I could use some tips from the folks out there that like to put the science in sci-fi. This engine I'm working on will be what I'm calling a RIDICS drive. Ram Inducted Directional Inertia Confinement Shunt. Basily it will just be a fancy Tokamak fusion generator, micro scaled. D-T fusion plasma will be used to generate the electricity and heat Hydrogen for propellent. Here's some questions I have as well as what I think could be acceptable answers but I thought I would get your input before I go nuts modeling a crazy complicated system.
(Shunt) In space, the DT plasma will be redirected via magnetic bottle out the exhaust. The plasma and liquid hydrogen propellent will meet in a final reaction chamber, expelling out the back generating the thrust/delta V. Is this the right way for it to work?
(Ram Inducted) while in an atmosphere the radiators will be closed along the top of the engine nacel. A jet turbine style intake condenses the local atmosphere and pushes it through the radiator housing super heating the gases which are then expelled for thrust. I figure that the atmosphere being heated by the radiators would eliminate any neutron radiation in the exhaust. For additional thrust, hydrogen propellent can be burned in the exhaust like a hydrogen afterburner. Is this acceptable or should it work a different way?
For coolant, should I use water which will help slow down stray neutrons so they are more easily collected in the lithium blanket, or can I use liquid helium? Since helium is a biproduct of the fusion, I figure if I use it as coolant, I have the option of flushing the coolant when needed and then generating more. Maybe?
Electrical generation. Should I use a hydro dynamic turbine allowing the coolant to always stay liquid, or is it better to allow the coolant to convert to a gas (steam). Then recondense it as it heads to the radiators?
In the name RIDICS, can anyone think of a better word then directional for the D? ;o
I could use some tips from the folks out there that like to put the science in sci-fi. This engine I'm working on will be what I'm calling a RIDICS drive. Ram Inducted Directional Inertia Confinement Shunt. Basily it will just be a fancy Tokamak fusion generator, micro scaled. D-T fusion plasma will be used to generate the electricity and heat Hydrogen for propellent. Here's some questions I have as well as what I think could be acceptable answers but I thought I would get your input before I go nuts modeling a crazy complicated system.
(Shunt) In space, the DT plasma will be redirected via magnetic bottle out the exhaust. The plasma and liquid hydrogen propellent will meet in a final reaction chamber, expelling out the back generating the thrust/delta V. Is this the right way for it to work?
This will be some sort of NERVA, but with gaseuus core (most likely).
(Ram Inducted) while in an atmosphere the radiators will be closed along the top of the engine nacel. A jet turbine style intake condenses the local atmosphere and pushes it through the radiator housing super heating the gases which are then expelled for thrust. I figure that the atmosphere being heated by the radiators would eliminate any neutron radiation in the exhaust. For additional thrust, hydrogen propellent can be burned in the exhaust like a hydrogen afterburner. Is this acceptable or should it work a different way?
The closest to your demands is a "nuclear lightbulb" (NTR-Gas Closed cycle ) - with addition of air intakes, it will work just fine, even without magnetic bottling.
Otherwise - you can use sort of NTR-Gas open/ HELIUM 3-DEUTERIUM FUSION hybrid and don`t bother with radiation too much - gamma-radiation is short-lived, unless it hit some kind of metal, to irradiate. So, landing group deployment won`t cause a problem.
For coolant, should I use water which will help slow down stray neutrons so they are more easily collected in the lithium blanket, or can I use liquid helium? Since helium is a biproduct of the fusion, I figure if I use it as coolant, I have the option of flushing the coolant when needed and then generating more. Maybe?
You will get a lot of troubles, keeping helium in LIQUID form. Lithium could be a better choice. Additionaly it will allow you to heat the radiator to much higher degrees (and make them smaller)
Electrical generation. Should I use a hydro dynamic turbine allowing the coolant to always stay liquid, or is it better to allow the coolant to convert to a gas (steam). Then recondense it as it heads to the radiators?
In the name RIDICS, can anyone think of a better word then directional for the D? ;o
Coolant should stay just below the vaporisation point. Additional electric generation could be achieved through thermo-couples. No idea about different the name for your thrruster, thou
If you don't mind a little fiction mixed with your science, the wiffleball inertial electrostaic containment fusion reactor (described on that page stonecold mentioned) could also help reduce radiation issues, and you get electricity generation without the need for any steam turbines and the like.
I was just looking into hydrogen Boron fusion and I think that would work better to replace my tokamak core. The problem is that there is not alot of information out there to reference what a HB fusion rocket would look like. One reactor I found uses a bunch of electrodes. They send an electric pulse down the electrodes which forms a plasma, that then kind of collapses in on it's self sending highly charged helium one direction and electrons in another. The helium is so charged that they convert it directly into electricity. I think I like this concept a bit more but I am uncomfortable as I know alot more about tokamaks. I understand how they convert the fusion reaction into electricity just fine, but what is the best way to convert that reaction into thrust? The plasma doesn't last very long and I don't see alot of places for extra heat in the design.
OK. Not sure which type of confinement fussion I'm using but luckely, they all look about the same from outside the vaccum container lmao. I know how I want it to work, I'll leave it to a rocket scientist to make out the details. Here's some progress on the engines.
As well as a cutaway of how I want the engine to work.
The fusion engines have two operational modes, one for use in space and another for use in an atmoshere. Plasma from the fusion reactor is directed down the fusion divertor. At the end of the fusion divertor is a powerful mechanism capable of diverting the plasma flow. During space operations, the divertor is open causing the plasma to flow directly into the reaction chamber's injector nozzel where it meets with the hydrogen propellent. During atmospheric operations, the plasma divertor's mechanism closes, forcing the plasma to flow around it and into the reaction chamber's drum section. Here, the plasma meets the local atmosphere which has been ducted in by powerful intake compressors. The super heated gases exit the chamber through a series of cooled ducts providing thrust.
I was just looking into hydrogen Boron fusion and I think that would work better to replace my tokamak core. The problem is that there is not alot of information out there to reference what a HB fusion rocket would look like. One reactor I found uses a bunch of electrodes. They send an electric pulse down the electrodes which forms a plasma, that then kind of collapses in on it's self sending highly charged helium one direction and electrons in another. The helium is so charged that they convert it directly into electricity. I think I like this concept a bit more but I am uncomfortable as I know alot more about tokamaks. I understand how they convert the fusion reaction into electricity just fine, but what is the best way to convert that reaction into thrust? The plasma doesn't last very long and I don't see alot of places for extra heat in the design.
You can't directly convert it into thrust. Nuclear power itself itself isn't generating an impulse unless you do something really dumb like set off a bomb and ride the shockwave forward (a seriously proposed but highly scary prospect). So you need to find ways of converting electricity into thrust, and this looks most likely to be electrical arcs generating an expanding plasma that acts as a thrust; the same way an ion engine uses an electrical arc to generate ions, and the charge difference is converted to thrust - the plasma thing is the same principle but a few orders of magnitude more energy hungry, as in a plasma you're completely stripping the atoms of electrons to make a "soup" of fundamental particles rather than having them in organised atoms or ions. In the real world, these things are incredibly inefficient and often have a massive trade-off between weight, expense, power consumption and thrust, making your usual chemical rockets by far the best option (if they weren't the best option, we'd have stopped using them!).
BUT, with a little sci-fi handwavium, you can do what you like. Wikipedia has a list of rocket types and engine variants if you want to base it on something realistic. Just pick something from there and modify the stats to make it usable.
My ultimate goal is for the fusion rocket to generate enough electricity to power itself while also heating propellent for thrust. Is it wiser to have a large boron fusion reactor to generate the power and then have the four engines which themselves are fusion rockets like Vasmir? Maybe even have a typical jet engine mounted around a fusion rocket. The jet engine is for Earth to altitude, the fusioin rocket is for orbit to orbit ect.
Maybe even have a typical jet engine mounted around a fusion rocket. The jet engine is for Earth to altitude, the fusioin rocket is for orbit to orbit ect.
That would be the idea behind space planes. Conventional engines can use oxygen from the atmosphere, while rocket engines need to carry their own O2 supply, liquid in most cases. Using a combination of engines for different altitudes saves weight.
spaceplanes however don't normally have fusion engines, which are no doubt so much more efficient that saving on oxidiser is a non-issue... because neither system needs it... Why not in that case use the fusion all the time rather than a chemical reaction... are you worried about radiation? melting holes in the runway? if not, hauling chemical engines around seems like a waste of payload.
I think I've decided to make the reactor a focus fusion reactor using hydrogen and boron. Making a ship that can do all the things I want is not really possible with modern technology, at least not one that looks like this. 8 mini focus fusion reactors will use the z pinch style of fusion to pulse the power needed to run the engine. The engine itself is yet another larger focus fusion generator. Instead of using the fusion to generate electricity through a particle decelerator, the engine will use it's fusion to heat hydrogen for thrust. The 8 mini focus fusion generators will power the engine so it will have a constant flow instead of a pulsed flow. When voltage is run through the engine's electrodes, instead of colapsing in to form the z pinch, it will be redirected through a magnetic bottle where it will be further compressed before mixing with the propellent. The drum section behind the main reactor will act like a tokamak but instead of condensing the gases to form fusion it will just keep the already formed plasma from touching the walls as it is exposed to the local compressed atmosphere. The result will be thrust for atmospheric operations that doesn't consume propellent. Sound complicated? Well it is and it would probobly never work lol. But it's good enough for the chics I go out with.
I'm an electrical engineer, not a rocket scientist. I was shocked that I could make landing gear that would actually work. Nuclear rocket science appears to be beyond me.
Here's a link to some animations that show how focus fusion using z pinch works. http://focusfusion.org/index.php/site/article/dpf_animation/
I was just thinking about this while at work and it occured to me that A.) 8 generators per engine is way too much. 2-4 maybe. B.) Even with 2-4 this baby will glow! Maybe I need to rethink the whole thing without throwing away the model all together. I think a dense plasma focus generator for power and engines that use a vasmir concept with a ram jet built around them may be the solution. This craft is ment to be dropped into low orbit so it doesn't need to worry too much about anything other then surface to orbit and orbit to surface. Maybe a full on fusion engine is just too much for such a small craft.
This is getting silly. I spoke with my father at length about this design as he has aviation experience, his imagination is more NASA and less Star Wars (tm Lucas Films ltd.) Together we came up with some ideas that are great but will drasticly change this design. I'm all for it! Looking at this ship we can all safely say we've seen it before in some form or another so I don't mind some recreating here and there. The engines will be a hybrid design incorporating your typical jet engine, a ram jet, and a scram jet. As this technology has been proven it feals safer to imagine a future where these engines have been vastly improved. Sadly, we will have to carry some oxidizer so we can get a fiew Delta V in space but since this baby is for surface to orbit only, that should be fine. To aid in launching at high speeds some aspects of the craft will need updating such as the engine nacel design, the windshield (may have to loose it or go for one with much less glass much more reenforcing), and the wings. My Dad's idea was to make the wings more like that of a TomCat, folding back as higher speeds are reached to reduce drag. If I do this I will probobly have to change the tail design as well. But, at least we got the engines licked lmao.
Prototyping the new engine concept from a quick sketch I made during dinner and wanted to get some good 'ol sci fi meshes feedback before I get too into it. Haven't added the intake veins and the like and I'm not sure what I want to do with the area along side of the main section between the top and bottom section, but I think you can get the idea of the direction this is going.
Is it a turbo jet? A ram jet? Maybe even an aerospike? Is it all of them? Does it need a little section on the side that resembles a scram jet intake and exhaust just for good measure? I don't know, but it looks like it could get us to space!
Not sure which part you are talking about but there are no radiators on this at the moment. The front end is actually three intakes, the pointed ones that stick out are the variable intakes for turbo jet/ramjet operation. Around those two is space for scramjet/aerospike intake air. Around the body of that are slats (not finished) that open to allow more air in for the turbo jet during vtol.
At the rear of the engine starting in the middle is the variable area exhaust nozzle, used for turbojet and ramjet opertaion. Around that is a ring of slats for the toroidal aerospike exhaust. Above and below this ring is the exhaust veins for the sramjet mode.
I haven't done all the details to the rear yet but here is a closer image.
Been gone a long while, crazy life, cheating wife, you know the story. Back at it though. This is where I left off. Giving up on the flying this in space, just going to use it as a typical atmospheric vehicle, like a chanook or something.
Long live the republic! You should paint one in "red-white" color scheme from "Clone wars". Any way, looking quite good. Thou it`s sad to see, that the bird lost it`s extra-atmospheric abilities.
It does look like something from star wars lmao, not intended though. I was trying to make a modern fighter pilot helmet but enclose the whole thing like a space suit. Guess star wars has been my sci fi inspiration for too long.
It does look like something from star wars lmao, not intended though. I was trying to make a modern fighter pilot helmet but enclose the whole thing like a space suit. Guess star wars has been my sci fi inspiration for too long.
Looks fine to me, but most likely a modern full faced motorcycle helmet would be a better choice than Fighter pilot helmet, it's a bit bulkier in look and feel.
Posts
(Shunt) In space, the DT plasma will be redirected via magnetic bottle out the exhaust. The plasma and liquid hydrogen propellent will meet in a final reaction chamber, expelling out the back generating the thrust/delta V. Is this the right way for it to work?
(Ram Inducted) while in an atmosphere the radiators will be closed along the top of the engine nacel. A jet turbine style intake condenses the local atmosphere and pushes it through the radiator housing super heating the gases which are then expelled for thrust. I figure that the atmosphere being heated by the radiators would eliminate any neutron radiation in the exhaust. For additional thrust, hydrogen propellent can be burned in the exhaust like a hydrogen afterburner. Is this acceptable or should it work a different way?
For coolant, should I use water which will help slow down stray neutrons so they are more easily collected in the lithium blanket, or can I use liquid helium? Since helium is a biproduct of the fusion, I figure if I use it as coolant, I have the option of flushing the coolant when needed and then generating more. Maybe?
Electrical generation. Should I use a hydro dynamic turbine allowing the coolant to always stay liquid, or is it better to allow the coolant to convert to a gas (steam). Then recondense it as it heads to the radiators?
In the name RIDICS, can anyone think of a better word then directional for the D? ;o
This will be some sort of NERVA, but with gaseuus core (most likely).
Roughly, plausable. However, maybe you should look at this page:
http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3c2.html
The closest to your demands is a "nuclear lightbulb" (NTR-Gas Closed cycle ) - with addition of air intakes, it will work just fine, even without magnetic bottling.
Otherwise - you can use sort of NTR-Gas open/ HELIUM 3-DEUTERIUM FUSION hybrid and don`t bother with radiation too much - gamma-radiation is short-lived, unless it hit some kind of metal, to irradiate. So, landing group deployment won`t cause a problem.
You will get a lot of troubles, keeping helium in LIQUID form. Lithium could be a better choice. Additionaly it will allow you to heat the radiator to much higher degrees (and make them smaller)
Coolant should stay just below the vaporisation point. Additional electric generation could be achieved through thermo-couples. No idea about different the name for your thrruster, thou
As well as a cutaway of how I want the engine to work.
The fusion engines have two operational modes, one for use in space and another for use in an atmoshere. Plasma from the fusion reactor is directed down the fusion divertor. At the end of the fusion divertor is a powerful mechanism capable of diverting the plasma flow. During space operations, the divertor is open causing the plasma to flow directly into the reaction chamber's injector nozzel where it meets with the hydrogen propellent. During atmospheric operations, the plasma divertor's mechanism closes, forcing the plasma to flow around it and into the reaction chamber's drum section. Here, the plasma meets the local atmosphere which has been ducted in by powerful intake compressors. The super heated gases exit the chamber through a series of cooled ducts providing thrust.
You can't directly convert it into thrust. Nuclear power itself itself isn't generating an impulse unless you do something really dumb like set off a bomb and ride the shockwave forward (a seriously proposed but highly scary prospect). So you need to find ways of converting electricity into thrust, and this looks most likely to be electrical arcs generating an expanding plasma that acts as a thrust; the same way an ion engine uses an electrical arc to generate ions, and the charge difference is converted to thrust - the plasma thing is the same principle but a few orders of magnitude more energy hungry, as in a plasma you're completely stripping the atoms of electrons to make a "soup" of fundamental particles rather than having them in organised atoms or ions. In the real world, these things are incredibly inefficient and often have a massive trade-off between weight, expense, power consumption and thrust, making your usual chemical rockets by far the best option (if they weren't the best option, we'd have stopped using them!).
BUT, with a little sci-fi handwavium, you can do what you like. Wikipedia has a list of rocket types and engine variants if you want to base it on something realistic. Just pick something from there and modify the stats to make it usable.
That would be the idea behind space planes. Conventional engines can use oxygen from the atmosphere, while rocket engines need to carry their own O2 supply, liquid in most cases. Using a combination of engines for different altitudes saves weight.
I'm an electrical engineer, not a rocket scientist. I was shocked that I could make landing gear that would actually work. Nuclear rocket science appears to be beyond me.
Here's a link to some animations that show how focus fusion using z pinch works. http://focusfusion.org/index.php/site/article/dpf_animation/
I was just thinking about this while at work and it occured to me that A.) 8 generators per engine is way too much. 2-4 maybe. B.) Even with 2-4 this baby will glow! Maybe I need to rethink the whole thing without throwing away the model all together. I think a dense plasma focus generator for power and engines that use a vasmir concept with a ram jet built around them may be the solution. This craft is ment to be dropped into low orbit so it doesn't need to worry too much about anything other then surface to orbit and orbit to surface. Maybe a full on fusion engine is just too much for such a small craft.
At the rear of the engine starting in the middle is the variable area exhaust nozzle, used for turbojet and ramjet opertaion. Around that is a ring of slats for the toroidal aerospike exhaust. Above and below this ring is the exhaust veins for the sramjet mode.
I haven't done all the details to the rear yet but here is a closer image.
Looks fine to me, but most likely a modern full faced motorcycle helmet would be a better choice than Fighter pilot helmet, it's a bit bulkier in look and feel.
something like this with a few tubes wrapped around the bottom maybe? http://www.amazon.com/HJC-CS-R1-CSR1-BLACK-SIZE/dp/B000W511X8