[bamarama]

You are quite right. Unfortunately, the setup is an optically accessible rocket engine running GH2/GO2 flames at 600 and 800 psi that cost $50,000 in total, not considering propellant feed and control systems. I don't think NASA wants to spring for a couple more. And the thing runs beautifully. It's just that when you're dealing with 3000+ K flames at 6 MPa, repeatedly cycled on and off dozens of times a day, with windows inches from the flame, shiate happens.

Rule 1. Rocket engines should be run outside, not indoors.
Rule 2. Testing is just as effective with the rocket strapped onto a Katana, as long as the data-acquisition equipment is attached as well. SweetLou is our resident test pilot for such endeavors (flames, power), but I will stand in if necessary.
Rule 3. Everything should be digitally filmed at high speed, so the operations can be reviewed in peaceful settings later (such as on the net, where we're all laughing at Lou going across an open field at 300 kph on a Kat with flames shooting out his butt).

Actually, it sounds quite cool.
You igniting the mixture with laser ablation or with traditional methods?
You working at either TF 116 or E-3 with this set-up?

There are some technical sources of similar test results available if you need them, although the most recent NASA-sponsored study I know of is from '99 and only went to 300 psi...

Cheers
=-= The CyberPoet

That would be quite awesome, although toting the bottles along with you would be quite a challenge. I ignite it with 10 kV spark, copper leads. We are actually doing laser diagnostics of the flame, so there wasn't an available laser to do this with. We did play around with it for a week, but found that due to high power required of the laser and the fouling of the window, we could only get about 5 runs before the laser ate a pit on the inside surface of the window, which was an excellent place for stress concentration. Needless to say we had flames shooting out at us the next run. And honestly, I dunno what you are referring to with TF 116 or E-3. Maybe you could explain it to me. And I'm set on literature at this point. I've read and reviewed enough white paper over the past 2 years to stock the bathroom at a mexican restaurant for years.

[The CyberPoet]

And honestly, I dunno what you are referring to with TF 116 or E-3. Maybe you could explain it to me.

Two of the NASA test rig places here in the southeast US set up to actually take a rocket motor, strap it down, vent the exhaust, fully facilities to test it, while providing the right fuel on demand from on-site storage (as verses to having to feed it from temporary bottles). TF stands for Test Facility (gee, NASA using an acronym? Who'd imagine), thus it's NASA Test Facility #116. The E3 is a specific test rig also appropriate for that kind of testing, located separately from TF116.

Cheers,
=-= The CyberPoet

[bamarama]

And honestly, I dunno what you are referring to with TF 116 or E-3. Maybe you could explain it to me.

Two of the NASA test rig places here in the southeast US set up to actually take a rocket motor, strap it down, vent the exhaust, fully facilities to test it, while providing the right fuel on demand from on-site storage (as verses to having to feed it from temporary bottles). TF stands for Test Facility (gee, NASA using an acronym? Who'd imagine), thus it's NASA Test Facility #116. The E3 is a specific test rig also appropriate for that kind of testing, located separately from TF116.

Cheers,
=-= The CyberPoet

ah, ok, yeah i'm not too familiar with that. we do the testing in house in our combustion lab. run off of arrays of 2600 psi bottles. we also have a scramjet engine in the lab, which is noisier than the rocket engine. our testing is essentially to get data for CFD model validation. we're working with a CFD team from GaTech. We've got much more data than they can process at the moment, with the exception of the optical species concentration measurements, which is more difficult to implement than my advisor thought it would be. Essentially I've already done the stuff that I enjoy (design, computer model validation, build, troubleshoot to run), and all's that is left is mindless tests for data and getting the optical diagnostic techniques to work (which I could care less about), hence me leaving with a MS instead of sticking around for a PhD, which would require me to do the optical stuff. The job I'm taking in Huntsville is basically the 4 steps that I enjoy, over and over again, on different projects.