China's Space Program Thread II

Helius

Senior Member
Registered Member
It's hard to say which rocket motor is the more efficient without knowing the fuel burn rate for each of them which in turn depends on how fast they are designed to burn.

An example would be that a star-shaped surface would increase the burning surface area and thereby increase the thrust as opposed to a cylinder-shaped surface.

So we are really talking about the specific impulse here which we have no way of knowing without the fuel burn rate or the total fuel burning time of the specific rocket motor that was tested.
Like I said it's not supposed to be exact, which it really isn't for the reasons you mentioned. Just throwing metrics around as something to ponder on the point of China now having "the world's most powerful solid booster". If CASC claims their 150t class SRB with 500t/f is the most powerful to-date, I see little point in disputing that claim.

Like-for-like I think the 1,000t variant that they've got planned, which is gonna be multi-segment, would be a more apt comparison, if one were to make a comparison.

Still, just for the sake of discussion, even CZ-11 which is much smaller than the SSSRB has a higher Isp like I pointed out (248 seconds vs 237 seconds if I'm correct). The P241 that's currently on the Ariane 5 is probably as close of a comparison to the SSSRB while still being smaller
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, while the new P120 slated for Ariane 6 that Temster also linked to does away with the segmental config entirely, and it sits even higher at 278s despite having a smaller mass.

So yeah, scaling up affords more performance in terms of thrust produced is pretty much a given, but not necessarily always the most efficient (although the SSSRB does enjoy a boost (!) in Isp from 237s to 262s by adding that extra 5th segment), which is why I said throwing more mass at the problem by scaling the CZ-11 up from a 2m/35t class motor to 3.5m/150t wouldn't necessarily produce the same results we see with this new SRM, otherwise there'd be no point to these tests.

That being said, without getting way too technical which would be simply beyond me, the fact that this SRM can produce 500t/f from 150t of solids while its closest equivalent being the P120 which also produces similar results, notwithstanding that we're missing a few important details, specifically the mass flow rate and exhaust velocity for the SRM, assuming those are on par with the P241/P120 specs, a very rough ballpark could still be worked out which puts it roughly around the mid-270s range, possibly even higher at high-270s.

Not too shabby, at least quite a bit more efficient than the SSSRB already while able to achieve higher specific impulse at the same time.

SRM 500 -
SRM 500.jpg

SSSRB Block 1B -
SSSRB B1B.jpg
 

SinoSoldier

Colonel
Better images of the 500t solid rocket booster.

52472825174_0bb51e96aa_k.jpg

52472549026_0b19119bb3_k.jpg

The Chinese did build at least one segment of a 4+ meter diameter solid rocket motor with a thrust of >1000 tons. It hasn't been confirmed whether or not it was actually tested.

DWk7dASW0AAZ4YU.jpg
 

Quickie

Colonel
Like I said it's not supposed to be exact, which it really isn't for the reasons you mentioned. Just throwing metrics around as something to ponder on the point of China now having "the world's most powerful solid booster". If CASC claims their 150t class SRB with 500t/f is the most powerful to-date, I see little point in disputing that claim.

Like-for-like I think the 1,000t variant that they've got planned, which is gonna be multi-segment, would be a more apt comparison, if one were to make a comparison.

Still, just for the sake of discussion, even CZ-11 which is much smaller than the SSSRB has a higher Isp like I pointed out (248 seconds vs 237 seconds if I'm correct). The P241 that's currently on the Ariane 5 is probably as close of a comparison to the SSSRB while still being smaller
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, while the new P120 slated for Ariane 6 that Temster also linked to does away with the segmental config entirely, and it sits even higher at 278s despite having a smaller mass.

So yeah, scaling up affords more performance in terms of thrust produced is pretty much a given, but not necessarily always the most efficient (although the SSSRB does enjoy a boost (!) in Isp from 237s to 262s by adding that extra 5th segment), which is why I said throwing more mass at the problem by scaling the CZ-11 up from a 2m/35t class motor to 3.5m/150t wouldn't necessarily produce the same results we see with this new SRM, otherwise there'd be no point to these tests.

That being said, without getting way too technical which would be simply beyond me, the fact that this SRM can produce 500t/f from 150t of solids while its closest equivalent being the P120 which also produces similar results, notwithstanding that we're missing a few important details, specifically the mass flow rate and exhaust velocity for the SRM, assuming those are on par with the P241/P120 specs, a very rough ballpark could still be worked out which puts it roughly around the mid-270s range, possibly even higher at high-270s.

Not too shabby, at least quite a bit more efficient than the SSSRB already while able to achieve higher specific impulse at the same time.

SRM 500 -
View attachment 100733

SSSRB Block 1B -
View attachment 100734

500 ton thrust would be 1100000 lbf since 1kgf = 2.2 lbf

Anyway, I think this is somewhat arbitrary.

I seem to recall they did mention somewhere here the total testing time for the 500 ton rocket motor.
 

Helius

Senior Member
Registered Member
500 ton thrust would be 1100000 lbf since 1kgf = 2.2 lbf

Anyway, I think this is somewhat arbitrary.

I seem to recall they did mention somewhere here the total testing time for the 500 ton rocket motor.
It was 115 seconds -

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

But yeah, it should've been 1,102,311lb/f to be precise. But the values come out unchanged anyway, so the difference is negligible... not that we're being precise to begin with.
 

Quickie

Colonel
It was 115 seconds -

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

But yeah, it should've been 1,102,311lb/f to be precise. But the values come out unchanged anyway, so the difference is negligible... not that we're being precise to begin with.

Using the formula here
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
,

the Specific Impulse comes out to be 383 which is way bit too high. Obviously, the 500-ton thrust is not all through the 115-second test.

Anyway, the rocket motor with a mass of just 150 tons proved to be very powerful, able to put out 500 tons of thrust.
 
Top