Raptor Engine graphics/schematics and tips/tricks to make them

[HVM]

Can the methane pump be shortened to remove the vestige of the third stage pump element (left over from the SSME drawing)?

Here is Illustrator (only twenty bucks per month)
https://www.adobe.com/products/illustrator.html
And here you can find the Inkscape (it's free, open source software)
https://inkscape.org/

I just traced it, I've never actually designed turbo machinery so; I don't know what you mean. You need to draw me a picture... And if you can do that, you know...

[Hitech]

The pump shown has three stages with only two impellers. The  "unused" bottom defuser and collector needs to be removed and a defuser/Volute/collector to connect to the output fuel line. Then, the assembly needs to be shortened.

[codav]

Can the methane pump be shortened to remove the vestige of the third stage pump element (left over from the SSME drawing)?

I just traced it, I've never actually designed turbo machinery so; I don't know what you mean. You need to draw me a picture... And if you can do that, you know...

That's probably the additional "turn" below the two pump blades. I removed it and moved all the top parts down so they fit nicely.

[livingjw]

Can the methane pump be shortened to remove the vestige of the third stage pump element (left over from the SSME drawing)?

I just traced it, I've never actually designed turbo machinery so; I don't know what you mean. You need to draw me a picture... And if you can do that, you know...

That's probably the additional "turn" below the two pump blades. I removed it and moved all the top parts down so they fit nicely.

Thanks!

[Hitech]

Yea, that's the ticket; I made a slight edit to shorten the pump body.  (I have the program but early in the learning curve) 

[Hitech]

I went back and looked at the original and saw that the "housing" did not show at all on the original so I tweaked it again.

[Hitech]

I was thinking that with  Additive Manufacturing I would be possible to have Film cooling that was variable as it would be possible to separate the regin flow from the film flow. What would be the best educated guess as to the source of that flow and the locations on the MCC or even the area around the injector plate to dampen oscillation?

[rakaydos]

I was thinking that with  Additive Manufacturing I would be possible to have Film cooling that was variable as it would be possible to separate the regin flow from the film flow. What would be the best educated guess as to the source of that flow and the locations on the MCC or even the area around the injector plate to dampen oscillation?

doesn't Methane's narrow range of combustible mixtures make film cooling easy? Higher density of methane at the edges, with a well mixed spray of oxygen in the center.

[Hitech]

Variable as if needed it's flowing and the flow match the "need". The second test video showed a large are of external combustion suggesting high film cooling flow. This may explain how they could turn around an run again so quickly.

[livingjw]

Tweaked CH4 pump to clear turbine exhaust path. Changed thrust to 2.05 MN. Changed Title to 12 Feb 2019.

[RobLynn]

Carbon fibre tank test failure was at 2.3bar.  There would have been significant safety margin in that number.  It is also absolutely key to getting tank mass down (and safety factors high) to keep necessary engine inlet pressure low.  So 3bar inlet pressure is almost certainly too high.  2.3bar with an assumed safety factor of 1.5 would be 1.5 bar design tank pressure.  Carbon fibre tank test data: 

[Lar]

Yeah maybe we sliced this thread too fine. RobLynn's post just above me doesn't seem very image related. I would have expected it to be in the main thread.

Anyway I just brought two posts over from the main thread that discuss the issue of the image being uploaded at Wikimedia Commons "[[File:Raptor_Engine_Unofficial_Combustion_Scheme.png]]" with what Llian and I think is an improper license.

Llian raises the issue in this one:
    https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=47383.msg1909699#msg1909699
livingjw says it's ok to use a newer version at Commons here:
    https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=47383.msg1909783#msg1909783
but HVM says it's not ready here:
    https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=41363.msg1909780#msg1909780

The image at Commons shouldn't be public domain. Whoever that one shot user was, they basically nicked it from our artists livingjw and HVM. The svg is a better image format so it ought to be the primary image and the one that gets updated whenever our artists make substantial changes (and used in the articles in updated form) And a license like CC-By-SA (share alike, no changing the license for derivative works, and with attribution that can't be removed) is better than public domain.

If someone other than the authors uploads it we may need to file some sort of proof of permission with Comnons so if one of our authors had a Commons ID that would be great. But Commons is so arcane.
 
On the other hand if public domain actually IS ok, then I guess never mind. Just upload the SVG, reference the original PNG and leave it be. What do you authors want (it's Ok that it is not "done" yet)

[HVM]

Updated and error corrected version; Use only fonts installed on the Wikimedia server, and don't leave empty text boxes. Edited with text editor to find invisible to inkscape boxes!!! If missing text; correct it but only use sans-serif or other wiki-safe-font.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Raptor_Engine_Unofficial_Combustion_Scheme.svg

[huntster]

Thanks all for working on this and getting the proper image uploaded to Commons. I've gone ahead and deleted the PNG file since it was not authorised for upload and is thus a copyright violation.

[Lar]

Thanks all for working on this and getting the proper image uploaded to Commons. I've gone ahead and deleted the PNG file since it was not authorised for upload and is thus a copyright violation.

Did you change the two articles that used the PNG version.. someone did, awesome!

I wasn't sure if you were an admin on Commons or not when I left that message on your en:wp talk page... I think there is still one loose end, we need to get proof of permission into OTRS...

As of now it will be deleted in 7 days unless either HVM mails [email protected] with a statement that they are the author of the file or some other proof is provided.

(user pbroks13 added this template fairly recently per the file history at

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Raptor_Engine_Unofficial_Combustion_Scheme.svg&action=history )

[HVM]

I hereby affirm that I, HVM, am the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of the media work https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Raptor_Engine_Unofficial_Combustion_Scheme.svg.
I agree to publish the above-mentioned work under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International.
I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work, even in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.
I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.
I am aware that the copyright holder always retains ownership of the copyright as well as the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by the copyright holder.
I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

[HVM]

Here is tool for checking SVG
https://tools.wmflabs.org/svgcheck/

This end up to be bit more time consuming, than I would guess...

[Lar]

I hereby affirm that I, HVM, am the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of the media work https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Raptor_Engine_Unofficial_Combustion_Scheme.svg.
I agree to publish the above-mentioned work under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International.
I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work, even in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.
I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.
I am aware that the copyright holder always retains ownership of the copyright as well as the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by the copyright holder.
I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

Awesome! Did you mail that to OTRS (the, email I gave?)... we can try to find the OTRS ticket number (I used to have OTRS access, but doubt that I still do, haven't used it in years to search for tickets) and put it in the file information box. If not we can try a link to your post. (I did that and removed the no permission template as well as commented on your talk page and on the  help page discussion thread)

[livingjw]

Carbon fibre tank test failure was at 2.3bar.  There would have been significant safety margin in that number.  It is also absolutely key to getting tank mass down (and safety factors high) to keep necessary engine inlet pressure low.  So 3bar inlet pressure is almost certainly too high.  2.3bar with an assumed safety factor of 1.5 would be 1.5 bar design tank pressure.  Carbon fibre tank test data: 

1.5 bar? Don't know if I ever heard of a rocket tank pressure that low, especially feeding engines which don't appear to have boost pumps. Anybody?