Author Topic: Enabling the future: NASA call for exploration revolution via NIAC concepts  (Read 21416 times)

Offline Chris Bergin

Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Offline Jason1701

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2232
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 152
Great article. Do you know how many Phase IIs will be awarded?

Offline Chris Bergin

Thanks! :)

All they have documented on Phase II is:

"Phase II NRA release – early April, 2012
– Proposals eligible if based on current Phase I studies, or
prior NIAC studies that have not completed Phase II"
Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Anyone we know submitting a proposal?  8)
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline Andy DC

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 370
  • Liked: 85
  • Likes Given: 156
Really enjoyable and interesting read Chris. Thanks again!

Offline Paul Howard

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 466
  • Perth, Western Australia
  • Liked: 15
  • Likes Given: 25
Great write up. That is exciting stuff.

Offline alexterrell

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1747
  • Germany
  • Liked: 184
  • Likes Given: 107
I like the metallic hydrogen concepts.

I wonder what the practical Isp would be? Can you use evapourative water cooling for the rocket chamber.

http://iopscience.iop.org/1742-6596/215/1/012194/pdf/1742-6596_215_1_012194.pdf

Quote
Abstract. Wigner and Huntington first predicted that pressures of order 25 GPa were required for the transition of solid molecular hydrogen to the atomic metallic phase. Later it was predicted that metallic hydrogen might be a metastable material so that it remains metallic when pressure is released. Experimental pressures achieved on hydrogen have been more than an order of magnitude higher than the predicted transition pressure and yet it remains an insulator. We discuss the applications of metastable metallic hydrogen to rocketry. Metastable metallic hydrogen would be a very light-weight, low volume, powerful rocket propellant. One of the characteristics if a propellant is its specific impulse, Isp . Liquid (molecular) hydrogen-oxygen used in modern rockets has an Isp of ~460s; metallic hydrogen has a theoretical Isp of 1700 s! Detailed analysis shows that such a fuel would allow single-stage rockets to enter into orbit or carry economical payloads to the moon. If pure metallic hydrogen is used as a propellant, the reaction chamber temperature is calculated to be greater than 6000 K, too high for currently known rocket engine materials. By diluting metallic hydrogen with liquid hydrogen or water, the reaction temperature can be reduced, yet there is still a significant performance improvement for the diluted mixture.

Offline aquanaut99

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1049
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 0
Great write up. That is exciting stuff.

Sorry, but I fail to be excited. To me, this is yet more starry-eyed dreaming about possibilties that will most likely never come to pass due to lack of budget and interest.

Instead, IMO, we would be better off focusing all our efforts on the current and immediate problem of access to our National Laboratory in Space in case Russia has to stand down, as well as the imminent problem of preventing a runaway Kessler Syndrome which has the potential to end all spaceflight for good.

After all, did the last NIAC really accomplish much?

Offline Chris Bergin

Thanks Andy and Paul! :)
Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Offline cro-magnon gramps

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1548
  • Very Ancient Martian National
  • Ontario, Canada
  • Liked: 843
  • Likes Given: 10995
Great write up. That is exciting stuff.

Sorry, but I fail to be excited. To me, this is yet more starry-eyed dreaming about possibilties that will most likely never come to pass due to lack of budget and interest.

Instead, IMO, we would be better off focusing all our efforts on the current and immediate problem of access to our National Laboratory in Space in case Russia has to stand down, as well as the imminent problem of preventing a runaway Kessler Syndrome which has the potential to end all spaceflight for good.

After all, did the last NIAC really accomplish much?

This is about pure research, and not about development, that is 50 - 100 years out; think of this as funding early research into the mechanics of flight, from di Vinci to the early 1800's pioneers of flight; the engineering wasn't there to produce a plane, but it became possible when the internal combustion engine was invented;
     so in short, no, I'm not expecting any hardware out of this in mine or your lifetimes; but I do hope that this pushes the can down the road a few miles and interests more researchers to work on these and other projects; 100,000 each is a low cost investment in the possible;
      we aren't looking at Warp Drive research here, we are looking at Impulse Power, that will ultimately lead us to the colonizing of our Solar System; Not Star Flight to other stars; I'm encouraged that they are looking at the magnetic manipulation of plasma as a propulsion source; it could make trips to the outer planets and the Oort Belt as common place as a trip from New York to Sydney, Australia in 100 years;

Don't be so pessimistic

Great article Chris, sure deserves a round at the pub ;)

Gramps
Gramps "Earthling by Birth, Martian by the grace of The Elon." ~ "Hate, it has caused a lot of problems in the world, but it has not solved one yet." Maya Angelou ~ Tony Benn: "Hope is the fuel of progress and fear is the prison in which you put yourself."

Offline kcrick

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 294
  • Connecticut
  • Liked: 23
  • Likes Given: 2630
Great article !!  Exciting stuff...

This might be far-out stuff, but we should start laying the foundation now, so we will have more options for future exploration.

Kevin

Offline ChileVerde

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1176
  • La frontera
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 0
I like the metallic hydrogen concepts.

I wonder what the practical Isp would be? Can you use evapourative water cooling for the rocket chamber.


According to http://www.dcr.net/~stickmak/JOHT/joht13rocketprop.htm , the theoretical maximum Ve is 17,700 m/s, or an Isp slightly north of 1800 seconds.
"I can’t tell you which asteroid, but there will be one in 2025," Bolden asserted.

Offline simonbp

  • Science Guy
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7138
  • Liked: 314
  • Likes Given: 183
I once had a Professor who advised me, "If you want to win a NIAC proposal, make sure to break at least two fundamental laws of physics. They won't take you seriously if you break only one..."

Offline space_dreamer

  • Member
  • Posts: 44
  • London
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 12
I once had a Professor who advised me, "If you want to win a NIAC proposal, make sure to break at least two fundamental laws of physics. They won't take you seriously if you break only one..."

Hahahahahaha If your going to be a law breaker, be a physics law breaker!

Offline Jason1701

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2232
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 152
Great write up. That is exciting stuff.

Sorry, but I fail to be excited. To me, this is yet more starry-eyed dreaming about possibilties that will most likely never come to pass due to lack of budget and interest.

Instead, IMO, we would be better off focusing all our efforts on the current and immediate problem of access to our National Laboratory in Space in case Russia has to stand down, as well as the imminent problem of preventing a runaway Kessler Syndrome which has the potential to end all spaceflight for good.

After all, did the last NIAC really accomplish much?

NIAC accomplishes a lot for its tiny budget (just a few million).

Offline Chris Bergin

I once had a Professor who advised me, "If you want to win a NIAC proposal, make sure to break at least two fundamental laws of physics. They won't take you seriously if you break only one..."

Awesome! I'll start writing up my plans for two of these then ;D



NO, I don't want to hear medium launchers could do the same job!! ;D
« Last Edit: 01/10/2012 05:47 pm by Chris Bergin »
Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Offline Warren Platts

I like the metallic hydrogen concepts.

I wonder what the practical Isp would be? Can you use evapourative water cooling for the rocket chamber.

http://iopscience.iop.org/1742-6596/215/1/012194/pdf/1742-6596_215_1_012194.pdf

Quote
Abstract. Wigner and Huntington first predicted that pressures of order 25 GPa were required for the transition of solid molecular hydrogen to the atomic metallic phase. Later it was predicted that metallic hydrogen might be a metastable material so that it remains metallic when pressure is released. Experimental pressures achieved on hydrogen have been more than an order of magnitude higher than the predicted transition pressure and yet it remains an insulator. We discuss the applications of metastable metallic hydrogen to rocketry. Metastable metallic hydrogen would be a very light-weight, low volume, powerful rocket propellant. One of the characteristics if a propellant is its specific impulse, Isp . Liquid (molecular) hydrogen-oxygen used in modern rockets has an Isp of ~460s; metallic hydrogen has a theoretical Isp of 1700 s! Detailed analysis shows that such a fuel would allow single-stage rockets to enter into orbit or carry economical payloads to the moon. If pure metallic hydrogen is used as a propellant, the reaction chamber temperature is calculated to be greater than 6000 K, too high for currently known rocket engine materials. By diluting metallic hydrogen with liquid hydrogen or water, the reaction temperature can be reduced, yet there is still a significant performance improvement for the diluted mixture.

I liked that one too; it would be nice: metallic hydrogen has a density of 1 gm/cc, so you wouldn't need huge tanks even. But if it really was metastable once you relieve the pressure, then (a) there would be evidence of metallic hydrogen floating around in space besides the interiors of gas giants; and (b) if you can't convert it by releasing pressure, then how would you get it to ignite?
"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."--Leonardo Da Vinci

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
I once had a Professor who advised me, "If you want to win a NIAC proposal, make sure to break at least two fundamental laws of physics. They won't take you seriously if you break only one..."

Awesome! I'll start writing up my plans for two of these then ;D



NO, I don't want to hear medium launchers could do the same job!! ;D
I believe they are built in orbit (possibly out of raw materials), so.... ;)

(Cue the groans...)
« Last Edit: 01/10/2012 06:23 pm by Robotbeat »
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 demorcef

  • Member
  • Posts: 94
  • SCE to AUX
  • Chicago, IL
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 34
I once had a Professor who advised me, "If you want to win a NIAC proposal, make sure to break at least two fundamental laws of physics. They won't take you seriously if you break only one..."

Awesome! I'll start writing up my plans for two of these then ;D



NO, I don't want to hear medium launchers could do the same job!! ;D

DRADIS CONTACTS...SPIN UP THE FTL DRIVES CHRIS!

Offline Chris Bergin


I believe they are built in orbit (possibly out of raw materials), so.... ;)

You've got a bloody answer for everything, you ;)


DRADIS CONTACTS...SPIN UP THE FTL DRIVES CHRIS!

Praise the Lords of Kobol!
So say we all!

Ok, better get the serious face on before someone reports me to mod ;)
« Last Edit: 01/10/2012 06:16 pm by Chris Bergin »
Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115

I believe they are built in orbit (possibly out of raw materials), so.... ;)

You've got a bloody answer for everything, you ;)
...
You were were kind of asking for it. ;)
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 simonbp

  • Science Guy
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7138
  • Liked: 314
  • Likes Given: 183
Actually now, that I've looked through them, I agree the Metallic Hydrogen one really stands out for me, both as a space enthusiast and a planetary scientist. Not only does it offer a lot of potentially practical applications, but it's really, really needed for understanding the interiors of giant planets (which are mostly metallic hydrogen by mass). This latter application is much more near term (just getting any sample of hydrogen metal would be good), and so provides a funding path to bridge between the small NIAC-funded experiments and larger-scale applications.

I also like the metal-combustion power source proposal. RTGs are always going to have issues (whether justified or not), so a non-nuclear alternative would be wonderful.
« Last Edit: 01/10/2012 07:01 pm by simonbp »

Offline IsaacKuo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 1
Anyone we know submitting a proposal?  8)

I'm submitting a kinetic impact powered rocket CATS proposal.  My latest refinements use ISRU to provide most of the mass of the impactors.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
I really like the idea of finding a cheap method of producing Pu-238. Lots of opportunities open up for outer planet missions (and surface Mars missions, including safe and inexpensive and scalable power production for human Mars missions, including for ISRU) with access to abundant Pu-238, just about the most perfect long-term nuclear fuel imaginable.
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 simonbp

  • Science Guy
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7138
  • Liked: 314
  • Likes Given: 183
The problem is, production of (any) radioisotopes is a really tricky business. Even if NASA had unlimited money and materials, it would still legally have to go through the DoE to produce Pu-238 (a legacy of AEC having a monopoly on atomic research). Slightly better would be an independent company to produce it, but it would still legally have to be purchased by DoE and then furnished to NASA.

That's why I'm pulling for the metal combustion project; it has no silly legacy legal restrictions to deal with.
« Last Edit: 01/10/2012 07:47 pm by simonbp »

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
The problem is, production of (any) radioisotopes is a really tricky business. Even if NASA had unlimited money and materials, it would still legally have to go through the DoE to produce Pu-238 (a legacy of AEC having a monopoly on atomic research). Slightly better would be an independent company to produce it, but it would still legally have to be purchased by DoE and then furnished to NASA.

That's why I'm pulling for the metal combustion project; it has no silly legacy legal restrictions to deal with.
Metal combustion? That isn't referenced in the article here (and the metallic hydrogen concept sounds like it isn't practical at all). Pu-238 can produce several hundred Watts of heat per kilogram of Pu-238 for several decades and in a wide variety of environments (no atmosphere required, though it can improve heat transfer).

If these artificial barriers can be streamlined in a responsible manner, and a cheap method found for producing Pu-238 (perhaps through existing, commercial reactors), then the payback for outer planet missions would be enormous versus the scenario of severely limited Pu-238 production or rationing.

One thing I also really liked is the fission fragment rocket concept... Really, really awesome, though it probably needs a LOT of technical development before it becomes feasible. It really seems to me like the best approach to a near-interstellar probe mission happening in my lifetime.
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 Warren Platts

That's why I'm pulling for the metal combustion project; it has no silly legacy legal restrictions to deal with.

Yeah, but the metastability thing: is there any theoretical basis behind that?

And if so, what would be the implications for planetary interior models? E.g., would metastable metallic hydrogen make the plasma phase transition (PPT) more or less discrete?
"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."--Leonardo Da Vinci

Offline Warren Platts

Anyone we know submitting a proposal?  8)

I'm submitting a kinetic impact powered rocket CATS proposal.  My latest refinements use ISRU to provide most of the mass of the impactors.

Very cool Isaac! I'm proud you man! :)

Where are you proposing to get the ISRU mass from?
"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."--Leonardo Da Vinci

Offline Andrew_W

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 754
  • Rotorua, New Zealand
    • Profiles of our future in space
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 12
The metallic hydrogen idea has such spectacular potential in so many other energy storage applications that I suspect NASA funding research is pointless, if, in 50 years time it looks like it's feasible, many millions will be spent on it. A little bit of money spent now won't lead to the breakthroughs that would be needed.
I confess that in 1901 I said to my brother Orville that man would not fly for fifty years.
Wilbur Wright

Offline Chris Bergin

Anyone we know submitting a proposal?  8)

I'm submitting a kinetic impact powered rocket CATS proposal.  My latest refinements use ISRU to provide most of the mass of the impactors.

Cool! If you want threads, help, exposure, etc. We'll provide!
Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Offline simonbp

  • Science Guy
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7138
  • Liked: 314
  • Likes Given: 183
Metal combustion? That isn't referenced in the article here

That's why you follow the links Chris gave ;)

http://www.nasa.gov/offices/oct/early_stage_innovation/niac/paul_nonradioisotope_power.html

Quote
(and the metallic hydrogen concept sounds like it isn't practical at all).

There are some MSFC AIAA papers from a few years back about metallic hydrogen propulsion that are quite interesting. Effectively, once it is in the metallic state, it should (in theory) be pretty stable (over a range of temperatures). So, you load a whole bunch of it into a pressure tank in your rocket and slowly let it trickle out. As the pressure is released, it phase changes to gas, releasing a massive amount of thermal energy in the process. You then use this thermal energy to heat a reaction mass fluid (i.e. water), and shoot it out at very high velocities.

The real trick is that by changing the mix ratio between hydrogen and water, you can trade thrust and efficiency, making a metallic hydrogen/water SSTO rocket possible. Such a vehicle itself would be mechanically very simple, with all the real complexity (and needed development) in the production of metallic hydrogen on the ground.
« Last Edit: 01/10/2012 10:03 pm by simonbp »

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Of course, we haven't even produced metallic hydrogen, yet. 'Theoretically pretty stable' doesn't sound very safe, when you're talking about something that wants to release more energy-per-kilogram than any chemical reaction we are now aware of... I guess that puts it in the "pure research" category, since we need to first see if metallic hydrogen is stable at all at reasonable pressures (I kind of doubt it is... even if it's "classically" stable, quantum tunneling may well cause it to immediately disintegrate often enough that there's no way to store a reasonable quantity at a low enough pressure to be worthwhile).

As far as burning metal for energy... I'd really like to see the evidence that it'd be significantly more energy-dense than, say, a fuel cell. Just by the typical limits of chemical fuels, it can't be much more energy dense, plus since you're burning it for a heat engine, there's not going to be a high conversion efficiency of chemical energy to electrical energy. Nuclear fuel is going to be far superior for any sort of long-duration mission, obviously.

(your link doesn't go into any more depth than saying "we're going to burn metal, we think it might be more energy-dense than typical batteries." ...without any quantitative figure at all, it's hard to say if it's going to be significantly better than a good fuel cell design)

EDIT:In other words, I'm skeptical. :) Though, I will note that metallic hydrogen has been thought to be observed in the lab, though not in a metastable state under reasonable pressures: http://www.nature.com/nmat/journal/v10/n12/full/nmat3175.html

EDIT:And some dispute that metallic hydrogen was found at all in that experiment: http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1201/1201.0407.pdf
« Last Edit: 01/10/2012 10:50 pm by Robotbeat »
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 Warren Platts

There's no way metallic hydrogen can be "metastable" at the temperatures and pressures humans use for their rockets IMO. They way the investigate it now, is with massive diamond anvils and they hope to get a measurement for a millisecond or something like that. Arguably, the Great Red Spot on Jupiter runs on metallic hydrogen. It wouldn't work if metallic hydrogen was metastable.
"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."--Leonardo Da Vinci

Offline Chris Bergin

Wowzers, NASA.gov retweeted the article to their 1,739,545 followers :o

@NASA NASA
Check out this story about the call for revolutionary ideas from NASA's Innovative Advanced Concepts Program tinyurl.com/7njqg9w

That's a first for us! :)
Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Offline mike robel

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2304
  • Merritt Island, FL
  • Liked: 369
  • Likes Given: 260
Cool Chris!

Offline cro-magnon gramps

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1548
  • Very Ancient Martian National
  • Ontario, Canada
  • Liked: 843
  • Likes Given: 10995
Wowzers, NASA.gov retweeted the article to their 1,739,545 followers :o

@NASA NASA
Check out this story about the call for revolutionary ideas from NASA's Innovative Advanced Concepts Program tinyurl.com/7njqg9w

That's a first for us! :)

That's Great News Chris!!

Now what are you going to tell the interviewer from the press, when he asks, What does it feel like to be an overnight success??

Cheers,  ;D

Gramps
Gramps "Earthling by Birth, Martian by the grace of The Elon." ~ "Hate, it has caused a lot of problems in the world, but it has not solved one yet." Maya Angelou ~ Tony Benn: "Hope is the fuel of progress and fear is the prison in which you put yourself."

Offline alexterrell

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1747
  • Germany
  • Liked: 184
  • Likes Given: 107

There are some MSFC AIAA papers from a few years back about metallic hydrogen propulsion that are quite interesting. Effectively, once it is in the metallic state, it should (in theory) be pretty stable (over a range of temperatures). So, you load a whole bunch of it into a pressure tank in your rocket and slowly let it trickle out. As the pressure is released, it phase changes to gas, releasing a massive amount of thermal energy in the process. You then use this thermal energy to heat a reaction mass fluid (i.e. water), and shoot it out at very high velocities.

The real trick is that by changing the mix ratio between hydrogen and water, you can trade thrust and efficiency, making a metallic hydrogen/water SSTO rocket possible. Such a vehicle itself would be mechanically very simple, with all the real complexity (and needed development) in the production of metallic hydrogen on the ground.
Thinking about this, the limit is the melting point of the reaction chamber. As I understand it, LOx/LH2 rockets are pretty close to the material limitations of the chamber, so perhaps the best you could get would be a Metal Hydrogen / Liquid hydrogen mix. At the same temperature that should produce over 4 times the Isp, so close to 2,000 seconds.

But I haven't seen evidence that metallic hydrogen is stable. But then again, I would hope that NASA has pre-selected these concepts based on some descent academic research.

And metallic hydrogen has to be meta stable at achievable conditions or it will make a very nice, but unpredictable bomb.

It would also make a useful fuel for cars. An internal combustion engine to convert 2H -> H2, followed by a fuel cell to make water and electricity. Perhaps 1,000 miles per gallon? Or 3,000 miles per gallon if you can use it direct in a fuel cell. Keep dreaming.
« Last Edit: 01/11/2012 10:13 pm by alexterrell »

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
You can always use an ablative chamber, which wouldn't really have a limit in chamber temperature (though at some point, you ablate so fast you're basically operating a sort of solid rocket!).

That said, yeah. I'm more optimistic of fusion power than metallic hydrogen being used in this manner at any time soon.
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 alexterrell

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1747
  • Germany
  • Liked: 184
  • Likes Given: 107
You can always use an ablative chamber, which wouldn't really have a limit in chamber temperature (though at some point, you ablate so fast you're basically operating a sort of solid rocket!).

That said, yeah. I'm more optimistic of fusion power than metallic hydrogen being used in this manner at any time soon.
Something like a graphite / metallic hydrogen mix? The graphite has a high melting point but low molecular mass once vapourised.

We know fusion can work, though we don't know whether it can made practical for space applications or economic for power generation. Metastable metallic hydrogen is perhaps the other way round.

Offline IsaacKuo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 1
Anyone we know submitting a proposal?  8)

I'm submitting a kinetic impact powered rocket CATS proposal.  My latest refinements use ISRU to provide most of the mass of the impactors.

Cool! If you want threads, help, exposure, etc. We'll provide!

Thanks!  I have posted ideas about kinetic impact powered rockets here in the past, and will continue to do so occasionally.

What about others?  There are a lot of people who more regularly post ideas in this Advanced Concepts forum.  I would have guessed at least two or three others would also be submitting proposals to this NIAC call.

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10974
  • Delta-t is an important metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 1257
  • Likes Given: 724
Anyone we know submitting a proposal?  8)

I'm submitting a kinetic impact powered rocket CATS proposal.  My latest refinements use ISRU to provide most of the mass of the impactors.

I'm outlining a proposal on the practicality of ISRU pony propulsion.  Have broken three laws already.
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline Warren Platts

Anyone we know submitting a proposal?  8)

I'm submitting a kinetic impact powered rocket CATS proposal.  My latest refinements use ISRU to provide most of the mass of the impactors.

Cool! If you want threads, help, exposure, etc. We'll provide!

Thanks!  I have posted ideas about kinetic impact powered rockets here in the past, and will continue to do so occasionally.

What about others?  There are a lot of people who more regularly post ideas in this Advanced Concepts forum.  I would have guessed at least two or three others would also be submitting proposals to this NIAC call.

Well, let me run this past you guys: how about a design for an affordable architecture for a Lunar gold mine using near-term available technology?

I know it doesn't have anything directly to do with spaceflight (although, to make it work, it would have to have an adjunct Lunar ISRU propellant facility), but the plausible amounts of gold on the Moon combined with the high prices that prevail these days offer the first opportunity for a direct, economically profitable, export of a physical commodity back to Earth.

Thus, the hope would be that just as gold provided a reason to open up the frontiers in the western US, Alaska, and Australia, the discovery of economically recoverable gold deposits on the Moon could revolutionize spaceflight indirectly by providing a concrete reason for going into space other than scientific exploration.

I figure they probably wouldn't go for it, but I would be interested in some second opinions....
"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."--Leonardo Da Vinci

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
I think you should focus on stuff that NASA would be most interested in, like a totally novel lunar ISRU concept, a novel concept for a lander/rover to explore a permanently shadowed crater, etc.

Your idea on a gold mining technique would be far better for pitching to private investors than to NASA. Just my friendly opinion. :) Best of luck everyone with their proposals!
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 Tass

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 370
  • Liked: 89
  • Likes Given: 208
There's no way metallic hydrogen can be "metastable" at the temperatures and pressures humans use for their rockets IMO. They way the investigate it now, is with massive diamond anvils and they hope to get a measurement for a millisecond or something like that.

No they don't investigate it with diamond anvils, because no one has succeeded in making it yet. They are trying to make it in diamond anvils. Since no one has seen it yet we really don't know wether it is metastable. Theory says it might be, but theory on dense hydrogen is difficult, so we can't know for sure.

Try to read the article about it. It is all discussed.

Arguably, the Great Red Spot on Jupiter runs on metallic hydrogen. It wouldn't work if metallic hydrogen was metastable.

Any evidence for this?



Offline Warren Platts

There's no way metallic hydrogen can be "metastable" at the temperatures and pressures humans use for their rockets IMO. They way the investigate it now, is with massive diamond anvils and they hope to get a measurement for a millisecond or something like that.

No they don't investigate it with diamond anvils, because no one has succeeded in making it yet. They are trying to make it in diamond anvils. Since no one has seen it yet we really don't know wether it is metastable. Theory says it might be, but theory on dense hydrogen is difficult, so we can't know for sure.

Try to read the article about it. It is all discussed.

Arguably, the Great Red Spot on Jupiter runs on metallic hydrogen. It wouldn't work if metallic hydrogen was metastable.

Any evidence for this?

Looked at the IOP paper. It doesn't state the reasons why we should expect metallic hydrogen to be metastable, except to cite a Soviet paper dating back to 1971, but I suppose it's reasonable to expect that there might be some sort of thermodynamic barrier to be overcome before it switches back to a molecular phase.

They say this might be at around 1 eV, whereas the energy of dissociation is 4.68 eV. Thus you can see the problem: even it were metastable, its a monopropellant that doesn't need an oxidizer to go kaboom; if just one molecule goes off, it will release 5 times more energy that will in turn set off a chain reaction.

As for the GRS, metallic hydrogen would be the perfect energy source for the perfect storm. If the GRS were a tornado-like funnel cloud rather than than the flat pancake model favored by numerical simulationists, it could reach all the way down to the plasma phase transition zone (PPT), and then entrain metallic hydrogen in the funnel. As the material moved toward the surface, it would recombine back into molecular hydrogen, thus releasing massive amounts of latent heat thus increasing the force of the updraft, and it would become self-sustaining.

Granted, this is just my crazy idea, but I'm sitting on a detailed manuscript that I dusted off yesterday, that I can email you if you're interested.

The evidence for this is that it would make a great cooling mechanism for Jupiter. The problem is that Jupiter is too cold compared to Saturn, given the sorts of hydrogen/helium equations of state (EOS's) that they think are likely. From the manuscript:

Quote
Homogeneous models (no helium-hydrogen phase separation) that invoke gravitational contraction as the sole power source accurately predict Jupiter’s temperature, but imply that Saturn should have achieved its present temperature over two billion years ago (Grossman et al. 1980). Inhomogeneous models that invoke helium phase separation and sedimentation within the metallic envelope predict slower cooling, reconciling Saturn’s predicted temperature with the observed temperature (Fortney and Hubbard 2003). However, Jupiter's helium mass fraction Y determined by the Galileo probe is 0.231—significantly less that the protosolar value of 0.27 (Guillot et al. 2004). The natural explanation for this discrepancy is helium phase separation, but under the EOS's consistent with Saturn's temperature and age, Jupiter should be hotter than it is now (Fortney and Hubbard 2003). Guillot et al. (2004) propose that core erosion and redistribution could provide the needed cooling mechanism. An alternate explanation is that the GRS functions as an expansion valve and gravity as a compressor in a natural refrigeration system that cools the planet.
"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."--Leonardo Da Vinci

Offline Warren Platts

I think you should focus on stuff that NASA would be most interested in, like a totally novel lunar ISRU concept, a novel concept for a lander/rover to explore a permanently shadowed crater, etc.

Your idea on a gold mining technique would be far better for pitching to private investors than to NASA. Just my friendly opinion. :) Best of luck everyone with their proposals!

lol! Ol' Bill Stone has had lots of luck recently! He needs a fresh idea: maybe I should give him a call. Good idea! ;D
"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."--Leonardo Da Vinci

Offline neilh

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2365
  • Pasadena, CA
  • Liked: 46
  • Likes Given: 149
I'll unfortunately be out of town, but NIAC's doing a symposium here in Pasadena this coming week.

Quote
NASA's Innovative Advanced Concepts (NIAC) Symposium will be held March 27-29 at the Westin Pasadena Hotel, 191 North Los Robles Ave., in Pasadena, Calif.
 
The NIAC examines early stage concepts that may lead to advanced and innovative space technologies critical for NASA to enable missions 10 to 100 years from today.
To attend this free registration conference, you must sign up online at:
 
http://events.Signup4.com/NIAC2012

Link and symposium schedule: http://www.nasa.gov/offices/oct/early_stage_innovation/niac/spring_symposium.html

A lot of the topic titles look really interesting.
Someone is wrong on the Internet.
http://xkcd.com/386/

Offline scienceguy

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 836
  • Lethbridge, Alberta
  • Liked: 155
  • Likes Given: 279
I would like to see the power point for "Nuclear Propulsion Through Direct Conversion of Fusion Energy" from the talk.
e^(pi*i) = -1

Offline cro-magnon gramps

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1548
  • Very Ancient Martian National
  • Ontario, Canada
  • Liked: 843
  • Likes Given: 10995
I would like to see the power point for "Nuclear Propulsion Through Direct Conversion of Fusion Energy" from the talk.

Googled John Slough, MSNW LLC

the first link, a large pdf file, explains in detail some of the experiments leading up to the presentation, with an e-mail address ;-)

this looks interesting, bit tech, but understandable to an old guy like me;

http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/08/john-slough-fusion-space-propulsion.html
« Last Edit: 03/25/2012 02:24 am by cro-magnon gramps »
Gramps "Earthling by Birth, Martian by the grace of The Elon." ~ "Hate, it has caused a lot of problems in the world, but it has not solved one yet." Maya Angelou ~ Tony Benn: "Hope is the fuel of progress and fear is the prison in which you put yourself."

Offline scienceguy

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 836
  • Lethbridge, Alberta
  • Liked: 155
  • Likes Given: 279
e^(pi*i) = -1


Offline Jim_LAX

  • Member
  • Posts: 78
  • California
  • Liked: 42
  • Likes Given: 428
Not sure if this is the right topic for this, but here goes:
While reading about the Daytime Fireball over Colima California I had the following thoughts.

The incoming space rock throws off thermal energy by exploding.  Could an incoming spacecraft do the same, but less destructively, by heating water into superheated steam.  The steam could be expelled through nozzles to function as retro rockets, slowing its descent.  If the spacecraft is returning from BEO it may already have water on board for radiation shielding purposes.  At atmospheric entry that water becomes a mass liability, having served its purpose

as shielding.

Someone with the math skills and engineering tradoff knowledge would have to say if this could work or not.
Just a thought.
« Last Edit: 04/26/2012 04:31 pm by Jim_LAX »
"I don't go along with going to the Moon first in order to build a launch pad to go to Mars.  We should go to Mars from Earth orbit."

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
...
Someone with the math skills and engineering tradoff knowledge would have to say if this could work or not.
Just a thought.
Teach yourself! :)
Math:
http://www.khanacademy.org/

To get a start on the engineering:

http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/aeronautics-and-astronautics/16-885j-aircraft-systems-engineering-fall-2005/video-lectures/
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 vulture4

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1099
  • Liked: 431
  • Likes Given: 92
The difficulty with NIAC is that they always want "game-changing" technologies that will make spaceflight free and can be developed for 25K. I try to point out that we need patient work to analyze the tasks that made the Shuttle cost ten times what was predicted to maintain. No interest so far.

Offline Joris

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 372
  • Liked: 24
  • Likes Given: 3
The difficulty with NIAC is that they always want "game-changing" technologies that will make spaceflight free and can be developed for 25K.

NIAC is there to push our knowledge of physics, not to make prototypes. It's like funding laser research in the '40's: blue skies research, almost purely theoretical.
JIMO would have been the first proper spaceship.

Offline LegendCJS

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 575
  • Boston, MA
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 2
The difficulty with NIAC is that they always want "game-changing" technologies that will make spaceflight free and can be developed for 25K. I try to point out that we need patient work to analyze the tasks that made the Shuttle cost ten times what was predicted to maintain. No interest so far.

Not their area of responsibility, also the answers to why the shuttle cost more than predictions are well known for decades now, and can be found in numerous books, papers, memoirs, and websites. 

To really understand the value of NIAC you need to get to know the NASA Technology Readiness Level (TRL) scale.  Just google it and have a read.

NIAC by definition keeps its focus on low TRL technologies, and it doesn't take much money at all to bring a TRL 1 idea to a TRL 2 or TRL 3 level.  Only at TRL 4 does actual hardware need to be made for a breadboard level/ or laboratory bench-top prototype.  So I don't see their way of doing things as having any inherent problem. 

In fact, given your interest in finding out why space missions cost more than predicted, but your seeming dislike of the idea behind NIAC, you might find it surprising that EVERY study on cost overruns blames a lack of focus on investment in basic tech development as a major contributor to these overruns.

Remember: if we want this whole space thing to work out we have to optimize for cost!

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10974
  • Delta-t is an important metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 1257
  • Likes Given: 724
[One]  might find it surprising that EVERY study on cost overruns blames a lack of focus on investment in basic tech development as a major contributor to these overruns.

I'm sure that's the case in general, but a link would help to enumerate and rank the other contributors.

There's a semantic problem in the idea of "basic tech development".  For example NIAC prefers to support "basic tech development" for advanced fields of inquiry.  One thing needing investigation would be "basic tech development" in fields where much is thought to be already known.  This would not be in NIAC's purview.

For example, regenerative nozzle manufacturing techniques.  Is innovation at an end in this field?  Thrust Augmented Nozzles?  Aerospike engines?  Composite super-light multi-lobe tanks? Metallic TPS system?
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline truth is life

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 278
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 8
In fact, given your interest in finding out why space missions cost more than predicted, but your seeming dislike of the idea behind NIAC, you might find it surprising that EVERY study on cost overruns blames a lack of focus on investment in basic tech development as a major contributor to these overruns.

I thought a bigger problem nowadays was the "TRL-5 hole," ie. the fact that NASA, DoD, etc. will fund your basic research and development up to TRL 3 or so, but don't really have programs for bringing an idea from paper studies and lab demos of key parts up to at least basic system validation. So you have lots of promising technologies that have seen some development, but they haven't seen anything approaching the level of development needed to start planning a mission/vehicle around them, at least not without accepting a great deal of design risk.

Offline vulture4

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1099
  • Liked: 431
  • Likes Given: 92
In fact, given your interest in finding out why space missions cost more than predicted, but your seeming dislike of the idea behind NIAC, you might find it surprising that EVERY study on cost overruns blames a lack of focus on investment in basic tech development as a major contributor to these overruns.

I thought a bigger problem nowadays was the "TRL-5 hole," ie. the fact that NASA, DoD, etc. will fund your basic research and development up to TRL 3 or so, but don't really have programs for bringing an idea from paper studies and lab demos of key parts up to at least basic system validation. So you have lots of promising technologies that have seen some development, but they haven't seen anything approaching the level of development needed to start planning a mission/vehicle around them, at least not without accepting a great deal of design risk.

Both are correct. Basic research is an admisison that we do not know something and need to understand it.  TRL-1 awards are generally not for basic research, they are for the initial stage in developing operational mission hardware by demonstrating prototypes. In theory you get your $50K grant for performing a precisely predicted series of developments with costs with a budget and schedule that are not just globally fixed but assigned to specific people and hardware, that will complete the first step in achieving space elevators, etc. If you admit the truth, that it is an important problem but you don't understand it and need to start with basic research, you have no where to apply.

Every week you submit notes and every month you have to present viewgraphs showing the progress you have made, the milestones completed and ahead, and graphics the management can use to impress their management. If you're lucky you get a couple hours a week in the lab to actually do research.

Then after a year the money runs out and you have no way to apply for a continuation because the only funds are for TRL-1-2 and you had to claim you would take the project to TRL-3-4 to get your initial grant. So the only way you could propose would be to admit failure, which, as we all  know, is not an option.

So the only choice is to completely abandon your promising research until people forget about it and pick another "game changing technology" project out of the air. Let's try antimatter this year.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0