DOCSLIB.ORG

Propulsion Enhancement Contributions to the Performance of Space Launch Vehicles

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Old Dominion University ODU Digital Commons Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering Theses & Dissertations Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering Winter 2007 Propulsion Enhancement Contributions to the Performance of Space Launch Vehicles Russell H. Edwards Old Dominion University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/mae_etds Part of the Space Vehicles Commons, and the Structures and Materials Commons Recommended Citation Edwards, Russell H.. "Propulsion Enhancement Contributions to the Performance of Space Launch Vehicles" (2007). Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), Dissertation, Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering, Old Dominion University, DOI: 10.25777/d71k-vq88 https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/mae_etds/120 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering at ODU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ODU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PROPULSION ENHANCEMENT CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE PERFORMANCE OF SPACE LAUNCH VEHICLES by Russell H. Edwards M. S., Aerospace Engineering, 1975, University of Dayton B. S., Physics, 1961, Carson-Newman College Graduate, June 1981, National Defense University, Industrial College of the Armed Forces A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of Old Dominion University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY MECHANICAL ENGINEERING OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY December 2007 Approved by: Dr. Gregory Selby/Director) Dr. Brett Newman Dr. Billie Reed Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ABSTRACT PROPULSION ENHANCEMENT CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE PERFORMANCE OF SPACE LAUNCH VEHICLES Russell H. Edwards Old Dominion University Director: Dr. Gregory Selby A research effort has been undertaken to investigate critical aspects of launch vehicle performance as affected by variations in specific launch vehicle parameters. The major portion of the study involves liquid propellant systems. However, since solid propellant systems also play a role in today's launch systems, a representative solid-propellant launch vehicle has also been analyzed. The research undertaken determined that the payload capability of a space launch vehicle, or, conversely, the vehicle total liftoff mass, is highly sensitive to the manner in which the space launch vehicle is staged. The research has led to the development and programming of a model for determining optimum staging relationships for given mission requirements. The research then utilized this optimum staging algorithm as a means of computing the sensitivities of the vehicle’s payload and liftoff mass to variations in the vehicle’s key propulsion and related performance parameters. It has been seen that significant gains in payload weight can be achieved through modest to substantial changes in specific impulse and structure factor. As an example, for a four-stage solid propellant space launch vehicle, and using the above tables, a 33% gain in payload weight can be achieved by increasing specific impulse by only 5%. As a second example, for a two-stage liquid-propellant launch vehicle, and using the above tables, a 41% gain in payload weight can be achieved through an increase in specific impulse of 10%. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS My deepest gratitude is extended to the faculty and staff members of the Mechanical Engineering Department at Old Dominion University for their encouragement, guidance, and support during the course of my graduate studies. I would like to express my deep and sincere gratitude to my advisor Dr. Gregory Selby, Professor of Mechanical Engineering, for his guidance, valuable suggestions, patience, support, and encouragement. I hope that our cordial relationship in both personal and professional fields will flourish further in the future. I also wish to express my sincere thanks to Dr. Jen-Kuang Huang, Professor and Chair of Mechanical Engineering, for his assistance during the course of my graduate studies. In addition to Drs. Selby and Huang, I also wish to extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to committee member, Dr. Billie Reed, of the Engineering Management Department, for his help and encouragement. Special thanks go to Dr. Brett Newman, of the Aerospace Engineering Department, for his wise counsel and assistance throughout my studies at ODU. I would also like to express my sincere gratitude to Dr. Surendra Tiwari, Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Eminent Scholar, for his encouragement and continuing support throughout the course of my graduate studies. Thanks and appreciation go to Mr. Keegan Morrison and Mr. Ian Gullett of the Computer Science Department, Old Dominion University, for their assistance in programming into C++ computer language the optimization equations which I have derived and which appear in Chapter VII. Very special thanks go to Mrs. Diane Mitchell for her excellent assistance in putting the manuscript in final form and for her continuing excellent support to the Department of Mechanical Engineering. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. I also express my deepest appreciation and regards to my former associates with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and various agencies of the Department of Defense for the knowledge and experience gained through many years of rewarding employment with these organizations. Thanks also go to the national research and development laboratories and aerospace corporations through which I have performed research and liaison work over many years of rewarding employment. Thanks also go to the faculty and administration of the Industrial College of the Armed Forces of the National Defense University for the excellent one-year fellowship accomplished with this organization. I would also like to express the deepest appreciation to my dear wife Faye for her patience and continuing support during the course of graduate studies. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. V TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...................................................................................................... iii LIST OF TABLES..................................................................................................................vii LIST OF FIGURES...............................................................................................................viii LIST OF SYMBOLS..............................................................................................................iix Chapter I. INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................1 II. CHARACTERISTICS OF SEVERAL CURRENT LAUNCH VEHICLES.......7 2.1 Ariane ................................................................................................................. 7 2.2 United States Space Shuttle .............................................................................. 8 2.4 ZENIT................................................................................................................ 9 2.5 ENERGIA........................................................................................................ 10 III. LIQUID PROPELLANT CHARACTERISTICS AND PERFORMANCE.......12 3.1 Classification of Propellants ........................................................................... 13 3.2 Monopropellants...............................................................................................14 3.3 Bipropellants ....................................................................................................14 3.4 Cryogenic Propellants .....................................................................................15 3.5 Storable Liquid Propellants .............................................................................16 3.6 Additives for Liquid Rocket Propellants........................................................16 3.7 Mixture Ratio ...................................................................................................17 3.8 Desirable Features of Liquid Propellants ...................................................... 17 IV. COMBINED PROPULSION AND PROPELLANT RELATIONSHIPS.........29 V. SOLID-PROPELLANT SYSTEMS......................................................................37 VI. STRUCTURE AND VELOCITY MODELLING................................................41 VII. DEVELOPMENT OF COMPUTATIONAL ALGORITHM ........................... 46 VIII. DERIVATIONS AND ANALYSIS......................................................................52 IX. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION............................................................................ 59 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. vi X. CONCLUDING REMARKS.................................................................................65 REFERENCES........................................................................................................................67 SUPPLEMENTAL SOURCES CONSULTED...................................................................69 Appendices A. FLOWCHART FOR COMPUTER PROGRAM.................................................71
Recommended publications
  • Rocket Propulsion Fundamentals 2

    Rocket Propulsion Fundamentals 2

    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20140002716 2019-08-29T14:36:45+00:00Z Liquid Propulsion Systems – Evolution & Advancements Launch Vehicle Propulsion & Systems LPTC Liquid Propulsion Technical Committee Rick Ballard Liquid Engine Systems Lead SLS Liquid Engines Office NASA / MSFC All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted, unless for course participation and to a paid course student, in any form or by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of AIAA and/or course instructor. Contact the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Professional Development Program, Suite 500, 1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Reston, VA 20191-4344 Modules 1. Rocket Propulsion Fundamentals 2. LRE Applications 3. Liquid Propellants 4. Engine Power Cycles 5. Engine Components Module 1: Rocket Propulsion TOPICS Fundamentals • Thrust • Specific Impulse • Mixture Ratio • Isp vs. MR • Density vs. Isp • Propellant Mass vs. Volume Warning: Contents deal with math, • Area Ratio physics and thermodynamics. Be afraid…be very afraid… Terms A Area a Acceleration F Force (thrust) g Gravity constant (32.2 ft/sec2) I Impulse m Mass P Pressure Subscripts t Time a Ambient T Temperature c Chamber e Exit V Velocity o Initial state r Reaction ∆ Delta / Difference s Stagnation sp Specific ε Area Ratio t Throat or Total γ Ratio of specific heats Thrust (1/3) Rocket thrust can be explained using Newton’s 2nd and 3rd laws of motion. 2nd Law: a force applied to a body is equal to the mass of the body and its acceleration in the direction of the force.
  • Design, Analysis, and Simulation of Rocket Propulsion System By

    Design, Analysis, and Simulation of Rocket Propulsion System By

    Design, Analysis, and Simulation of Rocket Propulsion System By Sarah L. Kulhanek Submitted to the graduate degree program in Aerospace Engineering and the Graduate Faculty of the University of Kansas in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Science. ________________________________ Chairperson, Dr. Ray Taghavi ________________________________ Committee member, Dr. Saeed Farokhi ________________________________ Committee member, Dr. Shahriar Keshmiri Date Defended: 6/6/2012 The Thesis Committee for Sarah L. Kulhanek certifies that this is the approved version of the following thesis: Design, Analysis, and Simulation of Rocket Propulsion System __________________________________ Chairperson, Dr. Ray Taghavi, Date approved: 6/6/2012 ii Abstract This document details the functionality of a software program used to streamline a rocket propulsion system design, analysis and simulation effort. The program aids in unifying the nozzle, chamber and injector portions of a rocket propulsion system design effort quickly and efficiently using a streamlined graphical user interface (GUI). The program also allows for the selection of common nozzle profiles including 80% rao, conical, a user selected percentage bell, and a minimum length nozzle (MLN) using method of characteristics (MOC). Chamber dimensions, propellant selections, and injector selection between doublet or triplet allow for further refinement of the desired rocket system design. The program takes the available selections and specifications made by the user and outputs key design parameters calculated from the input variables. A 2-D graphical representation of the nozzle and/or chamber is plotted and coordinates of the plotted line are displayed. Additional design calculations are determined and displayed within the program such as specific impulse, exhaust velocity, propellant weight flow, fundamental instability frequencies, etc.
  • Atlas V Cutaway Poster

    Atlas V Cutaway Poster

    ATLAS V Since 2002, Atlas V rockets have delivered vital national security, science and exploration, and commercial missions for customers across the globe including the U.S. Air Force, the National Reconnaissance Oice and NASA. 225 ft The spacecraft is encapsulated in either a 5-m (17.8-ft) or a 4-m (13.8-ft) diameter payload fairing (PLF). The 4-m-diameter PLF is a bisector (two-piece shell) fairing consisting of aluminum skin/stringer construction with vertical split-line longerons. The Atlas V 400 series oers three payload fairing options: the large (LPF, shown at left), the extended (EPF) and the extra extended (XPF). The 5-m PLF is a sandwich composite structure made with a vented aluminum-honeycomb core and graphite-epoxy face sheets. The bisector (two-piece shell) PLF encapsulates both the Centaur upper stage and the spacecraft, which separates using a debris-free pyrotechnic actuating 200 ft system. Payload clearance and vehicle structural stability are enhanced by the all-aluminum forward load reactor (FLR), which centers the PLF around the Centaur upper stage and shares payload shear loading. The Atlas V 500 series oers 1 three payload fairing options: the short (shown at left), medium 18 and long. 1 1 The Centaur upper stage is 3.1 m (10 ft) in diameter and 12.7 m (41.6 ft) long. Its propellant tanks are constructed of pressure-stabilized, corrosion-resistant stainless steel. Centaur is a liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen-fueled vehicle. It uses a single RL10 engine producing 99.2 kN (22,300 lbf) of thrust.
  • Solid Propellant Rocket Engines - V.M

    Solid Propellant Rocket Engines - V.M

    THERMAL TO MECHANICAL ENERGY CONVERSION: ENGINES AND REQUIREMENTS – Vol. II - Solid Propellant Rocket Engines - V.M. Polyaev and V.A. Burkaltsev SOLID PROPELLANT ROCKET ENGINES V.M. Polyaev and V.A. Burkaltsev Department of Rocket engines, Bauman Moscow State Technical University, Russia. Keywords: Combustion chamber, solid propellant load, pressure, temperature, nozzle, thrust, control, ignition, cartridge, aspect ratio, regime. Contents 1. Introduction 2. Historical information 3. SPRE scheme and main units 4. SPRE operation 5. Parameter optimization, the approach and results 6. Transient regime 7. Service 8. Development prospects 9. Conclusions Acknowledgments Glossary Bibliography Biographical Sketches 1. Introduction Solid propellant rocket engines (SPRE) are called the direct reaction engines, in which chemical energy of the solid propellant being placed in the combustion chamber is transformed at first to thermal energy, and then to kinetic energy of the combustion products thrown away with high velocity in the environment. The momentum of combustion products discharging through the nozzle is equal to the impulse of reactive force being created by the engine. 2. Historical information First of rocketsUNESCO known to us were rockets – with EOLSS primitive powder rocket engines used in China near 5000 years ago for pleasure and military aims (so-called "fiery arrows", Figure 1). SAMPLE CHAPTERS The first rocket propellant was black smoky powder (potassium saltpetre with charcoal mixture). In Russia, powder rockets appeared in the beginning of XVII century. In 1680, Tsar Peter I founded "rocket institution" in Moscow for firework rockets making. In 1717 lighting signal rockets existed for 200 years without changes. In the beginning of XIX century, Englishman Kongrev improved the "fiery arrows" having been borrowed from Hindus.
  • A Tool for Preliminary Design of Rockets Aerospace Engineering

    A Tool for Preliminary Design of Rockets Aerospace Engineering

    A Tool for Preliminary Design of Rockets Diogo Marques Gaspar Thesis to obtain the Master of Science Degree in Aerospace Engineering Supervisor : Professor Paulo Jorge Soares Gil Examination Committee Chairperson: Professor Fernando José Parracho Lau Supervisor: Professor Paulo Jorge Soares Gil Members of the Committee: Professor João Manuel Gonçalves de Sousa Oliveira July 2014 ii Dedicated to my Mother iii iv Acknowledgments To my supervisor Professor Paulo Gil for the opportunity to work on this interesting subject and for all his support and patience. To my family, in particular to my parents and brothers for all the support and affection since ever. To my friends: from IST for all the companionship in all this years and from Coimbra for the fellowship since I remember. To my teammates for all the victories and good moments. v vi Resumo A unica´ forma que a humanidade ate´ agora conseguiu encontrar para explorar o espac¸o e´ atraves´ do uso de rockets, vulgarmente conhecidos como foguetoes,˜ responsaveis´ por transportar cargas da Terra para o Espac¸o. O principal objectivo no design de rockets e´ diminuir o peso na descolagem e maximizar o payload ratio i.e. aumentar a capacidade de carga util´ ao seu alcance. A latitude e o local de lanc¸amento, a orbita´ desejada, as caracter´ısticas de propulsao˜ e estruturais sao˜ constrangimentos ao projecto do foguetao.˜ As trajectorias´ dos foguetoes˜ estao˜ permanentemente a ser optimizadas, devido a necessidade de aumento da carga util´ transportada e reduc¸ao˜ do combust´ıvel consumido. E´ um processo utilizado nas fases iniciais do design de uma missao,˜ que afecta partes cruciais do planeamento, desde a concepc¸ao˜ do ve´ıculo ate´ aos seus objectivos globais.
  • Developing the Space Shuttle1

    Developing the Space Shuttle1

    ****EU4 Chap 2 (161-192) 4/2/01 12:45 PM Page 161 Chapter Two Developing the Space Shuttle1 by Ray A. Williamson Early Concepts of a Reusable Launch Vehicle Spaceflight advocates have long dreamed of building reusable launchers because they offer relative operational simplicity and the potential of significantly reduced costs com- pared to expendable vehicles. However, they are also technologically much more difficult to achieve. German experimenters were the first to examine seriously what developing a reusable launch vehicle (RLV) might require. During the 1920s and 1930s, they argued the advantages and disadvantages of space transportation, but were far from having the technology to realize their dreams. Austrian engineer Eugen M. Sänger, for example, envi- sioned a rocket-powered bomber that would be launched from a rocket sled in Germany at a staging velocity of Mach 1.5. It would burn rocket fuel to propel it to Mach 10, then skip across the upper reaches of the atmosphere and drop a bomb on New York City. The high-flying vehicle would then continue to skip across the top of the atmosphere to land again near its takeoff point. This idea was never picked up by the German air force, but Sänger revived a civilian version of it after the war. In 1963, he proposed a two-stage vehi- cle in which a large aircraft booster would accelerate to supersonic speeds, carrying a rel- atively small RLV to high altitudes, where it would be launched into low-Earth orbit (LEO).2 Although his idea was advocated by Eurospace, the industrial consortium formed to promote the development of space activities, it was not seriously pursued until the mid- 1980s, when Dornier and other German companies began to explore the concept, only to drop it later as too expensive and technically risky.3 As Sänger’s concepts clearly illustrated, technological developments from several dif- ferent disciplines must converge to make an RLV feasible.
  • Worldwide Equipment Guide

    Worldwide Equipment Guide

    WORLDWIDE EQUIPMENT GUIDE TRADOC DCSINT Threat Support Directorate DISTRIBUTION RESTRICTION: Approved for public release; distribution unlimited. Worldwide Equipment Guide Sep 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Page Memorandum, 24 Sep 2001 ...................................... *i V-150................................................................. 2-12 Introduction ............................................................ *vii VTT-323 ......................................................... 2-12.1 Table: Units of Measure........................................... ix WZ 551........................................................... 2-12.2 Errata Notes................................................................ x YW 531A/531C/Type 63 Vehicle Series........... 2-13 Supplement Page Changes.................................... *xiii YW 531H/Type 85 Vehicle Series ................... 2-14 1. INFANTRY WEAPONS ................................... 1-1 Infantry Fighting Vehicles AMX-10P IFV................................................... 2-15 Small Arms BMD-1 Airborne Fighting Vehicle.................... 2-17 AK-74 5.45-mm Assault Rifle ............................. 1-3 BMD-3 Airborne Fighting Vehicle.................... 2-19 RPK-74 5.45-mm Light Machinegun................... 1-4 BMP-1 IFV..................................................... 2-20.1 AK-47 7.62-mm Assault Rifle .......................... 1-4.1 BMP-1P IFV...................................................... 2-21 Sniper Rifles.....................................................
  • Increasing Launch Rate and Payload Capabilities

    Increasing Launch Rate and Payload Capabilities

    Aerial Launch Vehicles: Increasing Launch Rate and Payload Capabilities Yves Tscheuschner1 and Alec B. Devereaux2 University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado Two of man's greatest achievements have been the first flight at Kitty Hawk and pushing into the final frontier that is space. Air launch systems aim to combine these great achievements into a revolutionary way to deliver satellites, cargo and eventually people into space. Launching from an aircraft has many advantages, including the ability to launch at any inclination and from above bad weather, which could delay ground launches. While many concepts for launching rockets from an airplane have been developed, very few have made it past the drawing board. Only the Pegasus and, to a lesser extent, SpaceShipOne have truly shown the feasibility of such a system. However, a recent push for rapid, small payload to orbit launches by the military and a general need for cheaper, heavy lift options are leading to an increasing interest in air launch methods. In order for the efficiency and flexibility of the system to be realized, however, additional funding and research are necessary. Nomenclature ALASA = airborne launch assist space access ALS = air launch system DARPA = defense advanced research project agency LEO = low Earth orbit LOX = liquid oxygen RP-1 = rocket propellant 1 MAKS = Russian air launch system MECO = main engine cutoff SS1 = space ship one SS2 = space ship two I. Introduction W hat typically comes to mind when considering launching people or satellites to space are the towering rocket poised on the launch pad. These images are engraved in the minds of both the public and scientists alike.
  • Lockheed-Martin OV-200 Class Space Shuttle (2011 –2138)

    Lockheed-Martin OV-200 Class Space Shuttle (2011 –2138)

    - 1 - Original texts and document concept copyright © 2007 by Richard E. Mandel STAR TREK, its on-screen derivatives, and all associated materials are the property of Paramount Pictures Corporation. Multiple references in this document are given under the terms of fair use with regard to international copyright and trademark law. This is a scholarly reference work intended to explain the background and historical aspects of STAR TREK and its spacecraft technology and is not sponsored, approved, or authorized by Paramount Pictures and its affiliated licensees. All visual materials included herein is protected by either implied or statutory copyright and are reproduced either with the permission of the copyright holder or under the terms of fair use as defined under current international copyright law. All visual materials used in this work without clearance were obtained from public sources through public means and were believed to be in the public domain or available for inclusion via the fair use doctrine at the time of printing. Cover art composited from the work of Andrew J. Hodges (DY-100) and Industrial Light and Magic (Excelsior) This work is dedicated to Geoffery Mandel, who started it for all of us. Memory Alpha and SFHQ/Mastercom cataloging data: UFP/SFD DTA HR:217622 - 2 - Gfefsbujpo!Tqbdfgmjhiu!Dispopmphz! First History (Prime Two) Edition Modified Okuda Timeline preview build 20070915 by Richard E. Mandel - 3 - Table of Contents Notes to self: no more than five major starships per section, ONLY canon/semi-canon/licensed/“reality”
  • Round Trip to Orbit: Human Spaceflight Alternatives

    Round Trip to Orbit: Human Spaceflight Alternatives

    Round Trip to Orbit: Human Spaceflight Alternatives August 1989 NTIS order #PB89-224661 Recommended Citation: U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, Round Trip to Orbit: Human Spaceflight Alternatives Special Report, OTA-ISC-419 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, August 1989). Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 89-600744 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402-9325 (order form can be found in the back of this special report) Foreword In the 20 years since the first Apollo moon landing, the Nation has moved well beyond the Saturn 5 expendable launch vehicle that put men on the moon. First launched in 1981, the Space Shuttle, the world’s first partially reusable launch system, has made possible an array of space achievements, including the recovery and repair of ailing satellites, and shirtsleeve research in Spacelab. However, the tragic loss of the orbiter Challenger and its crew three and a half years ago reminded us that space travel also carries with it a high element of risk-both to spacecraft and to people. Continued human exploration and exploitation of space will depend on a fleet of versatile and reliable launch vehicles. As this special report points out, the United States can look forward to continued improvements in safety, reliability, and performance of the Shuttle system. Yet, early in the next century, the Nation will need a replacement for the Shuttle. To prepare for that eventuality, NASA and the Air Force have begun to explore the potential for advanced launch systems, such as the Advanced Manned Launch System and the National Aerospace Plane, which could revolutionize human access to space.
  • Part 2 Almaz, Salyut, And

    Part 2 Almaz, Salyut, And

    Part 2 Almaz/Salyut/Mir largely concerned with assembly in 12, 1964, Chelomei called upon his Part 2 Earth orbit of a vehicle for circumlu- staff to develop a military station for Almaz, Salyut, nar flight, but also described a small two to three cosmonauts, with a station made up of independently design life of 1 to 2 years. They and Mir launched modules. Three cosmo- designed an integrated system: a nauts were to reach the station single-launch space station dubbed aboard a manned transport spacecraft Almaz (“diamond”) and a Transport called Siber (or Sever) (“north”), Logistics Spacecraft (Russian 2.1 Overview shown in figure 2-2. They would acronym TKS) for reaching it (see live in a habitation module and section 3.3). Chelomei’s three-stage Figure 2-1 is a space station family observe Earth from a “science- Proton booster would launch them tree depicting the evolutionary package” module. Korolev’s Vostok both. Almaz was to be equipped relationships described in this rocket (a converted ICBM) was with a crew capsule, radar remote- section. tapped to launch both Siber and the sensing apparatus for imaging the station modules. In 1965, Korolev Earth’s surface, cameras, two reentry 2.1.1 Early Concepts (1903, proposed a 90-ton space station to be capsules for returning data to Earth, 1962) launched by the N-1 rocket. It was and an antiaircraft cannon to defend to have had a docking module with against American attack.5 An ports for four Soyuz spacecraft.2, 3 interdepartmental commission The space station concept is very old approved the system in 1967.
  • Lesson 2: YOU're LAUNCHING a ROCKET!

    Lesson 2: YOU're LAUNCHING a ROCKET!

    Adventures in Aerospace: Lesson 2 Volunteer’s Guide Key to Curriculum Formatting: ► Volunteer Directions ■ Volunteer Notes ♦ Volunteer-led Classroom Experiments Lesson 2: YOU’RE LAUNCHING A ROCKET! ► Begin the presentation by telling the class that this is “Lesson 2: You’re Launching a Rocket!” If this is your second visit, reintroduce yourself and the program. Briefly review key concepts from the first lesson, “You’re Piloting a Plane!” If this is your first visit, here is a suggested personal introduction: “Hello, my name is _____________, and I am a _________________ (position title) at Aerojet. I or another Aerojet volunteer will be visiting your class once over the next few months to speak to you about space exploration and space travel. We will learn about the basics of aerodynamics, rocket propulsion, and spaceflight to the space station, the moon, and future missions to Mars!” ► Answer any questions left over from the previous visit. MATERIALS NEEDED • AiA Multimedia Presentation (AMP) • DVD-ROM Page 1 of 11 Adventures in Aerospace: Lesson 2 Volunteer’s Guide • TV or projection screen • Handouts • Index cards ► See lesson to assess total equipment needs. LESSON OUTLINE Introduction Lesson Concepts Vocabulary Rockets vs. Airplanes Newton’s Laws • First Law • Second Law • Third Law What Type of Rocket Are You Launching? • Types of Engines Comparing and Contrasting Liquid Engines and Solid Motors Other Types of Rocket Engines Applying What We’ve Learned Experiment INTRODUCTION Rocket launches have mesmerized audiences, often entire nations, for centuries. What kind of power does it take to propel spacecraft out of the atmosphere and into the vacuum of space? This unit introduces you to rocket propulsion systems.