Author Topic: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine  (Read 176947 times)

Online Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13728
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 3083
  • Likes Given: 476
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #500 on: 10/31/2017 02:12 AM »
Aviation Week article on the recent test.

http://aviationweek.com/space/blue-origin-fires-be-4-methane-fuel-rocket-engine

Not much new information. They did say they found the problem with the power pack failure and that it has been fixed. No information on what the failure is though.
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6422
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 873
  • Likes Given: 5541
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #501 on: 11/03/2017 03:24 PM »
There were some good reasons for why it took so long with RS-68, but none of those are likely here. The two aren't comparable.

From the artifacts present, suggest chamber pressure is the limiting factor in some form at the moment.
Wasn't RS68 the ablative cooled GG cycle LH2/LO2 for the Delta IV?

I'd guess ablative reuse would have been an issue.

Do you mean RS25, the SSME. There were 13 RUDs (of various levels of seriousness) getting it to flight. AFAIK It's still the only cryogenic SC (of any variant) to be developed in the US (before Blue and SX).
"Solids are a branch of fireworks, not rocketry. :-) :-) ", Henry Spencer 1/28/11  Averse to bold? You must be in marketing."It's all in the sequencing" K. Mattingly.  STS-Keeping most of the stakeholders happy most of the time.
So you're going to Mars to seek a better life. What does that mean to you? Always spot a fanbois by how they react to their idols failures.

Offline russianhalo117

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4009
  • AR USA / Berlin, DE / Moscow, RF
  • Liked: 812
  • Likes Given: 489
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #502 on: 11/03/2017 03:46 PM »
There were some good reasons for why it took so long with RS-68, but none of those are likely here. The two aren't comparable.

From the artifacts present, suggest chamber pressure is the limiting factor in some form at the moment.
Wasn't RS68 the ablative cooled GG cycle LH2/LO2 for the Delta IV?

I'd guess ablative reuse would have been an issue.

Do you mean RS25, the SSME. There were 13 RUDs (of various levels of seriousness) getting it to flight. AFAIK It's still the only cryogenic SC (of any variant) to be developed in the US (before Blue and SX).
RS-68B LRE Upgrade with regenerative cooling was shelved after i believe the Critical Design Review because Constellation program was terminated and there wasn't another rocket that needed it because it was easier to take certain components of RS-68 to make an RS-25E. This has been discussed many times and doesn't need to be repeated again.

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6422
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 873
  • Likes Given: 5541
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #503 on: 11/03/2017 09:24 PM »
There were some good reasons for why it took so long with RS-68, but none of those are likely here. The two aren't comparable.

From the artifacts present, suggest chamber pressure is the limiting factor in some form at the moment.
Wasn't RS68 the ablative cooled GG cycle LH2/LO2 for the Delta IV?

I'd guess ablative reuse would have been an issue.

Do you mean RS25, the SSME. There were 13 RUDs (of various levels of seriousness) getting it to flight. AFAIK It's still the only cryogenic SC (of any variant) to be developed in the US (before Blue and SX).
RS-68B LRE Upgrade with regenerative cooling was shelved after i believe the Critical Design Review because Constellation program was terminated and there wasn't another rocket that needed it because it was easier to take certain components of RS-68 to make an RS-25E. This has been discussed many times and doesn't need to be repeated again.
Whenever I think of human rated engines canabalized from non human rated engines I think of the J-2X, with most parts from the RS68 or the RL10.
"Solids are a branch of fireworks, not rocketry. :-) :-) ", Henry Spencer 1/28/11  Averse to bold? You must be in marketing."It's all in the sequencing" K. Mattingly.  STS-Keeping most of the stakeholders happy most of the time.
So you're going to Mars to seek a better life. What does that mean to you? Always spot a fanbois by how they react to their idols failures.

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27141
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 7109
  • Likes Given: 4937
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #504 on: 11/05/2017 12:29 AM »
Define "human rated" in a way that isn't 1) talking about an entire system (i.e. launch vehicle) or 2) cargo cult nonsense.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Raptor 42

  • Member
  • Posts: 2
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #505 on: 11/13/2017 12:22 PM »
On the Blue Origin website it says that "allows for the removal of a solid rocket motor at more than $10 million per flight for comparable missions."

Offline Nilof

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 904
  • Liked: 365
  • Likes Given: 538
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #506 on: 11/20/2017 12:17 AM »
Define "human rated" in a way that isn't 1) talking about an entire system (i.e. launch vehicle) or 2) cargo cult nonsense.

"Does not undergo RUD's on a significant fraction of engine tests" sounds like a good start.

Above that, it depends on the exact level of safety you want, and on reusable engines there's also an element of how practical achieving that safety is. The RS-25 is a great example of an engine that was human rated and never had a failure on manned flight, but only with very expensive maintenance between flights.
For a variable Isp spacecraft running at constant power and constant acceleration, the mass ratio is linear in delta-v.   Δv = ve0(MR-1). Or equivalently: Δv = vef PMF. Also, this is energy-optimal for a fixed delta-v and mass ratio.

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4876
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 3534
  • Likes Given: 1133
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #507 on: 11/21/2017 01:39 PM »
Some good news for BE-4 funding in the recent NDAA:

Good article by Eric Berger on the NDAA funding language and thus the flexibility it does, and does not, give the USAF:

https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/11/a-new-law-gives-air-force-some-wiggle-room-in-picking-its-new-rockets/

Two crucial quotes:

Quote
Further, the bill defines “rocket propulsion system” as a main booster, first-stage rocket engine, or motor. The term does not include a launch vehicle, an upper stage, a strap-on motor, or related infrastructure.

Quote
Another provision in the bill relates to the engines under development for Vulcan. This language states that the Air Force may terminate funding for other rocket propulsion systems when “the Secretary of the Air Force certifies to the congressional defense committees that a successful full-scale test of a domestic rocket engine has occurred.”

So first stage funding is fine, but not second or other stages, and AR-1 funding can be dropped once BE-4 achieves a 'full-scale test'.

Best follow-up in the original (space policy) thread.

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4876
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 3534
  • Likes Given: 1133
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #508 on: 01/08/2018 01:04 PM »
Quote
Latest BE-4 engine test footage where we exceeded our Isp targets. We continue to exercise the deep throttling of our full scale 550,000 lbf BE-4, the reusability of our hydrostatic pump bearings and our stable start/stop cycles. More to follow from ongoing tests. #BE4 #NewGlenn

https://twitter.com/blueorigin/status/950365085091811330

Vid to follow

Edit: video now attached
« Last Edit: 01/08/2018 01:08 PM by FutureSpaceTourist »

Offline Davidthefat

Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #509 on: 01/08/2018 02:16 PM »
Did a thermocouple or something get blasted off during shutdown? (Black wire looking thing flying around in the bell)

Offline Space Ghost 1962

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2558
  • Whatcha gonna do when the Ghost zaps you?
  • Liked: 2541
  • Likes Given: 1917
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #510 on: 01/08/2018 03:21 PM »
Nice progress to see Blue!

You can see clear improvements across all aspects of engine operation visible.

(One of the later things to see with such an engine will be be long duration tests, don't expect them soon.)

As to ULA, I'd think that combustion stability with many repeatable runs with varying conditions is helpful to the decision to down select on engines. From what's shown, looks likely we'll hear an announcement in 1-2 months to go ahead with BE-4 on Vulcan.

(Also, suspect that relentless pursuit of reliability and performance of this in successive video's we'll eventually see will become a hallmark of this engine. And while Vulcan will get the economical, performant engine it needs, it won't stop there - they'll give the Energomash designs a run for the money and then some.)

Nice news.

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #511 on: 01/08/2018 03:56 PM »
Have they done full power test yet? Even for few seconds.

Offline Space Ghost 1962

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2558
  • Whatcha gonna do when the Ghost zaps you?
  • Liked: 2541
  • Likes Given: 1917
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #512 on: 01/08/2018 04:08 PM »
Have they done full power test yet? Even for few seconds.
Probably not.

That wouldn't be a priority right now, and likely not useful. From the data accumulated, likely they can tell the bounds of engine performance they can reach.

Most important is that they determine that the engine operates like expected/model, through various conditions. Plenty to do for that.

There's many concurrent issues before you treat a propulsion system like it might be used on a LV. For you want it to work for the right reasons, not just any reason, for it to be a reliable/proven system that you need.

This is the right amount of progress, in the right way.

Online AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5216
  • Liked: 3131
  • Likes Given: 4446
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #513 on: 01/08/2018 04:24 PM »
Nice progress to see Blue!

You can see clear improvements across all aspects of engine operation visible.

...

Can you describe the 'improvements' that you see?
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline Davidthefat

Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #514 on: 01/08/2018 04:39 PM »
Nice progress to see Blue!

You can see clear improvements across all aspects of engine operation visible.

...

Can you describe the 'improvements' that you see?

Not blowing up? Wasn't there a breach in the power pack in the previously released information on testing?

Offline PahTo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1504
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 142
  • Likes Given: 432
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #515 on: 01/08/2018 04:54 PM »
Have they done full power test yet? Even for few seconds.
Probably not.

That wouldn't be a priority right now, and likely not useful. From the data accumulated, likely they can tell the bounds of engine performance they can reach.

Most important is that they determine that the engine operates like expected/model, through various conditions. Plenty to do for that.

There's many concurrent issues before you treat a propulsion system like it might be used on a LV. For you want it to work for the right reasons, not just any reason, for it to be a reliable/proven system that you need.

This is the right amount of progress, in the right way.

Thanks SG1962.  I asked the below in a Vulcan thread some time ago, and you've essentially answered here...

"Also, what is the expected frequency of tests for the BE-4?  Given the "recent" 50% test, should we expect a "long duration"at 50%?  Short run at 100%?"
« Last Edit: 01/08/2018 04:54 PM by PahTo »

Offline meberbs

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1407
  • Liked: 1266
  • Likes Given: 325
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #516 on: 01/08/2018 05:07 PM »
Nice progress to see Blue!

You can see clear improvements across all aspects of engine operation visible.

...

Can you describe the 'improvements' that you see?

Not blowing up? Wasn't there a breach in the power pack in the previously released information on testing?
No, that was last spring and before they put a full scale engine on a stand.

They released a previous video of a firing back in October, and they have been continuing to do tests since then. This is the second public video of a test of the full engine.


Offline jpo234

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 689
  • Liked: 491
  • Likes Given: 73
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #518 on: 01/08/2018 08:28 PM »
Short article to mark these tests:
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2018/01/blue-origin-be-4-engine-testing/

Quote
a gigantic production facility nearly competition on Merritt Island.

...a gigantic production facility nearing completion on Merritt Island.
You want to be inspired by things. You want to wake up in the morning and think the future is going to be great. That's what being a spacefaring civilization is all about. It's about believing in the future and believing the future will be better than the past. And I can't think of anything more exciting than being out there among the stars.

Offline theinternetftw

  • Member
  • Posts: 25
    • www.theinternetftw.com
  • Liked: 93
  • Likes Given: 101
Re: Blue Origin's BE-4 Engine
« Reply #519 on: 01/08/2018 08:33 PM »
Short article to mark these tests:
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2018/01/blue-origin-be-4-engine-testing/

Quote from: Chris Bergin in said short article

Interestingly, L2 information notes Blue Origin’s BE-3E engine is making progress in a trade study being conducted at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) for use on the Space Launch System’s Exploration Upper Stage (EUS).

This option is competing against the current baseline of the RL-10 and an alternative MB-60 LOX-LH2 engine from Japan.

Marking the tests, and throwing in just the slightest bit of eyebrow-raising and tree-shaking I see ;)

Tags: