Shutdown of a Raptor vacuum rocket engine in slow motion - SpaceX Starship
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 апр 2024
- [video & text: SpaceX]
Shutdown of a Raptor vacuum engine in slow motion. The engine’s nozzle is sized for use by Starship in the Earth’s upper atmosphere and outer space, so operation at sea level and low chamber pressures results in flow separation creating visible rings in the exhaust 
Наука
It turns into a rotating detonation engine for a few seconds 😂
Or just a detonation engine.
*高壓補燃循環旋轉爆震引擎*
Pulsed detonation engine 🎉
@@hvip4 So that oscilacion is what's causing the "raptor-honk" on shutdown, interesting 🤔
The oscilation is sea level atmosphere trying to push it's way back up the nozzle as the pressure inside decreases.
You should imbed a clock to indicate real-time
😎
Interesting ! - that blue flame, beautiful.
I'm still at the stage where I'm struggling to understand they can make these work, without blowing themselves to pieces in seconds. It's like they're containing the uncontainable .... but nice video anyway.
You could say the same about the engine in your car.
With a whole lot of engineering
The most fascinating thing in this engine design is the oxiden rich pre-burner. I's like a metal cutting torch inside a metal turbine. The other tricky part in the design is that the two pre-burners need each other to start, while the oxygen and fuel turbines have very different properties.
@@jwstolk Thank you. I knew hardly anything re it's design/function/existence until now, but eager to learn. Fascinating, indeed!
This is a giant 7.5m vacuum engine design for starship it has a giant steel ring on the end that keep it from exploding in sea level pressures. There is already 3 of them that go on starship future models will have 6.
SpaceX here hauling our bureaucracy-laden world into the Sci-Fi age.
Combustion instability.
Most rocket engines cannot be throttled lower than 70% for that reason.
They spent more time to control the instability than designing the engine itself. That speaks complexity.
Multiple restartable engines are a pretty cool hack
This is more becuase they are operating a vacuum optimized nozzle at sea level and in the process of shutting it down. The flow detaches and reataches to the nozzle wall.
They were just running the engine super rich until it died, preventing a blowback, that’s why you shut off oxygen first on a torch when you shut it off
fun fact raptor v3 engine could make up to 300 tons of thrust, which is almost half of a f1 engine
and future starship variants will have 6 vacuum engines (as well as 3 sea level engines) on the upper stage, giving a total thrust of 2640 tons of thrust for starship. if starship's upper stage were its own rocket, it would be 9th place in terms of most thrust of any rocket ever flown (sucessfully or not)
I will add another fun fact:
In terms of thrust Raptor 2 is more powerful than RS-25 (2.3 MN vs 1.8MN), and just slightly less powerful than BE-4. Raptor 3 will exceed thrust of BE-4. And this is while engine itself is half the size of those engines. Not to mention cost per unit, with Raptor 2 less than 1mln dollars, against 140mln for RS-25 refurbished (and 100mln new, but new ones are still in testing campaign) and 7 mln for BE-4 ( internal price, ULA paid 20 mln for each). And that price will go down to even 250k per one raptor with future generations.
@@just_archanAlso, if you want a BE-4, you need to order it 6 to 12 months in advance. Raptor 2 is an off the shelf item, same day delivery.
@@just_archan also, that is based off of rs 25 sea level thrust, which it being a sustainer engine (meant for a long portion of flight) its isp performance is not optimized for sea level, or exactly vacuum, but instead like inbetween sort of
but raptor 3 definitely exeeds thrust in rs 25 in all regimes
That's me, 8 am after a heavy night of beer and refried beans...
HONK!
Its not as easy to shut down a rocket engine as you'd think especially if you don't want it to destroy whatever its propelling.
Certainly, it doesn't help that the air pressure is completely different than what the engine is designed for.
Very beautiful and mesmerizing👻
Fascinating Captain.
exactly like how the RS-25 engines shock diamond dissipates
Awesome!!!
CFD has been computing it seems
look soo cool brooo!
They need to put one of these in Falcon 9's second stage. They come in different sizes and have greater thrust than Merlins.
Also, kerosene turns to slush at low temps in space. Don't have that problem with cryo methane.
Wonder if they can transition faster during regions of oscillation to reduce stresses. Preprogram flow controllers to transition faster at certain flows.
How that doesn't damage the engine I will never know
*Engineering
@@hafizuddinmohdlowhim8426 I know what I said
The extra bracing around the outside of the nozzle I'm sure is a big part of it. Also, I'd bet it *does* damage the nozzle: take a look at the very edge and you can see it flexing in and out. Fatigue cycles like that aren't going to take long to start creating cracks, but if it's cheaper to melt down the extension and sell it for scrap than run a full up vacuum test that would be worth the cost to get more testing.
@@benjaminshropshire2900 I was assuming the bracing is because it is a vacuum nozzle, but when shutting off, it is in atmosphere instead of vacuum so they reinforce it due to the different reactions during run and shut down.
@@jonbaker3728 that's my assumption as well. I'm also assuming that the shutdown in a vacuum is a lot different, with a lot less flow separation.
What do you want to bet that the current version is expected to have a low cycle life (IIRC the RS-25 is the only main engine to ever return from space and it's not fully vacuum optimized) and there's already plans for some of the rocket development and testing to actually be done in space?
Epstine drive from the expanse
Amazing video thank you for curing my insomnia.
I want to watch that with the Elon acid house remix played over it. Again and again. Have it ready in about, hmm, give me one hour and I'll be ready.
How slowed down is this? It's really hard to understand what's going on witthout knowing how long this whole process took. Was this one second in real time? 5 seconds? One minute? Two hours?
About tree fiddy..
It appears the entire shut down sequence, which is a couple seconds spread out in a minute a few seconds, but I had the exact same question. It’s slow down quite a bit.
About 1 second
You can soon say good bye to technology in the near further
that's not an engine,....that's a portal 😂
Lol. Would you like to step into that portal and let us know what's on the other side?
Those RD family of Soviet engines where beasts, the raptor is a modernization of those engines with name changed, just like the engine used by Antares RD family too
Right … RD-170, RD-180 and all Raptors designed by a little old lady in Novosibirsk. Got it.
Well raptor is full flow combustion engine while rd is just a basic rockrt engine developed from v2 rocket😂
Real Rocket Scientists at work here!
cheese
The fact that they deliberately chose not to use hypergolic propellants shows their complete lack of understanding of the challenges involved in space. These engines will never land a spacecraft on the moon, much less mars.
Sure you know what your'e talking about, they've only been launching and landing space rockets like 200 times
/s
This looks like a pot smoker
smokes one to know one
Fake
Please explain
I wouldn't bother asking their probably just another troll@@SirDeanosity
yeah clearly cg, the fake camera shake, the lack of any ice on the engine and the general look of the flame give it away
@@hectormclean33camera shake is from the shockwave of the engine shutdown and there isn’t ice since it’s not cold enough plus the engine is chilled not frozen. The flame of the engine is not the same as a sea level. This one is used for the vacuum in space that’s why it has a drop shape flame and that’s why it is big. Also your a dumb if you think this is fake, there is literally a live stream dedicated to engine tests it’s Mcgregor live from NASASspaceflight