DocM Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 Engines need 2 things to run: fuel and an oxidizer. Internal combustion car engines use gasoline and/or ethanol mixed with air; jet engines use highly refined kerosene and air; most liquid rocket stages use rocket grade kerosene or liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen etc. Where things get ugly is in some rocket stages and the orbital maneuvering thrusters used in spacecraft like the Shuttle, Dragon, Soyuz and satellites. These use a fuel mix that is hypergolic - that is they ignite on contact to make for high reliability and simplicity, but the problem is that the best ones are highly toxic: nitrogen tetroxide (N2O4) and hydrazine (N2H4). This combination is why you see guys in HAZMAT suits surround the Shuttle after it lands, and loading it into a spacecraft before launch is even worse. Many attempts to replace nitrogen tetroxide & hydrazine have been made, but now one might actually seal the deal: NoFBX NoFBX is a monopropellant - meaning it can simplify the design by eliminating half the plumbing. There have been other monopropellants, but not with as much energy as NoFBX. It can also be used not only in rockets but internal combustion engines. IC engines running on NoFBX could be used in propeller aircraft designed to work >100,000 feet, where normally there isn't enough oxygen for them to operate. DoD is definitely interested in that for recon drones. Torpedoes & underwater craft? Sure. One of the movers behind NoFBX is Max Vozoff, formerly of SpaceX (surprised? I'm not). Anyhow, this paper was presented at a recent AIAA (American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics) conference & might be interesting - http://www.aiaa.org/pdf/industry/presentations/Greg_Mungas.pdf and some companies involved - http://www.firestar-engineering.com/NOFB-MP.html http://www.ispsllc.com/nofbx.html (new site - under construction) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts