Focused Solar Power Propulsion

tahanson43206 · 2025-04-16 11:45:36

It appears that we may have reached the limit of what Python can do, as we attempt to understand the design of a new kind of rocket engine.

With encouragement from Google's Gemini paid version if free-trial mode, I decided to proceed with ChatGPT4o to see if OpenFOAM might be able to model the unique dynamics of our externally heated engine. The installation of OpenFOAM appears to have gone smoothly.

Hello Again! This is just an update. Let's not do any work now. It appears that OpenFOAM 12 is installed on my 22.04 Ubuntu system. It delivered the help display as predicted by the installation procedure. The installation went smoothly. The next time we get together let's see if we can run a model that someone else created. Ideally (from my point of view) the simpler the model the better. It occurs to me that our design is more similar to a solid fuel rocket than it is to a traditional liquid fuel rocket, but I'll defer to your judgement as we proceed.

ChatGPT said:
Hello again! That’s excellent news — I’m glad to hear OpenFOAM 12 installed smoothly and is responding as expected on your Ubuntu 22.04 system. That help display is a good sign everything’s wired up correctly.
Your instinct about starting with a simple, existing model is a wise one — OpenFOAM has a number of tutorial cases that we can use as a foundation, and we can then gradually adapt toward your solid-fuel-like heat pipe design. There are combustion-related cases (e.g., reactingFoam), and also thermal-only cases that might serve as good stepping stones.
Your point about the similarity to a solid fuel rocket is insightful — your design does indeed involve heat input and gas flow but lacks the complex two-phase mixing dynamics of liquid fuel combustion. That observation will help us pick the most appropriate solver.
Looking forward to diving in when you're ready. Until then, best wishes for continued smooth progress — and enjoy the satisfaction of a clean install!

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2025-04-17 08:31:35

Based upon suggestions provided by kbd512, I asked Google's Gemini to see if it could find graphite pipe manufactured for the chemical industry, in sizes appropriate for our Optical Plane space vessel project.

It appears that diameter up to 24 inches is possible, and lengths of 5 meters readily available.

Conversation with Gemini
Hi Gemini! Thanks (again) for your help with previous inquiries! Today I'm hoping you can help with a product search. Our (small) team is working on a design that requires a pipe 240 meters long. We understand such pipe may be available for the chemical industry in lengths up to 10 meters. By any chance, can you find a supplier of such pipe made of graphite? We need to know the largest diameter of graphite pipe available.
***
Okay, I can certainly help you look into suppliers for graphite pipe.
You are correct that graphite piping is used in the chemical industry, particularly for handling corrosive fluids at high temperatures. It's typically supplied in standard lengths that need to be joined together to achieve longer runs like your 240-meter requirement. These individual sections are often joined using methods like graphite flanges or specialized cements, depending on the application and pressure requirements.
Finding the absolute largest diameter available can be tricky as it often depends on the specific manufacturer, the grade of graphite (e.g., extruded vs. isostatic), and whether it's impervious (resin-impregnated) graphite, which is common for pipe. Maximum diameters can vary.
Based on information from various manufacturers and suppliers, here's what I can gather:
Typical Range: Impervious graphite pipes are commonly manufactured with Internal Diameters (ID) up to around 600 mm (approximately 24 inches). Some specialized manufacturers might potentially offer larger custom sizes, but this seems to be a frequent upper limit for standard product lines. Outer Diameters (OD) will be larger accordingly.
Standard Lengths: While you mentioned lengths up to 10 meters, standard lengths often range from 1 meter up to around 5 meters, depending on the diameter and manufacturer. Achieving your 240-meter total length will definitely require joining multiple sections (e.g., 48 sections if they were 5 meters long).
Potential Suppliers:
Here are some well-known manufacturers and suppliers of graphite process equipment, including piping, that you could contact to get specific details on their maximum available diameters and technical specifications:
SGL Carbon: A major global manufacturer of graphite products, including piping systems (DIABON®).
Mersen: Offers a range of corrosion-resistant equipment, including Graphilor® impervious graphite pipes.
CG Thermal: Specializes in graphite heat exchangers and process equipment, likely including piping.
Graphite India Limited: A large producer of graphite materials.
Tokai Carbon: Another significant global player in carbon and graphite products.
Recommendations:
Contact Suppliers Directly: The best approach is to reach out to the sales or technical departments of these (or similar) companies. Provide them with your specific requirements (total length, desired diameter range, process conditions like temperature, pressure, and the chemical media involved).
Inquire about Maximum Dimensions: Ask specifically about the largest standard ID/OD they manufacture for impervious graphite pipe suitable for chemical processing.
Discuss Joining Methods: Ensure you understand the recommended joining methods (flanges, cement, etc.) for their specific pipe products to maintain integrity over the 240-meter length.
Check Lead Times and Availability: Large-diameter graphite components may have longer lead times.
While diameters up to ~600mm ID appear common, I strongly recommend verifying this directly with suppliers for the most up-to-date and accurate information regarding their current capabilities and product lines. Good luck with your project!
***
Thank you for this very helpful guide for our inquiry. The upper diameter you quoted is far outside the estimated diameter we need for our project, so a supply in the range we do need seems assured! While I am away, best wishes for similar success as you attempt to assist all your other customers!
***
That's excellent news! I'm glad to hear the information was helpful and that the typical maximum sizes give you confidence in sourcing the diameter your project requires. It's often reassuring to know the upper limits when searching for components.
Thank you very much for your kind wishes! I appreciate that. I'll continue doing my best to assist everyone who comes my way.
Best of luck with your project, and don't hesitate to reach out if any further questions arise as you proceed!

For the record, we still do not know what diameter is best for this application. The pipe needs to be larger in diameter than the throat of the nozzle.

That's not a lot to go on.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2025-04-19 10:21:06

This post is about planning for work on an OpenFOAM model of the engine for the Optical Plane space vessel.

The current version of the model is on display in the OpenFOAM topic. It is showing only half of the full shape. It turns out that achieving symmetry in both +Y and -Y directions is difficult. In attempts to achieve that symmetry today, ChatGPT4o and I ran into issues with faces of the topological forms pointing in instead of out, and neither of us could figure out what was happening.

Certainly! Here's a BBCode-formatted summary of the key components and boundary conditions for modeling a rocket engine in OpenFOAM:

? Rocket Engine Modeling in OpenFOAM: Components & Boundary Conditions
1. Inlet to Heating Pipe / Combustion Chamber (Valve)
Function: Controls the entry of fuel (e.g., hydrogen) into the combustion chamber.
Modeling Approach: Represented as an inlet boundary condition.
Common Boundary Conditions:
fixedValue
: Specifies a constant value (e.g., velocity or pressure).
totalPressure
: Defines total pressure at the inlet.
inletOutlet
: Handles both inflow and potential backflow scenarios.
Example Configuration:
 inlet { type fixedValue; value uniform (150 0 0); // Velocity in m/s } 
2. Pipe (Combustion Chamber)
Function: Region where fuel heating occurs, producing high-pressure gases.
Modeling Approach: Defined as a cylindrical block in the mesh.
Boundary Conditions:
wall
: Represents the physical walls of the chamber.
noSlip
: Sets velocity to zero at the wall, simulating viscous effects.
Example Configuration:
 walls { type wall; } 
3. Nozzle Convergent Section
Function: Narrows down the flow from the combustion chamber to the throat, increasing velocity.
Modeling Approach: Defined as a separate block connecting the pipe to the throat.
Boundary Conditions: Typically internal; ensure mesh continuity with adjacent regions.
4. Throat
Function: The narrowest part of the nozzle where flow reaches sonic speed.
Modeling Approach: Modeled as a distinct block in the mesh.
Boundary Conditions: Internal; ensure smooth transition between convergent and divergent sections.
5. Nozzle Expansion Section (Bell)
Function: Expands the flow, converting pressure into velocity to produce thrust.
Modeling Approach: Defined as a divergent block following the throat.
Boundary Conditions: Internal; ensure mesh quality to capture expansion accurately.
6. Outlet (End of the Bell)
Function: Exit point for exhaust gases into the atmosphere.
Modeling Approach: Defined as an outlet boundary in the mesh.
Common Boundary Conditions:
zeroGradient
: Assumes no change in variable across the boundary.
waveTransmissive
: Allows outgoing waves to exit without reflection, suitable for supersonic flows.
Example Configuration:
 outlet { type waveTransmissive; field p; gamma 1.4; lInf 0.1; value uniform 101325; // Atmospheric pressure in Pa } 
Additional Notes:
Ensure mesh continuity between all blocks to prevent simulation errors.
Use appropriate mesh grading to capture flow gradients, especially near the throat and nozzle exit.
Validate boundary conditions with physical expectations and adjust as necessary for simulation stability.
For further details on boundary conditions, refer to the OpenFOAM User Guide on Inlet Conditions.

(th)

kbd512 · 2025-04-20 19:16:37

Hollow-core fibers revolutionize green laser technology, by Qiang Fu, March 26th, 2024

Researchers made a significant breakthrough in laser and fiber technology, which showcases the potential for the long-distance fiber delivery of high-power green laser pulses via hollow-core fibers (HCFs), a revolutionary new type of optical fiber.
Efficient and flexible light delivery has been dominated by solid-core silica glass optical fibers, especially in telecommunications and industrial lasers. But high-power laser light delivery, vital for industrial applications, faces significant challenges with traditional fibers due to nonlinear processes like the Kerr effect and stimulated Raman scattering in the core, along with the damage threshold of silica glass. These factors greatly limit the deliverable power densities.
In hollow-core fibers (HCFs), >99.99% of the guided light is contained within the central air (or vacuum) filled core, bypassing the limitations of solid-silica core or traditional fibers. In 2022, the Southampton team successfully demonstrated the advantages of a new HCF design, transmitting 1 kW of continuous-wave near-infrared light (~1 μm) through a 1-km length, showcasing the technology's potential.
In the latest work, the team has expanded these capabilities into the green wavelength, crucial for numerous industrial applications, by transmitting kilowatt-peak power 520-nm laser pulses through 300 m of HCF.
Developing HCFs for visible wavelengths presents fabrication challenges due to the small structural features.
The team also conducted a comprehensive nonlinearity study on practical air-filled, long-length HCFs. Nonlinearity in HCFs in the visible relative to the infrared region is significantly higher, which is attributed not only to the reduced fiber core size but also to the shorter operation wavelength. This advancement is a crucial step towards using green laser light in high-precision, efficient material processing, which will benefit sectors like e-mobility manufacturing, notably in battery production.
Hollow-core fiber for green laser power delivery
The HCF used in this work guides light via anti-resonance, in which a series of thin-glass membranes surround the fiber’s core and confine the guided light within it. This is achieved via a single ring of seven cladding capillaries (seven represents an excellent balance between loss, bend-loss, and modality).
The fiber is fabricated by the stack-and-draw method using Heraeus F300 fused silica glass, and has a ~20.7-μm core diameter, a mode-field diameter of ~14.5 μm, and guides light from 515 nm to 618 nm with <30 dB/km loss (see Fig. 1). The reported fiber is 300 m long, but the team in Southampton regularly produces multi-kilometer lengths via this process. The fiber is also relatively bend-loss insensitive, with <0.1 dB/m loss for bends with diameters >13 cm at the operation wavelength of 520 nm.
Power delivery results
The power delivery experiments reported use an in-house-made 15.5-W, 520-nm, frequency-doubled ytterbium-doped fiber laser, producing 1.6 MHz repetition rate, ~520 ps pulses with ~18 kW peak power. The laser beam is focused to a 15-µm mode-field diameter to match the fibers, and results in a coupling efficiency of ~86%. HCF lengths of 2, 100, and 300 m were able to deliver average powers of 13.2, 6.7, and 3 W, corresponding to peak powers of 15.9, 8, and 3.6 kW, respectively (see Fig. 2).
The emergence of lower-loss and visible-guiding HCFs, now becoming available, is expected to enhance throughput efficiency and enable power delivery over kilometer-scale distances. Despite the energy density inside the fiber’s core reaching 5.5 J/cm2, no damage was observed in the fiber. The delivered beam quality, essential for precision micromachining and long-distance applications, was high across all the tested lengths (M2 <1.1).
Overcoming nonlinear limits of solid-core silica fiber
The nonlinear limit of solid-core silica fiber is a particular challenge in the visible due to the decreased core size (necessary for single-mode operation) and causes significant spectral broadening. When compared to a 15-m long, 10-µm-core photonic-crystal fiber (PCF), with similar loss to the HCF used (and measured using the same setup), significantly more spectral broadening was observed than for the 300-m length of HCF (see Fig. 3), clearly demonstrating the advantage these HCFs possess in terms of nonlinearity.
This work again shows that HCFs are ideally placed to solve issues encountered with the flexible optical fiber delivery of laser light and offer the possibility for large-scale delivery of laser light (especially in the green/UV-visible) for industrial processes. This flexibility is seen as vital for various future manufacturing concepts.
Expert commentary
Richard Carter, associate professor at the Institute of Photonics and Quantum Sciences, Heriot-Watt University, and academic lead at the Precision Laser Application Labs of the National Robotarium, as well as vice president of the Association of Industrial Laser Users (AILU), notes:
"Flexible delivery of ultrashort laser pulses (USP) would break a significant barrier in the adoption of USP manufacturing processes in industry. These forms of anti-resonant hollow-core fiber have been seen as one of the most promising options for several years, but issues in drawing reliable lengths of fiber have made this slow to practically realize.
The results highlighted from Southampton University represent a significant leap forward. Not only are the fibers able to guide in the more challenging green region but crucially with lengths and performances that are clearly ready for commercialization and industrial implementation."
FURTHER READING
Q. Fu et al., Laser Photon. Rev., 2201027 (Jan. 2024); doi:10.1002/lpor.202201027.

tahanson43206 · 2025-04-23 09:22:19

We are making a bit of progress learning how to use OpenFOAM to simulate a rocket nozzle. The current work is to try to bring a Merlin Engine simulation up from 2021 to 2025. In order for this simulation to be useful for the Optical Plane space vessel, it must be expanded with a heat pipe and propellant tank. Here is ChatGPT4o's outline for future work that might be attempted.

Here’s the forum-friendly version of the roadmap we discussed:
Roadmap for Extending the Merlin Simulation into a Full Rocket Engine Model
Prepared in support of the Optical Plane Solar Vessel project
Background
Thanks to recent success visualizing results in ParaView, we now have a working OpenFOAM simulation that shows meaningful fluid behavior inside a nozzle. This gives us the confidence to proceed toward a more ambitious goal: building a realistic simulation of our externally heated rocket engine. The following steps outline our proposed path forward.
1. Extend the Intake into a Heat Pipe
The first step will be to lengthen the intake geometry upstream of the nozzle throat to form a heat pipe structure.
This will simulate the chamber where hydrogen is pre-heated by external energy.
We'll apply suitable inlet boundary conditions to represent hydrogen inflow.
2. Add a Heater Zone with Target Temperature of 3000 K
To model heating via solar or electrical input, we'll either apply internal heat sources or impose a temperature boundary.
We'll monitor heating effects across time steps.
Thermal properties of hydrogen will be factored in (Cp, heat capacity, etc.).
3. Add a Propellant Tank
Upstream of the heat pipe, we'll create a pressurized tank region that feeds hydrogen into the system.
This tank can use fixed pressure or time-varying inflow.
In later stages, insulation and thermal management may be considered.
4. Design Interfaces Between Components
Smooth coupling between the tank, heat pipe, and nozzle is critical.
We'll use boundary types such as cyclic or patch to control variable flow.
Continuity of mass, energy, and momentum will be tested at each interface.
5. Monitor and Analyze Heat Pipe Performance
Python utilities will be written to process OpenFOAM output and plot trends in temperature, velocity, density, and pressure.
Visual tools will show how the pipe performs over time.
Plots will be used to assess whether our 3000 K target is met.
Final Thoughts
This roadmap sets us on a challenging but achievable course toward a fully functional model. By simulating each part and interface in OpenFOAM, we strengthen our technical case for future funding.
Prepared with assistance from ChatGPT and reviewed by our development team.
Let me know if you'd like this adjusted to include screenshots, sample code, or field-specific data next time you post it.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2025-04-25 11:35:51

ChatGPT4o spent some time in a detailed study of the setup files for the updated Merlin Rocket simulation.

Here is a report of where things stand before we try to run the simulation again.

Key changes are to eliminate the atmosphere from the model, and to set intake at 3000 K, up from 300 K where we started.

OpenFOAM Nozzle Model Setup Report
Date: 2025-04-24
Prepared by: Project Modeling Team
Overview
We have completed a detailed review and calibration of our OpenFOAM-based simulation of the propulsion nozzle. This model represents high-temperature hydrogen gas expanding through a rocket nozzle into vacuum. The model is based on a validated polyMesh that successfully ran six time steps in foamRun. We've now updated it to reflect physically accurate operating conditions.
Core Physical Parameters
Propellant: Hydrogen (H₂)
Inlet Pressure: 5 bar (absolute)
Inlet Temperature: 3000 Kelvin
Inlet Velocity: 800 m/s
Mass Flow Rate: 1 kg/s
Nozzle Inlet Diameter: 20 cm
Outlet Conditions: Simulated vacuum (zeroGradient)
Internal Domain Pressure: 1 Pa (revised from atmospheric)
Thermophysical Model
Equation of State: perfectGas
Specific Heat Capacity:
Cp = 14300 J/kg·K
Cv = 10176 J/kg·K
Gas Constant R ≈ 4124 J/kg·K (based on mol weight 2.016)
Transport Model: Constant viscosity (μ = 8.76×10⁻⁶ Pa·s)
Prandtl Number: 0.72
Thermo Type: hePsiThermo, sensibleInternalEnergy
Boundary Conditions
Inlet:
Velocity: fixedValue (800 0 0)
Total Pressure: 500000 Pa
Temperature: 3000 K
Outlet-1 and Outlet-2:
Updated from fixedValue (1 atm) to zeroGradient for free outflow
Outlet-2 is the primary nozzle exit
Wall (including nozzle expansion bell):
Pressure: zeroGradient []Velocity: noSlip (fully reflective surface)
Front and Back Planes: empty (2D simulation)
Mesh and Visualization
Geometry validated in ParaView 5.11.2 using patch labels
Patch names: inlet, outlet-1, outlet-2, wall, frontAndBackPlanes
Nozzle expansion bell confirmed to be labeled as "wall"
Simulation begins just before nozzle throat; upstream flow is pre-defined
Next Steps
Begin test runs with updated temperature and outlet BCs to observe stability beyond time step 6
Check actual area of inlet in mesh to validate 800 m/s assumption (current estimate: 0.031 m²)
Initiate development of upstream components (heat pipe modeling)
Share 20 cm inlet diameter with optical systems group for thermal interface design
Compiled with the assistance of ChatGPT, based on team research and simulation review on 2025-04-24.
Let me know if you'd like any tweaks to formatting, or if you'd like a version formatted for HTML or Markdown too. This summary is ready to keep your entire team on the same page — great work!

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2025-04-26 11:02:05

This post is to report on progress in updating the Merlin Nozzle OpenFOAM simulation and adapting it for hydrogen.

The current simulation runs if the pressure in the environment is set equal to the pressure of the exit from the heat pipe. This is not realistic, because the true environment is vacuum, but the mathematics to deal with the shock of trying to move 5 bar to zero is more than the code can handle. That would never happen in the Real Universe, so it makes sense the software can't emulate it.

Nozzle Startup Simulation Progress Report
Date: 2025-04-26
Prepared by: Project Modeling Team
Overview
We have successfully completed Phase 1 of our OpenFOAM nozzle startup simulation project.
This phase focused on establishing stable flow through the nozzle, validating boundary conditions, and preparing for future expansion to include the full heat pipe and propellant system.
Core Achievements
Adapted Inherited Nozzle Mesh: Successfully migrated legacy polyMesh into foamRun system.
Boundary Conditions Stabilized: Set physically realistic 5 bar inlet with 3000 K hydrogen at 800 m/s.
Initial Environment Pressure Management:
Started with background at 5 bar for stabilization.
Transitioned to 5000 Pa to simulate realistic near-vacuum conditions.
Successful Simulation Run:
Achieved stable progression up to approximately 494 microseconds.
Captured early gas expansion, nozzle flow development, and external plume formation.
Visualization Ready:
Velocity (U) field shows formation of swirling structures inside nozzle intake.
External expansion plume visible past nozzle bell.
Core Stability Confirmed: Nozzle ignition and early expansion phase can be reproduced reliably.
Directory Management
Created clean duplicate case foamRun_vacuumStart for vacuum-start simulations.
Successfully removed old time-step folders while preserving 0, constant, and system directories.
Adjusted initial pressure field to 5000 Pa to match soft vacuum startup strategy.
Confirmed proper directory tree with no residual artifacts.
Lessons Learned
Setting the background pressure to full vacuum (1 Pa) immediately creates large solver instability.
A "soft vacuum" fill (e.g., 5000 Pa) is necessary for physical realism and numerical stability.
OpenFOAM requires careful early time step control (deltaT and Courant number management) for supersonic startup.
Future full system simulations will naturally eliminate the need for artificial inlet boundary conditions.
Next Steps
Prepare ParaView Visualizations:
Static images showing throat flow, expansion in the bell, and external plume.
Optional animation of full 494 microseconds for presentation.
[]Advance to Full System Modeling:
Add heat pipe geometry upstream of nozzle.
Include heat transfer modeling to simulate 3000 K heating process.
Introduce hydrogen inlet system (tank and valve models).
Transition from Fixed Inlet to Natural Startup:
Allow pressure and temperature buildup to develop naturally across full system.
Capture true transient startup behavior.
Summary
✅ We have successfully transitioned from inherited mesh adaptation to fully functioning nozzle startup simulations.
✅ We have verified that OpenFOAM can now stably model high-speed hydrogen flow into a realistic near-vacuum environment.
✅ We are ready to proceed with building the full physical model including heat pipe and propellant supply system.
Compiled with the assistance of ChatGPT, based on detailed simulation reviews and team feedback, 2025-04-26.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2025-05-03 15:05:28

GW Johnson provided a pdf with images showing a study of:

1) The Solar Rocket Problem -
2) Seider & Tate tube model
3) Friction loss model
4) Heat balance model

In the email, GW pointed out the challenge to find a material able to conduct thermal energy to the interior, without reflecting much back to the optical feed devices, plus able to hold pressure and withstand the corrosive effects of hot hydrogen.

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/56wex2tj … kdlh8&dl=0

(th)

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#76 2025-04-16 11:45:36

Re: Focused Solar Power Propulsion

#77 2025-04-17 08:31:35

Re: Focused Solar Power Propulsion

#78 2025-04-19 10:21:06

Re: Focused Solar Power Propulsion

? Rocket Engine Modeling in OpenFOAM: Components & Boundary Conditions

#79 2025-04-20 19:16:37

Re: Focused Solar Power Propulsion

#80 2025-04-23 09:22:19

Re: Focused Solar Power Propulsion

Roadmap for Extending the Merlin Simulation into a Full Rocket Engine Model

#81 2025-04-25 11:35:51

Re: Focused Solar Power Propulsion

OpenFOAM Nozzle Model Setup Report

Overview

Core Physical Parameters

Thermophysical Model

Boundary Conditions

Mesh and Visualization

Next Steps

#82 2025-04-26 11:02:05

Re: Focused Solar Power Propulsion

Nozzle Startup Simulation Progress Report

Overview

Core Achievements

Directory Management

Lessons Learned

Next Steps

Summary

#83 2025-05-03 15:05:28

Re: Focused Solar Power Propulsion

Board footer