excellent aerodynamic stability,
as seen in the inertial measurement unit data. Thanks to EcosimPro
and European Space Propulsion System Simulation, the engine
performance on the ground as well as in the flight was modeled in great
detail and with good accuracy. The flight trajectory simulations with
ASTOS showed very good agreements with the flight data from liftoff,
to the apogee, and to the landing point, including the effects of wind. In
conclusion, this clearly shows the potential, inherent safety, and
handling advantages of liquefying hybrid rocket propulsion and hybrid
sounding rockets. Moreover, the project enabled students to participate
in the development and implementation of all the aforementioned
KOBALD ET AL.
X-Acceleration
Y-Acceleration
Z-Acceleration
20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Time [s]
X-Rotation
Y-Rotation
Z-Rotation
40 50 60 70 80 90
Time [s]
systems, thereby providing them excellent hands-on experience in
addition to their theoretical studies. Furthermore, a new world record
for hybrid sounding rockets built by students was achieved.
Acknowledgments
The Hybrid Engine Development–Studentische Experimentalra-
keten project was funded by the DLR Space Administration with
funding from the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy
(Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Technologie) at the Institute
of Space Systems at the University of Stuttgart, under Grant
50RL1254 since September 2012. The hybrid propulsion tests were
performed in cooperation with the Institute of Space Propulsion at the
DLR Lampoldshausen, test complex M11.5. We thank especially the
participating students P. Kysela, A. Pahler, J. Gauger, J. Breitinger,
F. Hertel, and B. Hochheimer for their contributions in the launch
campaign and to the success of the project. The support of the DLR
Lampoldshausen and its department of propellants is greatly
acknowledged, especially the work of Markus Rehberger is greatly
appreciated. The authors would like to thank all the students,
individuals, institutes, and companies who supported the presented
work in several ways. A special thanks to Thomas Wegmann at the
Institute of Space Systems for his excellent administrative support.
The support and the software from Astos Solutions, GmbH is highly
appreciated. The provision of EcosimPro and ESPSS within the
frame of a Ph.D. thesis is also greatly acknowledged. Furthermore,
the help of Friedolin Strauss and Jan Witte with the M11.1 air heater
experiments is kindly appreciated.
 KOBALD ET AL.
References
[1] Kobald, M., Moser, H., Bohr, A., and Mielke, S., “Development and
Optimization of a Hybrid Rocket Engine,” DLR, German Aerospace
Co., DLRK2009-121202, Aachen, Germany, 2009.
[2] Kobald, M., Schmierer, C., Fischer, U., Tomilin, K., and Petrarolo, A.,
“A Record Flight of the Hybrid Sounding Rocket HEROS 3,” 31st
International Symposium on Space Technology and Science (ISTS),
Paper 2017-o-5-06, Matsuyama, Japan, 2017.
[3] Altman, D., and Holzman, A., “Overview and History of Hybrid
Rocket Propulsion,” Fundamentals of Hybrid Rocket Combustion and
Propulsion, edited by M. J. Chiaverini, and K. K. Kuo, Progress in
Astronautics and Aeronautics, AIAA, Reston, VA, 2007, pp. 1–36.
doi:10.2514/5.9781600866876.0001.0036
[4] Kuo, K. K., “Challenges of Hybrid Rocket Propulsion in the 21st
Century,” Fundamentals of Hybrid Rocket Combustion and Propulsion,
edited by M. J. Chiaverini, and K. K. Kuo, Progress in Astronautics and
Aeronautics, AIAA, Reston, VA, 2007, pp. 593–638.
doi:10.2514/5.9781600866876.0593.0638
[5] Schmucker, R., Hybridraketenantriebe–Eine Einführung in
Theoretische und Technische Probleme, Wilhelm Goldmann
Verlag, Munich, 1972, pp. 22–27.
[6] Caveny, L. H., Geisler, R. L., Ellis, R. A., and Moore, T. L., “Solid
Downloaded by 151.68.26.87 on November 20, 2023 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/1.A34035
Rocket Enabling Technologies and Milestones in the United States,”
Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 19, No. 6, 2003, pp. 1038–1066.
doi:10.2514/2.6944
[7] Davenas, A., “Development of Modern Solid Propellants,” Journal of
Propulsion and Power, Vol. 19, No. 6, 2003, pp. 1108–1128.
doi:10.2514/2.6947
[8] Sutton, G. P., “History of Liquid Propellant Rocket Engines in the
United States,” Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 19, No. 6, 2003,
pp. 978–1007.
doi:10.2514/2.6942
[9] Sackheim, R. L., “Overview of United States Rocket Propulsion
Technology and Associated Space Transportation Systems,” Journal of
Propulsion and Power, Vol. 22, No. 6, 2006, pp. 1310–1332.
doi:10.2514/1.23257
[10] Carrick, P. G., and Larson, C. W., “Lab Scale Test and Evaluation of
Cryogenic Solid Hybrid Rocket Fuels,” 31st AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE
Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, AIAA Paper 1995-2948,
1995.
doi:10.2514/6.1995-2948
[11] Karabeyoglu, M. A., Altman, D., and Cantwell, B. J., “Combustion of
Liquefying Hybrid Propellants: Part 1, General Theory,” Journal of
Propulsion and Power, Vol. 18, No. 3, 2002, pp. 610–620.
doi:10.2514/2.5975
[12] Karabeyoglu, M. A., “Transient Combustion in Hybrid Rockets,” Ph.D.
Thesis, Stanford Univ., Stanford, CA, 1998.
[13] Karabeyoglu, M. A., and Cantwell, B. J., “Combustion of Liquefying
Hybrid Propellants: Part 2, Stability of Liquid Films,” Journal of
Propulsion and Power, Vol. 18, No. 3, 2002, pp. 621–630.
doi:10.2514/2.5976
[14] Wooldridge, C. E., and Muzzy, R. J., “Boundary-Layer Turbulence
Measurements with Mass Addition and Combustion,” AIAA Journal,
Vol. 4, No. 11, 1966, pp. 2009–2016.
doi:10.2514/3.3832
[15] Muzzy, R. J., “Schlieren and Shadowgraph Studies of Hybrid
Boundary-Layer Combustion,” AIAA Journal, Vol. 1, No. 9, 1963,
pp. 2159–2160.
doi:10.2514/3.2017
[16] Kobald, M., Ciezki, H., and Schlechtriem, S., “Optical Investigation of the
Combustion Process in Paraffin-based Hybrid Rocket Fuels,” 49th AIAA/
ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, AIAA Paper 2013-3894,
2013.
doi:10.2514/6.2013-3894
[17] Jens, E. T., Miller, V. A., and Cantwell, B. J., “Schlieren and OH
Chemiluminescence Imaging of Combustion in a Turbulent Boundary
Layer over a Solid Fuel,” Experiments in Fluids, Vol. 57, No. 3, 2016,
pp. 1–16.
doi:10.1007/s00348-016-2124-x
[18] Kobald, M., Verri, I., and Schlechtriem, S., “Theoretical and
Experimental Analysis of Liquid Layer Instabilities in Hybrid Rocket
Engines,” CEAS Space Journal, Vol. 7, No. 1, 2015, pp. 11–22.
doi:10.1007/s12567-015-0076-2
[19] Nakagawa, I., and Hikone, S., “Study on the Regression Rate of
Paraffin-Based Hybrid Rocket Fuels,” Journal of Propulsion and
Power, Vol. 27, No. 6, 2011, pp. 1276–1279.
doi:10.2514/1.B34206
499
[20] Petrarolo, A., and Kobald, M., “Evaluation Techniques for Optical
Analysis of Hybrid Rocket Propulsion,” Journal of Fluid Science and
Technology, Vol. 11, No. 4, 2016, Paper JFST0028.
doi:10.1299/jfst.2016jfst0028
[21] 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,” Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 20, No. 6,
2004, pp. 1037–1045.
doi:10.2514/1.3340
[22] Kobald, M., Toson, E., Ciezki, H., Schlechtriem, S., Di Betta, S.,
Coppola, M., and De Luca, L. T., “Rheological, Optical, and
Ballistic Investigations of Paraffin-Based Fuels for Hybrid Rocket
Propulsion Using a Two-Dimensional Slab-Burner,” EUCASS
Proceedings Series—Advances in AeroSpace Sciences, edited by
M. Calabro, L. De Luca, S. Frolov, L. Galfetti, and O. Haidn,
Vol. 8, EDP Sciences, 2016, pp. 263–282.
doi:10.1051/eucass/201608263
[23] Kobald, M., Schmierer, C., Ciezki, H., Schlechtriem, S., Toson, E., and
De Luca, L. T., “Viscosity and Regression Rate of Liquefying Hybrid
Rocket Fuels,” Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 33, No. 5, 2017,
pp. 1245–1251.
doi:10.2514/1.B36207
[24] Adachi, M., and Shimada, T., “Liquid Films Instability Analysis of
Liquefying Hybrid Rocket Fuels Under Supercritical Conditions,” AIAA
Journal, Vol. 53, No. 6, 2015, pp. 1578–1589.
doi:10.2514/1.J053459
[25] Story, G., “Large-Scale Hybrid Motor Testing,” Fundamentals of
Hybrid Rocket Combustion and Propulsion, edited by M. J. Chiaverini,
and K. K. Kuo, Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics, AIAA,
Reston, VA, 2007, pp. 513–552.
doi:10.2514/5.9781600866876.0513.0552
[26] Story, G., “Flight Testing of Hybrid-Powered Vehicles,” Fundamentals
of Hybrid Rocket Combustion and Propulsion, edited by M. J.
Chiaverini, and K. K. Kuo, Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics,
AIAA, Reston, VA, 2007, pp. 553–591.
doi:10.2514/5.9781600866876.0553.0592
[27] Zilliac, G., Waxman, B. S., Evans, B., Karabeyoglu, M. A., and
Cantwell, B., “Peregrine Hybrid Rocket Motor Development,”
50th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, AIAA
Paper 2014-3870, 2014.
doi:10.2514/6.2014-3870
[28] Waxman, B. S., “An Investigation of Injectors for Use with High Vapor
Pressure Propellants with Applications to Hybrid Rockets,” Ph.D.
Thesis, Stanford Univ., Stanford, CA, 2014.
[29] Karabeyoglu, M. A., Stevens, J., Geyzel, D., Cantwell, B., and
Micheletti, D., “High Performance Hybrid Upper Stage Motor,” 47th
AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit,
AIAA Paper 2011-6025, 2011.
doi:10.2514/6.2011-6025
[30] Boardman, T. A., Carpenter, R. L., and Claflin, S. A., “A Comparative
Study of the Effects of Liquid- Versus Gaseous-Oxygen Injection on
Combustion Stability in 11-Inch-Diameter Hybrid Motors,” 33rd AIAA/
ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, AIAA
Paper 1997-2936, 1997.
doi:10.2514/6.1997-2936
[31] Karabeyoglu, M. A., “Combustion Instability and Transient Behavior in
Hybrid Rocket Motors,” Fundamentals of Hybrid Rocket Combustion
and Propulsion, edited by M. J. Chiaverini, and K. K. Kuo, Progress in
Astronautics and Aeronautics, AIAA, Reston, VA, 2007, pp. 351–411.
doi:10.2514/5.9781600866876.0351.0412
[32] Karabeyoglu, M. A., De Zilwa, S., Cantwell, B., and Zilliac, G.,
“Modeling of Hybrid Rocket Low Frequency Instabilities,” Journal of
Propulsion and Power, Vol. 21, No. 6, 2005, pp. 1107–1116.
doi:10.2514/1.7792
[33] Sakurai, T., Yuasa, S., Ando, H., Kitagawa, K., and Shimada, T.,
“Performance and Regression Rate Characteristics of 5-kN Swirling-
Oxidizer-Flow-Type Hybrid Rocket Engine,” Journal of Propulsion
and Power, Vol. 33, No. 4, 2017, pp. 891–901.
doi:10.2514/1.B36239
[34] Verberne, O., Boiron, A. J., Faenza, M. G., and Haemmerli, B.,
“Development of the North Star Sounding Rocket: Getting Ready
for the First Demonstration Launch,” 51st AIAA/SAE/ASEE Joint
Propulsion Conference, AIAA Paper 2015-4045, 2015.
doi:10.2514/6.2015-4045
[35] Karp, A., Nakazono, B., Benito, J., Shotwell, R., Vaughan, D., and
Story, G., “A Hybrid Mars Ascent Vehicle Concept for Low Temperature
Storage and Operation,” 52nd AIAA/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion
Conference, AIAA Paper 2016-4962, 2016.
doi:10.2514/6.2016-4962
 500
[36] Karabeyoglu, M. A., “Nitrous Oxide and Oxygen Mixtures (Nytrox) as
Oxidizers for Rocket Propulsion Applications,” Journal of Propulsion
and Power, Vol. 30, No. 3, 2014, pp. 696–706.
doi:10.2514/1.B34768
[37] Fischer, U., “Design of a CFRP-Pressure Vessel for a Sounding Rocket,”
Student Project, Stuttgart Univ., Stuttgart, Germany, 2014.
[38] Karabeyoglu, M. A., Dyer, J., Stevens, J., and Cantwell, B., “Modeling
of N2O Decomposition Events,” 44th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint
Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, AIAA Paper 2008-4933, 2008.
doi:10.2514/6.2008-4933
[39] Kapteijn, F., Rodriguez-Mirasol, J., and Moulijn, J. A., “Heterogeneous
Catalytic Decomposition of Nitrous Oxide,” Applied Catalysis B:
Environmental, Vol. 9, Nos. 1–4, 1996, pp. 25–64.
doi:10.1016/0926-3373(96)90072-7
[40] Gülhan, A., Siebe, F., Thiele, T., Neeb, D., Turner, J., and Ettl, J., “Sharp
Edge Flight Experiment-II Instrumentation Challenges and Selected
Flight Data,” Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 51, No. 1, 2014,
pp. 175–186.
doi:10.2514/1.A32572
[41] Carmicino, C., and Russo Sorge, A., “Influence of a Conical Axial
Injector on Hybrid Rocket Performance,” Journal of Propulsion
Downloaded by 151.68.26.87 on November 20, 2023 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/1.A34035
KOBALD ET AL.
and Power, Vol. 22, No. 5, 2006, pp. 984–995.
doi:10.2514/1.19528
[42] Carmicino, C., “Acoustics, Vortex Shedding, and Low-Frequency
Dynamics Interaction in an Unstable Hybrid Rocket,” Journal of
Propulsion and Power, Vol. 25, No. 6, 2009, pp. 1322–1335.
doi:10.2514/1.42869
[43] Pastrone, D., Casalino, L., and Carmicino, C., “Analysis of
Acoustics and Vortex Shedding Interactions in Hybrid Rocket
Motors,” Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 30, No. 6, 2014,
pp. 1613–1619.
doi:10.2514/1.B35188
[44] Schmierer, C., Kobald, M., Steelant, J., and Schlechtriem, S.,
“Combined Trajectory Simulation and Optimization for Hybrid Rockets
Using ASTOS and ESPSS,” 31st International Symposium on Space
Technology and Science (ISTS), Paper 2017-o-5-03, Matsuyama, Japan,
2017.
[45] Zimmerman, J. E., “Self-Pressurizing Propellant Tank Dynamics,”
Ph.D. Thesis, Stanford Univ., Stanford, CA, 2015.
A. D. Ketsdever
Associate Editor
 This article has been cited by:

1. Giuseppe Gallo, Landon Kamps, Shota Hirai, Carmine Carmicino, Nagata Harunori. 2024. Prediction of the fuel
regression-rate in a HDPE single port hybrid rocket fed by liquid nitrous oxide. Combustion and Flame 259, 113160.
[Crossref]
2. Vladyslav Proroka, Mykola Dron, Oleksii Kulyk, Vadym Solntsev, Svitlana Klymenko. 2023. Evaluation of the results of the
flight tests of the small research rocket K80 Meteo 7000 on the way to the creation of the Ukrainian family of suborbital
launch vechicles. EUREKA: Physics and Engineering :5, 67-79. [Crossref]
3. Christian Paravan, Anwer Hashish, Valerio Santolini. 2023. Test Activities on Hybrid Rocket Engines: Combustion
Analyses and Green Storable Oxidizers—A Short Review. Aerospace 10:7, 572. [Crossref]
4. Francesco Barato. 2023. Review of Alternative Sustainable Fuels for Hybrid Rocket Propulsion. Aerospace 10:7, 643.
[Crossref]
5. Tomasz Noga, Adam Okniński, Dawid Cieśliński. 2023. On development and use of rockets for Mars atmosphere sounding.
Acta Astronautica 203, 370-384. [Crossref]
6. Natan Petrutik, Ilia Kaminker, Eli Flaxer, Daniel Shem-Tov, Tsabar Giladi, Yossi Bar-Bechor, Jagadish Das, Michael
Gozin. 2023. Janus-type hypergolic fuels for hybrid systems using hydrogen peroxide and hydroxylammonium nitrate-
Downloaded by 151.68.26.87 on November 20, 2023 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/1.A34035

based oxidizers. Chemical Engineering Journal 454, 140170. [Crossref]

7. Colin D. Hill, Will Nelson, Craig T. Johansen. 2022. Evaluation of a Paraffin/Nitrous Oxide Hybrid Rocket Motor with
a Passive Mixing Device. Journal of Propulsion and Power 38:6, 884-892. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] [PDF Plus]
8. Weiyu Zhu, Hongge Fu, Fei Li, Xu Ji, Yuqing Li, Fan Bai. 2022. Optimization of CFRP drilling process: a review. The
International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 123:5-6, 1403-1432. [Crossref]
9. Johan J. Nunez-Quispe. Conceptual design of an Experimental rocket with Variable Diameter stages: Stability and Effects
on the Drag Coefficient 1-5. [Crossref]
10. Mario Tindaro Migliorino, Manuel Aiello, Matteo Berti, Marco Rotondi, Simone D’Alessandro, Daniele Bianchi, Munzer
Jahjah, Marco Pizzarelli. 2022. Student firing tests and launches with commercial and self-made solid rocket motors. Acta
Astronautica 197, 23-34. [Crossref]
11. J. Huh, S. Kwon. 2022. A practical design approach for a single-stage sounding rocket to reach a target altitude. The
Aeronautical Journal 126:1301, 1084-1100. [Crossref]
12. Murat Bakirci, Muhammed Mirac Ozer. Electrical Architecture of the Recovery System of a High Powered Rocket with
Payload 1-4. [Crossref]
13. Colin Hill. Evaluation of a Paraffin/Nitrous Oxide Hybrid Rocket Motor with Passive Mixing Device . [Abstract] [PDF]
[PDF Plus]
14. Tadayoshi Shoyama, Yutaka Wada, Takafumi Matsui. 2022. Conceptual Study on Low-Melting-Point Thermoplastic Fuel/
Nitrous Oxide Hybrid Rockoon. Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets 59:1, 286-294. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] [PDF Plus]
15. Natan Petrutik, Ilia Kaminker, Eli Flaxer, Daniel Shem-Tov, Tsabar Giladi, Yossi Bar-Bechor, Jagadish Das, Michael
Gozin. 2022. Greener Space Propulsion – Janus-Type Hypergolic Fuels for Hybrid Systems Using H2o2 and Han-Based
Oxidizers. SSRN Electronic Journal . [Crossref]
16. Kazuki Yasuda, Daisuke Nakata, Masaharu Uchiumi. 2021. Experimental Study on Temperature Change by Cavitation
Accompanying Self-Pressurization of Propellant for Small Rocket Engines. Journal of Fluids Engineering 143:12. . [Crossref]
17. Yongtae Yun, Kyu-seop Kim, Vikas Khandu Bhosale, Sejin Kwon. 2021. Effect of Fuel Activation Energy on Ignition
of Hydrogen Peroxide Hybrid Rocket. Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets 58:6, 1930-1934. [Citation] [Full Text] [PDF]
[PDF Plus]
18. Tomasz Palacz, Jacek Cieślik. 2021. Experimental Study on the Mass Flow Rate of the Self-Pressurizing Propellants in
the Rocket Injector. Aerospace 8:11, 317. [Crossref]
19. Jafet Santivanez, Omar Blas, Camila Saenz, Luis Espinoza, Williams Solis, Jose Cornejo, Paul Palacios, Jaime Estela. Design
of Low-Cost Solid Propellant Engine Test Bench and Electronic Embedded System used for Small Rockets 1-6. [Crossref]
20. Drew Stannard, Declan Quinn, Colin Hill, Craig Johansen. 2021. Experimental investigation of self-pressurized propellant
injection into a simulated rocket motor combustion chamber. International Journal of Multiphase Flow 142, 103707.
[Crossref]
 21. Colin Hill, Craig T. Johansen. Evaluation of Lattice-Augmented Hybrid Rocket Fuels on a Slab Burner . [Abstract] [PDF]
[PDF Plus]
22. Mingyang Xiao, Hao Zhu, Ziyan Du, Yushan Gao, Hui Tian, Guobiao Cai. 2021. Design optimization of velocity-
controlled cruise vehicle propelled by throttleable hybrid rocket motor. Aerospace Science and Technology 115, 106784.
[Crossref]
23. Mario Tindaro Migliorino, Daniele Bianchi, Francesco Nasuti. 2021. Numerical Simulations of the Internal Ballistics of
Paraffin–Oxygen Hybrid Rockets at Different Scales. Aerospace 8:8, 213. [Crossref]
24. Francesco Barato. 2021. Challenges of Ablatively Cooled Hybrid Rockets for Satellites or Upper Stages. Aerospace 8:7,
190. [Crossref]
25. Martin Urban, Ondřej Nentvich, Tomáš Báča, Ivo Veřtát, Veronika Maršíková, Daniela Doubravová, Vladimír Dániel,
Adolf Inneman, Ladislav Pína, Ladislav Sieger, Randall L. McEntaffer, Ted B. Schultz, Drew M. Miles, James H. Tutt.
2021. REX: X-ray experiment on the water recovery rocket. Acta Astronautica 184, 1-10. [Crossref]
26. Yongtae Yun, Jeongmoo Huh, Youngil Kim, Seonuk Heo, Hyuntak Kim, Sejin Kwon. 2021. Scale-Up Validation of
Hydrogen Peroxide/High-Density Polyethylene Hybrid Rocket with Multiport Solid Fuel. Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets
58:2, 552-565. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] [PDF Plus]
27. Kathryn A. Clements, Michael J. Baier, P. Veeraraghavan Ramachandran, Steven F. Son. 2021. Experimental Study of
Downloaded by 151.68.26.87 on November 20, 2023 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/1.A34035

Factors Affecting Hypergolic Ignition of Ammonia Borane. Journal of Propulsion and Power 37:2, 202-210. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF] [PDF Plus]
28. Kazuki Yasuda, Daisuke Nakata, Masaharu Uchiumi, Kugo Okada, Ryoji Imai. 2021. Fundamental Study on Injector Flow
Characteristics of Self-Pressurizing Fluid for Small Rocket Engines. Journal of Fluids Engineering 143:2. . [Crossref]
29. Mengu Dinesh, Rajiv Kumar. 2021. Experimental Studies of Protrusion-Inserted Hybrid Rocket Motor with Varying L/
D Ratio. Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets 58:1, 134-147. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] [PDF Plus]
30. Francesco Barato, Enrico Paccagnella, Daniele Pavarin. 2020. Explicit Analytical Equations for Single Port Hybrid Rocket
Combustion Chamber Sizing. Journal of Propulsion and Power 36:6, 869-886. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] [PDF Plus]
31. Vignesh Sella, Andrew Larkey, Abhiraj Majumder, Avinash Rao, Zavar Abidi, Nicolas Rasmont, Aasheesh Randeo, Miron
Liu, Avery Moore, Michael F. Lembeck. Development of a Nytrox-Paraffin Hybrid Rocket Engine . [Abstract] [PDF]
[PDF Plus]
32. Yongtae Yun, Joungki Seo, Kiyun Park, Jeongmoo Huh, Jaemin Lim, Sejin Kwon. 2020. Integration validation of key
components for small sounding rockets. Aerospace Science and Technology 100, 105823. [Crossref]
33. M. Franco, F. Barato, E. Paccagnella, M. Santi, A. Battiston, A. Comazzetto, D. Pavarin. 2020. Regression Rate Design
Tailoring Through Vortex Injection in Hybrid Rocket Motors. Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets 57:2, 278-290. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF] [PDF Plus]
34. Chengen Li, Guobiao Cai, Pengfei Wang, Hui Tian. 2019. Flow field and injector heat characteristics of hybrid rocket
motor with annular-gap injector. Aerospace Science and Technology 93, 105326. [Crossref]
35. Christian Schmierer, Mario Kobald, Konstantin Tomilin, Ulrich Fischer, Stefan Schlechtriem. 2019. Low cost small-
satellite access to space using hybrid rocket propulsion. Acta Astronautica 159, 578-583. [Crossref]
36. Anna Petrarolo, Mario Kobald, Stefan Schlechtriem. 2019. Optical analysis of the liquid layer combustion of paraffin-based
hybrid rocket fuels. Acta Astronautica 158, 313-322. [Crossref]
37. Kamps, Sakurai, Saito, Nagata. 2019. Comprehensive Data Reduction for N2O/HDPE Hybrid Rocket Motor Performance
Evaluation. Aerospace 6:4, 45. [Crossref]
38. Anna Petrarolo, Mario Kobald, Stefan Schlechtriem. 2018. Understanding Kelvin–Helmholtz instability in paraffin-based
hybrid rocket fuels. Experiments in Fluids 59:4. . [Crossref]