best kind of motor to achieve 100K feet
charles
an altitude of 100K ft... and I was wondering what kind of engine
would be better? solid, liquid, or hybrid?
Robert Heller
It probably is not a matter of the 'state' of the fuel (solid, liquid,
etc.), as to what the fuel is and things like nozzle geometry. We are
after all, talking rocket science :-).
The other issue is: does it have to be a single stage or is a
multi-stage rocket an allowed solution? The issue here is fuel/engine
weight vs altitude. A multi-stage rocket allows for a 'heavier' first
(and maybe second) stage to get things going for a much lighter final
stage to reach your altitude goal. A single stage rocket is limited in
that it has to haul the whole rocket (less spent fuel) to the goal
altitude, which in turn means more thrust / specific impulse / fuel, and
you can hit a 'law of diminishing returns' that way.
>
>
--
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933
Deepwoods Software -- Download the Model Railroad System
http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Binaries for Linux and MS-Windows
hel...@deepsoft.com -- http://www.deepsoft.com/ModelRailroadSystem/
Jeff Findley
"charles" <jesus.a...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:05a67a93-bbd9-4ad0...@f16g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> My college rocketry club is trying to build a rocket that has to reach
> an altitude of 100K ft... and I was wondering what kind of engine
> would be better? solid, liquid, or hybrid?
You might want to Google the ARocket email list, join, and search through
their archives.
Jeff
--
"Take heart amid the deepening gloom
that your dog is finally getting enough cheese" - Deteriorata - National
Lampoon
.
Ken S. Tucker
To start, I'd recommend evolving a solid, then move to hybrid,
and then liquid, as it evolves in complexity.
Hope to watch this group for updates on what you guys decide
and why.
Best
Ken