We made a Rocket Engine. But it's a surprise!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 авг 2024
- Our rockets are 100% crowdfunded. Visit www.copsub.com/support-us to become one of our supporters!
Compliment us by wearing our apparel: www.zazzle.com/store/copsub
Book a visit to our rocket factory in Copenhagen: www.airbnb.com/copsub
Copenhagen Suborbitals is the world's only crewed, crowdfunded space program. In the future, a volunteer astronaut will fly to space on our home-built rocket. We do this in our spare time, all the donations go to paying our workshop rent and buying materials. We are forever thankful to each of our supporters!
Twitter : / copsub
Facebook : / copenhagensuborbitals
Instagram : / copsub
LinkedIn : / copenhagen-suborbitals
Pinterest : / copsub
Music by Everyday Astronaut:
(www.everydayastronaut.com)
TIMESTAMPS:
00:00 - Intro
01:12 - How we landed on the BPM-100 design for Spica
03:25 - The challenges of building a large rocket engine
05:48 - Rocket engine reveal
07:37 - Why the stealth mode?
08:45 - New design pros & cons
10:12 - Next steps in engine and injector production
12:13 - How are we going to weld everything?
14:30 - Outro 
Наука
Remember that every time you click the like button or support our project in any other way, an Easter Bunny lays a little rocket engine somewhere.
Thank you for watching! If you wish to support the development of many more engines, you can do so over at www.copsub.com/support-us
Beautiful work guys!!
@@jamesstjames1289 Thank you, James!
the video is unwatchable on anything better sounding then a phone.
you need to use low pass filters if you not able to hear low frequency
the craziest thing is these guys dont need 1000000's of $$$ to do this . legends
It's only the cost of tooling, materials, and spare time now that we have in-house manufacturing capabilities.
Keep in mind its not their job, they do it as a passion in spare time.
In the industry, where people work on these, they must be paid (its their job after all). This is arguably one of the main costs, paying your workers.
Well I woud wager about one million donate if you want this succeed.
You might wait until they actually do anything at all before claiming their legend hood...
@@Vatsyayana87 6 launches so far :-)
Modern rockets: keep making the engine smaller until it is very cheap and easy to build, test, and refine. If that doesn't work, add more small engines until it does.
Sea Dragon: keep making a single simple pressure-fed engine so big that the weight of the fuel itself provides the pressure. If it doesn't work, keep making it bigger until it does.
Interesting rocket development philosophy. Me like ... 😀
...And go for launch Copen!
Keep on drilling those holes!
Yippie!!!!!
Beautiful! Changing the design requirements to include on-site production capability is really good. But wait - There's more!
I can't remember if Spica was going to use gimbals or exhaust vanes for control, but if you're using the former, one BPM can get pitch and yaw control with two-axis gimbals but no roll control. However... 4 BPM 25 engines can run, each with a single gimbal axis, to control to pitch, yaw AND roll. :)
You're onto something! ;)
@@CopenhagenSuborbitals Keep up the good work, gentle-people. You're some of my heroes. :)
Could use differential steering, however if you are already working on gimbal that is probably better since differential steering means the engines are constantly throttling, which leads to instability. I think the N1 faced this problem.
@@somerandomnification Is this what firefly uses on their Alpha booster? Can’t remember if it’s firefly or another small launch provider but it’s a very smart idea!
DOOOOOPPEEE
Took long enough 😂 glad to see y’all back at it
Very cool. It's good that you have stayed flexible and realized that the BP100 was just pushing the boundaries, so you changed up the design. That is really exciting!
Wonderful update! Now, on to thrust control vectoring.
One of the benefits of this change is that TVC and roll control becomes much more similar in implementation to the jet vanes we flew on Nexø I and II.
@@CopenhagenSuborbitals Each engine (assuming you have 4 or 5) only needs to move along one axis, not two for full control, right?!
Exactly.
Definitely the Karman line is closer! Can´t wait to see it´s static fire! Keep pushing guys!!
This is so cool! You guys are incredible, can't wait to see the BPM-25 static fire! Clustering always seems like an inevitability with small scale rockets these days
Absolutely fascinating! As an amateur engineer nearing the tender age of 60 years, the most significant piece of wisdom I have come to appreciate is the necessity of putting any design idea into the context and in light of production capability and resources available. It's such a revelation to realize that a great idea is no good if it is just too hard to build. Like you said. Being able to have full control over the implementation of a design is vital to creating something that will actually work, or at least will have real hope of being able to work out problems that come up. Keep up the great work!
Thank you! Glad we have come to the same conclusions.
Thank you - and so well written! As you imply yourself it takes almost a lifetime to learn it, but we are trying our best to bring the wisdom you mention to the younger generation(s) so they don't need to use their own lifetime to realize it like some of we old folks have done😀
I've been a part of CS since 2010 and I have acquired an incredible amount of different skills based on our changing requirements through the years. I'd like to regard myself as an amateur engineer myself. With literally no education in the backpack other than "Gymnasium" (mix between high school and College) and a lot of different courses in manufacturing and a load of self studies, I am for the time being attending school again (together with youngsters aged 17-28) at an age of 62, becoming educated metal smith, specialized in stainless welding, next year. I believe that tinkering with everything in all of your spare time keeps you young!
@@jorgenskyt Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Looking forward to seeing your next milestone on the project.
Welding an hourglass shape inside of a close fitting hourglass shape, that's some expert level challenge!
Have you considered a split ring for the outside section around the throat instead? That's what SpaceX has on their engines, and Soviets did too on RD-107.
We will "just" weld it. And you are perfectly right regarding the expert level of welding for the uncomfortably restricted space we have to work in. It will demand a lot of welding trials and material testing. And off course special welding equipment - which is EXACTLY what we are developing and constructing right now ... 🙂
Very nice . Congratulations on your work and perseverance
The Saturn 5 F1 engine combustion camber and exhaust skirt were made using inconel tubes formed in the shape of the thrust chamber and stacked in a circle between two precision machined ring shaped manifolds. The full assembly was then brazed together in a furnace. Bands were then wrapped around the shape for strength. The tubes not only formed the thrust chamber but also doubled as the cooling jacket for the engine.
Insanely cool stuff you all are doing. Looking forward to seeing the result of this project. Wishing you all the best!
Much appreciated!
The advantage of "can be made" is hard to beat.
I love you, you make huge work, I see your progress.
Thanks!
Thank you!
It might be worth continuing this system longer than you're currently thinking of. In particular, if this engine works well, then it might be worth clustering combustion chambers around a single set of pumps, with one central chamber being used as the main chamber, and the others only having their combustion chamber control valves opened when higher thrust is desired.
Even though we do not use pumps I like your approach. You are welcome to come by and work with us. Just remember to find a job in the Copenhagen area to live of, using your spare time to work for CS.
It is interesting situation i must say, where manufacturing dictates complex design.
Kinda sad 100 aint happening any time soon, but still cool to see a cluster
It's more than just manufacturing, actually, but we'll touch on that in the pros and cons video.
I'd say this is the shortest, fastest path towards an actual BPM-100 -- should they actually want to make one after having built the BPM-25s.
The really good question is why they didn't do this 4.5 years ago...
@@peterfireflylund Why? That's actually quite easy to answer:
Some times you chase the gold at the end of the rainbow for years - and the moment you are about to give all up, you realize the bucket of gold is right under your feet!
We are a democratic organization making decisions based on best achievable knowledge. Then we stay on the track and do not deviate!
At the time we took the decision to streamline consensus in our aim for our future development, best achievable knowledge pointed towards one single, large engine, the BPM100. At that time it didn't matter whether we chose one design over the other because the manufacturing of ANY engine way larger than BPM5 was an impossible task for us: Either way, we had to develop a long series of completely new machinery, development tools and testing methods.
By aiming high for the "impossible", we were able to develop an upgraded workshop, new skills, new welding robots, acquired new volunteers - and suddenly visualizing the BPM25 design that is the PERFECT fit for all the many upgrades we developed in our chase for the "impossible" 😀
Glad to see any progress!
Thanks!
This great to see the progress yall are making on everything and look forward to seeing what is to come. Quick question regarding weld testing, what methods are you using for testing welds? Are you looking at destructive or non destructive methods or both?
Both. And a lot of them, until we have tweaked the welding parameters to fit our demands.
Great idea! nice to see strides of progress!
Great update and great video, nice work all and congratuations
I wish I lived in Copenhagen for one reason.
Great update!!
Wow. Y’all are living the dream out there!
Really exciting stuff, guys! 4 or 5 of these 25s certainly seems more doable than the 100. Good luck!
I was wondering if you were having problems due to the lack of videos about it, glad to see you identified the issues and are working around them. I look forwards to further updates!
Also I've read a few old NASA papers that have calculated a 4-engine layout to be the ultimate balance between risk factors, so the fact you have a 1/4th size engine isn't too surprising
Thank you so much for this exciting update. I've been following the project since the very beginning and I'm super glad to see progress towards more easily produced engines.
Thank you for the continued support!
you guys are awesome!
You and Scott manly videos about injectors inspired me to make my own injectors
Because if one team of part timers can build and fly rockets I can build an engine
I did zero calculations I just started building
Can't say I was successful but at least I did not fail
It makes me very happy to see you doing this with LinuxCNC.
Good luck with the new engine.
super excited for this projekt
I've been following you guys since about 2012 and I look forward to the day you finally put a man in space! You can do it!
Thank you, we appreciated it a lot!
I thought this was the keg rocket for a second when I first glanced at it
Awesome! Differential thrust, resonance and vibrations, and manifolds for the fuel and LOX are no doubt going to be super-challenging! Pity Mori-Seiki haven't rolled up with a lovely big VMC for the project 😢
Shiny! I like…
Engineering revisions are fine, the goal dictates the path.
Why we don't use dirigeable as first stage ?
I can't compare metrics. :p
Please keep up the good work!!!
We're trying to! ;)
But, you also need to consider the fact that having 5 engines gives you redundancy. If your one engine fails, then that’s it (like what happened to Blue Origin). If one of 5 fails, you still have 4/5ths of your power. You might still be able to complete the mission.
Did you discuss spin-forming, additive, or other manufacturing techniques for the BPM100?
I'm nervous about a five-engine design's reliability for a manned ship...
love to see these videos as always. I bet you would get more support with a weekly update video where you take a few minutes to explain what you built that weekend, even if it's not a high-quality edit like this one
We have absolutely discussed all of the methods you mention including hydro forming, die pressing and lost wax casting. We tried spinning for the first iterations of the BPM5, but the results were troublesome for several reasons. The methods we have chosen are the best at hand taking into account which manufacturing equipment and skills we have access to in our own workshop.
The weekly tiny video are an amazing idea
So, geometrically, would a 7 engine cluster of BPM-25 be more viable, with 6 engines providing 150 kN and the 7th being the margin for engine failure ? Obviously this would provide 3 gimble axes 60° apart instead of two 90° apart, affecting control software design. Either way, you will need a new warning on the lower rim of the rocket to achieve the same level of happiness .
Four engines are enough for SPICA. The 5th is only a concept idea delivering the possible need for extra thrust during the first couple of minutes of flight.
Fantastic Video Again Keep Up The Great work. Are you guys going to do a static test fire live stream. Would Be Fantastic
I can assure you that when the engine has been finished the hot fire test WILL be live streamed ... 😉
Can you electroplate a huge rocket engine from copper? (I suggest copper because it is easy to electroplate and probably with cooling - like part of the LOX - heat might not be that much of an issue)
Can you? Demonstrate the process and show it to us. We are open to any suggestions!
@@jorgenskyt I have done it as a hobby years ago. You should find videos on youtube. Possible issues could be the need of potassium cyanide and photosensitive material on curved surfaces. Also some form which could be electroplated and that could be wax or probably even coated limestone --- depends on what works best for your CNC-machine.Iron and aluminum don't work well with electroplating.
@@mathiaslist6705
Exactly. It is a very interesting technology but when you dive into it, it is way more toxic and way more difficult than the theory implies. For a crowd founded NGO like ours we have to use of the shelf materials and (common) state of the manufacturing methods.
The problem with external welds is getting a clean penetration to the internal surface that does not leave a protrusion into the flow path, or an incomplete penetration that will allow high pressure exhaust gases to erode at the join. Hmmm...
The fuel only flows from the higher to the lower pressure. Thus in all regeneratively cooled engines, the highest pressure is between the double walls of the thrust chamber assembly. There is some pressure drop in the cooling channels, then across the injector, and only then you get down to the pressure of the hot gasses. So any leak would just spray fuel into the chamber, not the other way around.
But of course you are right, any debris blocking the cooling channels themselves would be disastrous. All the joints need to be carefully designed and the welds expertly executed, with proper quality control afterwards. Very time consuming.
could you 3D print a complete engine in one go?
Not with our budget, but it's been done before, i.e. Rocket Lab's Rutherford, Launcher's E2, Relativity's Aeon 1 (correct me if I'm wrong on that one being a single piece).
Clustered engines can make gimbaling easier.
Will you be looking into friction or stir welding for your parts?
No! It is way beyond our workshop capabilities, our needs and our levels of experience. TIG/WIG is still the Holy Grail of welding in our perspective ;-)
With regards to heat-flux, wouldn't a copper-alloy inner liner be more suitable than steel? Or are you going for an ablative coating on the inside?
For our low-pressure engines and conservative fuel mixtures steel is good enough.
Great update! But how did you make the chamber walls? Were they metal spinned from tubes or how did you manage the get them machined?
It's shown in the video - mill and lathe.
good idea to make smaller engines. its what spacex does. Very curious to see how you weld this together. its like a puzzle. good work.
Btw for a 25KN engine , do you consider dpr to be a viable solution for maintaining chamber pressure or switching to a electric turbopump is a good option .
Orbital machines are developing the same for you , development of a pump for 25kn engine must not be as hard as developing the same for 100kn so might be you can develop a pump fed 25kn engine which will be first of its kind ❤️❤️
We are working on development within at least 3 different techniques for pressurization ;-)
@@jorgenskyt the one I saw was a vaporizer which will convert liquid nitrogen to gas form at very fast rate and feed to the tanks but again this involves complications . R u looking towards developing and realising a cryogenic centrifugal pump .
Where can we find the BPM 25 T-shirt ?
Can you launch an extra rocket and have the parachute deploy over the US and I will pick it up for you! 😅
Nice, that guy is Lithuanian, dont see my nationality often
Labas!
@@CopenhagenSuborbitals Labas ir tau geros dienos~
So is it 5 engines with dedicated pumps or just 5 thrust chambers to get around the manufacturing issues?
The latter.
It is 4-5 individual motors. As we have not yet decided the method for delivering propellants for the combustion you might call it "an engine assembly with individually gimbaled and clustered thrusters". Probably with a shared control system - everything is connected and it will be a complex system. At least viewed from our amateur perspective.
Will all engines gimbal?
Four engines will gimbal on one axes each. If we choose to use the proposed 5th engine it will be passive.
@@jorgenskyt same way as Firefly Alpha? Nice, that should remove a lot of complexity
skal en rakket motor ikke normalt have riller i noget kobber dækket af en udvendig liner? eller er det ikke nødvendigt her?
er det lineren vi kigger på nu? og hvorfor er den lavet i så mange dele?
godt arbejde, keep it up 👍
Det er godt set af dig, at mange raketmotorer bruger én eller anden kobberlegering (bronze), der leder varmen rigtig godt. I vores tilfælde har vi valgt at bruge almindelig konstruktionsstål, der langt overvejende både har en rigtig god styrke og termisk konduktivitet og derfor kan flytte varmen hurtigt og effektivt fra indersiden af brændkammeret og ud til den forbipasserende kølevæske, der som bekendt er vores fuel, nemlig etanol tilsat 25% vand. Kobber er en god varmeleder, men har en ret lav styrke, så det skal altid forstærkes, hvilket er svært, da f.eks kobber og stål er svært at lodde eller svejse sammen. Vi sigter altid efter at bruge de materialer, der er bedst mulige, uden at overkomplicere det. Og i vores forskning har det vist sig, at ståltypen S355 er ideel for lige netop denne motortype 🙂
So, no more coaxial swirl injectors? 🤔
Coaxial swirl injectors are still an interesting technology we have proven to success. Actually, any thinkable injector technology is interesting for us, as we are not ONLY aiming for "The Best Technology To Achieve Our Goal"; we are also researching alternatives, educating and exploring new boundaries in the field.
For the time being we are aiming for a hot fire test without prolonged, international negotiations with the risk of delicate information crossing borders. The best path for us is to use technology inside our own house - like an impinging shower head injector.
In this way each and every Dollar or Euro spent on supporting us is even better payed out, as NOTHING goes to administration or work done in other countries. Donations ONLY goes to tools, materials and rent for our cramped, unheated workspace 😀
T00b
something with the audio is weird
audio is clipping
Why don’t you spin form all of your parts and then weld them ?
If you have successful personal experience in this method of production, we will like to hear from you!
Earlier trials during development of the BPM5 were disastrous.
@@jorgenskyt yes sure I would love to help give you some information. Personally I am a cnc programmer and engineer so I have not done spin forming parts personally. But I have seen it done and it is quite common in china making cups and plates and in Japan that’s how they make their rocket nose. I just figured instead of billet material, you could redesign a version with simply sheet metal parts that have been squished by hand up on a mandrill and you could make a rocket nozzle and weld it like you have been doing
@@jorgenskyt
ruclips.net/video/43N44ICyuEU/видео.html
@@Echo7Kyle
That's exactly the method we have been using years ago in our childhood.
During the later production stages, like welding and nickel plating, we realized the method of spin forming introduced oily inclusions inside the spin formed metal parts and a number of other critical flaws. It seemed promising at the time, but has been abandoned. Others could have success with it, but we hadn't.
There is an annoying sound in the background 😤
What software do you use to design the motors?
Solid Works, of course. Nothing compares to Solid Works ;-)
The lathe work is kinda poor quality. lots of vibration marks. Goodluck guys!
It's mostly the milling work that have resulted in tiny deviations in light reflections. Considering the money we can put into development of our equipment, I find it rather good. The goal for our manufacturing is to make it "good enough" from an engineering standard, not shining and "marvelous" based on Hollywood standards ...
You are welcome to come by and shine it up with abrasive paper, but for a perspective of purposeful usability there are no reason to shine it up.
bla bla bla.... boring!
This rocket will never fly.... 😢