I've seen that somewhere before, but can't quite remember where.
Posted on 01/18/2006 5:29:02 PM PST by KevinDavis
A new design for an ion engine promises up to 10 times the fuel-efficiency of existing electric propulsion engines, according to tests by the European Space Agency. The new thruster could be used to propel craft into interstellar space, or to power a crewed mission to Mars, ESA says.
Ion engines work by using an electric field to accelerate a beam of positively charged particles – ions – away from the spacecraft, thereby providing propulsion. Existing models, such as the engine used in ESA’s Moon mission, SMART-1, extract the ions from a reservoir and expel them in a single process.
(Excerpt) Read more at newscientistspace.com ...
I've seen that somewhere before, but can't quite remember where.
What could you do if you employed gravity assists around Jupiter with the use of an ion engine?
They just have to make sure the ship touches a doorknob every couple million miles.
It is a pretty blue hue in the blackness of space.
This stuff is always ten years away. I won't hold my breath.
It deodorizes outer space.
Six weeks! No way, dude! Do you have a link on that?
That is true... Instead of 6 months to Mars.. It would be shorter...
What G-forces would be generated on such a trip?
Put one in Earth orbit to clean up the atmosphere!
Actually, almost none in terms of G-forces. Remember, the acceleration from an ion rocket is not one big initial acceleration, but a slow constant acceleration over weeks at a time.
Gosh, I wish I were smarter,,,lol,,,thanks for the ping
Why don't they combine an ion engine with the nuke capability of spacecraft that have plutonium generators? The mission to Pluto would be perfect for it!
Ping
Never mind Pluto, I prefer Alpha Centauri...
Correct.
Well, except that the thrust is tiny. Don't look for ion engines to lift a vehicle off the surface of the earth into outer space.
Because the RTG generators doesn't generate enough power for the ion engine to work properly. You need a real nuclear reactor so enough ions can be generated for a larger spacecraft on a long flight.
You don't generate more 'time', you generate more thrust with the same amount of fuel. A jet engine keeps an aircraft aloft by simply expanding the air by 15% due to the heat created by combustion. Cold air is sucked into the jet engine, jet fuel is burned, and hot air is exhausted. The hot air is ~15% greater in volume, due to the increase in temperature.
Hence, the goal in jet fuel is to create a slow burning (so it heats the air, instead of simply exploding) fuel that burns very hot.
Depending upon the fuel used, the ionization may increase an atom's diameter by a large amount (Hydrogen) or a small amount (kerosene). You are only moving the outter electron orbits up a level or two. All you have to do is run some current through some conductors on the nozzle.
Naturally, some exotic fuels will have very low atomic weight fuels, such that the benefits are larger. Increasing the diameter of Carbon (for example) would produce less than a 1% increase in the atom's size; where as elements with very small atomic masses would increase more.
Remember High School Chemistry/Physics. There are 7 Electron orbits, each with a series of sub-orbits (S, P, D and F). Hydrogen has 1 electron, which is normally at rest in the 1S shell. By exciting the Hydrogen, the electron bumps from the 1S to the 1P shell. Thus, the Hydrogen atom is now LARGER, in that the 1P shell is further away from the nucleas. This excitation can be accomplished by heat, or imparting energy through a magnetic field. Thus, as you get to larger and more complex atoms, the size increase you get from ionizing them is not as significant.
Some of the early ionization engines consisted simply of Hydrogen in a pressurized container (think spray bottle). This spray was vented out a nozzle. In space, it doesn't require a whole lot of thrust to move stuff around; they found that by (temporarily) routing the batteries through windings on the nozzle; the Hydrogen ionized, and they got significantly more thrust from the same amount of Hydrogen.
Obviously, things have moved forward quite a bit in the past 25+ years.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.