Ciro1983811

Members
  • Content count

    62
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

31 Excellent

1 Follower

About Ciro1983811

  • Rank
    Interstellar Nuclear Engineer

Profile Information

  • Location Italy
  • Interests Nuclear Physics

Recent Profile Visitors

881 profile views
  1. [1.3.1] Kerbal Star Systems [v0.7.1 part 1*]

    Good point. Notice that I wasn't asking you to work on request!! Sorry if my bad English seemed unpolite to you. I'll have a look at your suggestion. Bye!
  2. [1.3.1] Kerbal Star Systems [v0.7.1 part 1*]

    I actually was looking for a galaxy sytem that have both the stock system AND the Real solar system, each one orbiting it'sw own star.... so I can play the role of the kerbalking findind and exploring the Humankind ... that would be coooool. NB: Both systems in their real size ... stock scale kerbol system and real scale sol system ... Do you think you could add Sol and RSS to this pack?? Bye!
  3. [1.3][WIP] Kerbal Exoplanets (v0.3)

    Kerbalstarsystems do this by placing an exotic object (like... The All ... The Creator ... just not to abuse of the same Black hole) instead of kerbol, to make the galaxy center, and then move kerbol and the stock system orbiting that galaxy center in a galaxy arm... ... any other star system orbits the galaxy center in other orbit planes and eccentricity, so the stars move relatively each other at about 50-60 mt/sec .... drifting away in different directions.... bye!
  4. Have you put a thermal generator on the molten salt reactor?
  5. @FreeThinker, maybe you missed it, is there a way to use solidhydrogen storage to feed liquidhydrogen to engines as propellant, or it only works as reactors fuel? It would be great to use the improved fuel density to store hydrogen.
  6. @FreeThinker I don't understand how the conversion from solidhydrogen to liquidhydrogen works. I made a plane with solidhydrogen cryotank, liquidhydrongen cryotank, and compressed hydrogen gas tank, and a refrigerator. Solidhydrogen cryotank is missing the solid/liquid slider (like liquid/gas slider for other resources). Refrigerator is missing solidhydrogen... so when my engine consume all the liquidhydrogen, with solidhydrogen tank full, i cannot convert it to liquid ..... How it works? Bye!
  7. Just to let you know, we built the first working solar thermal mirror ..!!! Unlike the one we have in KSPI-E, it works with 3atm compressed air instead of molten salt. Thet reach 900°C and run a special microturbine for direct eletricity generation ..!! http://www.repubblica.it/scienze/2017/09/21/news/l_enea_presenta_il_disco_solare_per_condomini_e_piccole_industrie-176122920/?ref=nrct-2#gallery-slider=176124125
  8. Also hydrogen peroxide (htp) is missing from all CT but the radial spherical one. I use to produce it from hydrogen and oxygen with antraquinone process, than I made ammonia from nitrogen and hydrogen, and finally hydrazine with htp and ammonia ... secondary product is water, that I electrolyze to give me more hydrogen and oxygen for htp production.... high thrust fuel from just common gases!
  9. Normal behaviour I think. You sustain the black hole, or you loose containment. And so you can reduce the fuel fed to the black hole (manual throttle) but for each unit of fuel fed, the black hole will emit a certain amount of hawking radiation, aka wasteheat. Only fusion And antimatter reactors (and certain fission reactors where you have moderators on solid cores, or where you can reduce the gaseous/dusty fissionable materials injected) can be throttled automatically following the power needs.
  10. Form Project rho atomic rockets website. That's to understand why antimatter reactor is limited to 5% when producing electrical power or used to heat up propellants. Because the rreaction produce neutral pions, that decay to gamma ray in attoseconds, prompt gamma rays, and charged pions that In nanoseconds decay in neutral muons and neutrinos. So gamma rays equals wasteheat, and you produce a lot of them., if you don't redirect instantly out the charged particles whit a magnetic nozzle, or absorb wasteheat heating a propellant, you'll be in troubles trying not to fuse the reactor and the ship. On the subatomic particle level, the antimatter version of a proton is an antiproton. An antimatter electron is called a positron, and an antimatter neutron is an anti-neutron. You might have the mistaken idea that when you mix antimatter and matter that you get energy. That turns out not to be the case. First off, a particle will only annihilate with the corresponding anti-particle. This means if an electron hits an anti-proton, they will just bounce off each other (actually, protons and antineutrons sometime annihilate, and vice versa. But that does not happen very often). Electron-positron annihilations do turn into energy, in the form of gamma rays. But note that electrons and positrons are approximately 1/1836 the mass of protons and other nucleons. So if you are mixing atoms of anti-hydrogen with atoms of hydrogen, the electrons and positrons will contribute about 1/1836th of the resulting energy. Electrons and positrons have a mass of 9.10938291×10-31 kilograms, so an electron-positron annihilation produces about 1.6×10-15 joules. Since protons and anti-protons have 1836 times the mass, they also produce 1836 times the energy. So a proton-antiproton annihilation produces about 2.9376×10-12 joules. The trouble is with proton-antiproton annihilations. This produces (on average) 1.5 neutral pions and three charged pions with an average energy of 250 Mev. And energy that manifests itself in the fact that the particles are moving at very high velocities. Also about 0.005 (0.5%) of the annihilation energy becomes the so-called "prompt" gamma rays. The neutral pions almost instantly (90 attoseconds) decay into "delayed" gamma rays with an average energy of 200 MeV. Which is good if you want gamma rays. If you don't they are an inconvenient blast of deadly radiation traveling in all directions. As is the case with antimatter propulsion. The charged pions (traveling at 0.94c) will move about 21 meters from the reaction before decaying into muons and neutrinos. The fact they are charged means they can be directed by electromagnetic fields for propulsion or their energy harvested by electromagnetic fields to generate electricity. Failing that you can just have them heat up reaction mass to make rocket thrust. The charged particles are annoying if you are trying to make an antimatter bomb. 21 meters from ground zero the charged particles will decay into muons and neutrinos that will do no damage whatsoever to the target. This means about 30% of the energy of the antimatter bomb is wasted. To recap: Antimatter Weapon: gamma rays good, charged particles bad Antimatter Rocket Engine or Electrcal Power Generator: gamma rays bad, charged particles good Antimatter Reaction Symbol Particle p+ Proton p- Antiproton e- Electron e+ Positron γ Gamma Ray π0 Neutral Pion π+ Positive Pion π- Negative Pion μ+ Positive Muon μ- Negative Muon νμ Muon Neutrino νμ Muon Antineutrino νe Electron Neutrino νe Electron Antineutrino
  11. Hi all, on the new release, i can't find HTP (hydrogen peroxyde) storage nowhere other than spherical cryo tank ... it is intended or a bug? Bye!
  12. i know, that's how it is written, i suppose 2%wt
  13. that's what you can read on project rho website: Zubrin calculates that the 20% enriched uranium tetrabromide will produce a specific impulse of about 7000 seconds (69,000 m/s exhaust velocity), which is comparable to an ion drive. However, the NSWR is not thrust limited like the ion drive. Since the NSWR vents most of the waste heat out the exhaust nozzle, it can theoretically produce jet power ratings in the thousands of megawatts. Also unlike the ion drive, the engine is relatively lightweight, with no massive power plant required. Zubrin suggests that a layer of pure water be injected into the plenum to form a moving neutron reflector and to protect the plenum walls and exhaust nozzle from the heat. One wonders how much protection this will offer. Zubrin gives a sample NSWR configuration. It uses as fuel/propellant a 2% (by number) uranium bromide aqueous solution. The uranium is enriched to 20% U235. This implies that B2 = 0.6136 cm-2 (the material buckling, equal to vΣf-Σa)/D) and D = 0.2433 cm (diffusion coefficent). Radius of the reaction plenum is set to 3.075 centimeters. this implies that A2 = 0.6117 cm-2 and L2 = 0.0019. Since exponential detonation is desired, k2 = 2L2 = 0.0038 cm-2. Then k = U / 2D = 0.026 cm-1 and U = 0.03. If the velocity of a thermal neutron is 2200 m/s, this implies that the fluid velocity needs to be 66 m/s. This is only about 4.7% the sound speed of room temperature water so it should be easy to spray the fuel into the plenum chamber at this velocity. The total rate of mass flow through the plenum chamber is about 196 kg/s. Complete fission of the U235 would yield about 3.4 x 1012 J/kg. Zubrin assumes a yield of 0.1% (0.2% at the center of the propellant column down to zero at the edge), which would not affect the material buckling during the burn. This gives an energy content of 3.4 x 109 J/kg. Assume a nozzle efficiency of 0.8, and the result is an exhaust velocity of 66,000 m/s or a specific impules of 6,7300 seconds. The total jet power is 427 gigawatts. The thrust is 12.9 meganewtons. The thrust-to-weight ratio will be about 40, which implies an engine mass of about 33 metric tons.
  14. @FreeThinker Also, nertea worked on NSWR .. i don't know if it's in his mods because i don't use them...
  15. You will have also to make a fuelswitch setup for the nuclear fuel tank that allow Ubr4 storage, with a very high dry mass (the pipes bundle of boron carbide) and made it mandatory that the tank have to be directly above the engine (otherwise, no moderator in UBr4 solution means starting a chain fission reaction...kaboom) @FreeThinker, somebody here on forum is trying to develope one, and made some models: Try to contact him!