|
|
Post by jageriv on Dec 26, 2016 5:26:10 GMT
Hey, this might be a somewhat silly question, but I've been working on engines, and realized I didn't actually understand what was being said in the Thrust to weight measure of engine design: my current design says "80 g0(underscore)". I'm not entirely sure what I'm being told: does this mean 80 grams of thrust per gram of engine? Or am I misunderstanding this? I've so far been working under the assumption that a higher number is better, but with my realization of a lack of understanding, I'm less sure.
Just a simple, probably obvious in hindsight question I just wanted to throw out there.
|
|
|
|
Post by fenrin49 on Dec 26, 2016 5:43:32 GMT
higher is better. but when tweaking keep in mind exhaust velocity also.
|
|
|
|
Post by n2maniac on Dec 26, 2016 5:54:30 GMT
Hey, this might be a somewhat silly question, but I've been working on engines, and realized I didn't actually understand what was being said in the Thrust to weight measure of engine design: my current design says "80 g0(underscore)". I'm not entirely sure what I'm being told: does this mean 80 grams of thrust per gram of engine? Or am I misunderstanding this? I've so far been working under the assumption that a higher number is better, but with my realization of a lack of understanding, I'm less sure. Just a simple, probably obvious in hindsight question I just wanted to throw out there. That is correct (other than the pedantic mass =/= force detail). 80 times earth gravity (which, in CDE, seems like it would be an alien / outdated concept...). |
|
|
|
Post by newageofpower on Dec 26, 2016 19:56:57 GMT
That is correct (other than the pedantic mass =/= force detail). 80 times earth gravity (which, in CDE, seems like it would be an alien / outdated concept...). Humans evolved under Earth's gravity. The notion of STP won't dissapear easily either. |
|
|
|
Post by cutterjohn on Dec 26, 2016 20:28:03 GMT
That is correct (other than the pedantic mass =/= force detail). 80 times earth gravity (which, in CDE, seems like it would be an alien / outdated concept...). Humans evolved under Earth's gravity. The notion of STP won't dissapear easily either. Not to mention the sheer volume of engineering documentation that use those constants that will keep it a familiar option. Its rather like how, when the space shuttles engines were uprated, they didn't make the new full thrust 100%, but just called it 110% thrust, keeping the old 100% as a standard since it was already heavily referenced. |
|
|
|
Post by David367th on Dec 26, 2016 20:52:35 GMT
Its rather like how, when the space shuttles engines were uprated, they didn't make the new full thrust 100%, but just called it 110% thrust, keeping the old 100% as a standard since it was already heavily referenced. Here I thought they were using 10% more thrust than was allowed thermally or mechanically. Like 100% would be safe and 110% would've burned up the nozzle or something. Humans evolved under Earth's gravity. The notion of STP won't dissapear easily either. Maybe they'll start using Mars gravities and STP in terms of mars atmospheres. |
|
|
|
Post by morrigi on Dec 26, 2016 23:02:09 GMT
Its rather like how, when the space shuttles engines were uprated, they didn't make the new full thrust 100%, but just called it 110% thrust, keeping the old 100% as a standard since it was already heavily referenced. Here I thought they were using 10% more thrust than was allowed thermally or mechanically. Like 100% would be safe and 110% would've burned up the nozzle or something. Humans evolved under Earth's gravity. The notion of STP won't dissapear easily either. Maybe they'll start using Mars gravities and STP in terms of mars atmospheres. It'd probably be a clusterfuck on the same scale as the attempts to replace the U.S. customary/Imperial hybrid system with metric. |
|
