On Fri, 27 Sep 2002, Michael Wallis wrote:
> That sounds more like a design/practice issue relating to keeping your
> propellants separate. There should be no path for the kero into the
> peroxide.
Since the plumbing systems for the two propellants necessarily meet in the
chamber, there is inevitably a path back as far as the lowest oxidizer
valve(s). The question is whether procedural measures like purges can
keep that path from ever being followed. The way you debug such measures
is by having them fail.
> John and his team have built and tested their design without
> scrubbing any kero as far as I know.
Their one and only engine explosion, so far, involved kerosene in an area
(the catalyst pack) that was theoretically a peroxide-only part of the
system. It blew because they didn't scrub the kero. :-)
Henry Spencer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
ERPS-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.erps.org/mailman/listinfo/erps-list
