On Wed, 4 Sep 2002 22:02:30 -0700, "kevin bollinger"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For your information, 20lb/in^2/min is a "standard design value" many
>engines used much higher loadings up to 200lb/in^2/min !!!! , The British
>Gamma engines used 50-60 lb/in^2/min.in their silver screen packs.
That's the rule of thumb I was looking for. Called catalyst loading
IIRC. I think Armadillo used a higher loading not too long ago, but
that memory is not reliable. We're using something around 20 in KISS,
I forget the exact value, and it's working well for us. Dan did a
good job on that engine.
A higher catalyst loading lets you make a skinnier engine for a given
thrust. This is important in rockets limited to monoprop performance.
You can beat it with clever cat pack design, but getting better raw
performance out of the catalyst is usually better. It's one of those
many tradeoffs.
-R
--
"Sutton is the beginning of wisdom -
but only the beginning."
-- Jeff Greason
_______________________________________________
ERPS-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.erps.org/mailman/listinfo/erps-list
