Is it possible to create a plasma engine that has the thrust equivalent of a normal rocket engine.

I've always wondered if it were possible to create an engine that has the efficientcey and ISP of a plasma/ion engine, but has comparable thrust to a chemical rocket engine. Would an increase in thrust destroy the plasma engines fuel efficientcey? Your thoughts and info appreciated.

[edit on 1-8-2008 by DSCAEDALUS]

There is a type of engine being worked on by noted Shuttle astronaut Franklin Chang-Diaz called VASIMIR, for Variable specific impulse magnetoplasma rocket. It still can't substitute for chemical rockets in terms of launching things from Earth into space, but in terms of space transportation (trips to the Moon, asteroids, and the planets) it could prove very useful.

Chang-Diaz formed a company called the Ad Astra Rocket Company in 2005 to develop the idea, and is hoping to launch a space test of their VF-200 prototype by the end of 2010.

The ESA and a few partners are working on a double layer plasma ion drove that is supposed to be just as efficient, yet considerably faster than the currently deployed ion drives used in deep space explorers.
I cant seem to find any real current data, but the technology is only a few years old so there is still plenty of research to do.
Plasma is being researched for several applications, primarily for space exploration. It is interesting to see so many of the things that they are trying to develop.

if they didn't have to be the same size I would say Sure.

reply to post by DSC

AEDALUS


Hi,

I can't see it being possible no. Chemical rockets rely on the massive quantities of combustion products being ejected from the rocket nozzle, it's simply a matter of mass x velocity.

Ion rockets simply don't have the mass to provide the thrust. What mass they do have travels at extremely high velocities, but we're still talking about measurements in the low ones/tens of newtons, not exactly the millions of newtons available in chemical rockets. Which is what makes them good for high speed sustained space travel.

Cheers

Robbie

So we are basically stuck with chemical rockets to get from earth to orbit then. Crap. Thanks for the replies!

What about fusion engines based on a dense plasma focus or the late Dr. Bussard's IEC fusion reactors? Would they only have a marginal increase in thrust, while ISP would be dramtically increased over VASIMR and DHT based plasma engines? Are there any plans for some type of mix of a conventional chemical rocket and a plasma engine; kinda like a nuclear thermal rocket with an oxygen afterburner, except the reactor core was replaced with a plasma generating device to heat the fuel prior to cumbustion, increasing overall performance?

Hi DSCAEDALUS

Interesting point, but I would have to ask....why bother? Chemical rockets are much cheaper!!
I can't really see how a fusion reactor could be used either. In traditional nuclear rockets the simple fission core was open to air, effectively becoming the combustion chamber. Incoming air would be heated in the core and expelled via a nozzle. Very Very dirty!!! The problem with a fusion reactor is that the plasma has to be contained in a magnetic field, if you lose the plasma you lose fusion and you lose thrust.

Chemical rockets mate, they'll be around until anti-gravity is commercially developed.

Cheers

Robbie

Theory of Zero Point Energy
FAQs

* Q: If only we could ignite hydrogen instead of gasoline... Wait, we can?
* A: With a plasma spark plug of course

* Q: Is that possible?
* A: According to Princeton it is.

* Q: So where will we get the hydrogen?
* A: Using a hydrogen generator

* Q: But if we attach an alternator to the engine's output to run the hydrogen generator and to initiate the plasma ignition; wont't that use more energy and/or add more resistence to the engine than the power required to make the engine perpetual?
* A: Very likely. However water has hydrogen in it, thereby removing the requirement for the hydrogen generator.

* Q: And plasma will ignite water?
* A: Yes

* Q: Is this a perpetual motion device?
* A: No. Gravity dropping rain into your Wild West Rain Barrel is the force doing the work. I said free not perpetual.

* Q: Won't we run out of water?
* A: The hang up with conservation of mass and the discombobulated confusion with free energy vis-a-vis perpetual motion says no. We don't destroy either the H's or the O's during combustion, we simply break their bond, causing ions (electrons) to be released. Soon, we'll be told Oxygen and Hydrogen, like CO2, is a pollutant. Also, we'll be told rainfall harvesting is a public health hazard mostly due the refusal by very the same people to spray for mosquitoes.

* Q: Yes, but your water bill will be incredibly high, right?
* A: The water needn't be potable (drinkable) thus needn't come from the water company.

* Q: How would you collect all that water?
* A: Your roof: "One of the best examples is the one designed and built by John Kight, who completed a 3,500 square foot home in 2002 with enough roof space to collect 4,000 gallons from every inch of rainfall. Since the water is used for drinking, the system has filtration and disinfection systems that are not necessary when the only goal is non-potable uses like landscape watering.

* Q: So how do I start researching this myself, without a huge investment?
* A: Build a plasma spark plug like this and attach it to a small generator like this.

Ion propulsion

Ion thrusters have existed since the 1960s

Several forms of ion propulsion have been experimented with.
Pulsed plasma thrusters

Pulsed plasma thrusters are a method of spacecraft propulsion which use an arc of electric current adjacent to a solid propellant, to produce a quick and repeatable burst of impulse. PPTs are excellent for attitude control, and for main propulsion on particularly small spacecraft with a surplus of electricity (those in the hundred-kilogram or less category). However they are also one of the least efficient electric propulsion systems, with a thrust efficiency of less than 10%.

What the does small spacecraft with a surplus of electricity mean? Well surplus means more than you need. The energy a motor needs (consumes is called its fuel. An engine with a surplus of energy is an engine that creates more fuel than it needs to run. By definition this is a perpetual motion device. They admit to our face that it works. And then wrap it in linguistic paradoxes and technical mumbo jumbo and scary looking math equations meant to confuse the layman.

Pulsed Plasma Thruster (PPT) systems are completely self contained propulsion modules, each containing its own thruster, propellant, propellant feed, and power processing. PPTs are capable of micro-Newton-second (uN-s) impulse-bit precision spacecraft control. The PPT employs solid teflon propellant and requires only 28V power input, analog command/telemetry lines, and a mechanical hardpoint for mounting. The use of solid Teflon propellant eliminates the expense, reliability concerns, and mass of propellant feed system components such as tanks, valves, and heaters, as well as the safety requirements associated with pressurized propellants.

According to an IEEE document 802 (on micro pulsed plasma thrusters the following parts are required:

* Negator Spring
* Cathode
* Anode
* Capacitor
* Power Supply
* Teflon Propellant

The teflon provides fuel to the engine since in space you smoke 'em if you got 'em, as it were. Replace it with H20 and it appears that plasma propulsion in air breathing motors is simpler than reaction engines.
Magnetoplasmadynamic (MPD) / Lithium Lorentz Force Accelerator (LiLFA)

MPD and LiLFA thrusters use roughly the same idea with the LiLFA thruster building off of the MPD thruster. Hydrogen, argon, ammonia, and nitrogen gas can be used as propellant. The gas first enters the main chamber where it is ionized into plasma by the electric field between the anode and the cathode. This plasma then conducts electricity between the anode and the cathode. This new current creates a magnetic field around the cathode which crosses with the electric field, thereby accelerating the plasma due to the Lorentz Force. The LiLFA thruster uses the same general idea as the MPD thruster, except for two main differences. The first difference is that the LiLFA uses lithium vapor, which has the advantage of being able to be stored as a solid. The other difference is that the cathode is replaced by multiple smaller cathode rods packed into a hollow cathode tube. The cathode in the MPD thruster is easily corroded due to constant contact with the plasma. In the LiLFA thruster the lithium vapor is injected into the hollow cathode and is not ionized to its plasma form/corrode the cathode rods until it exits the tube. The plasma is then accelerated using the same Lorentz Force.

In 1971 the US and Russia experimented with magnetic nozzles functioning as the plasma igniter. By 2002 we found out you can use an IR laser to initiate the plasma.

* Q: So whats the problem with the MPD style engines?
* A: They require kilowatts of power because they use a magnetic field as the nozzle/fuel injector. They also cause an incredible amount of heat to be generated between the cathode and anode plates.
* Q: How do you get around that?

Casimir effect

With two uncharged metallic plates in a vacuum, placed a few micrometers apart, without any external electromagnetic field. In a classical description, the lack of an external field also means that there is no field between the plates, and no force would be measured between them. When this field is instead studied using quantum electrodynamics, it is seen that the plates do affect the virtual photons which constitute the field, and generate a net force - either an attraction or a repulsion depending on the specific arrangement of the two plates. This force has been measured, and is a striking example of an effect purely due to second quantization.

Is it possible to create a plasma engine that has the thrust equivalent of a normal rocket engine.
Yes its possible to build them.
But they only work in Star Trek.
When you drive them off the set, they stop working.
Weird huh.

Tesla Turbines
The Tesla turbine is a bladeless centrifugal flow turbine. It is referred to as a bladeless turbine because it uses the boundary layer effect and not a fluid impinging upon the blades as in a conventional turbine. One of Tesla's desires for implementation of this turbine was for geothermal power.

Tesla's design sidestepped the key drawbacks of the bladed turbine. It does suffer from other problems such as shear losses and flow restrictions. Some of Tesla turbine's advantages lie in relatively low flow rate applications or when small applications are called for. The disks need to be as thin as possible at the edges so as not to introduce turbulence as the fluid leaves the disks. This translates to needing to grow the number of disks as the flow rate increases. Maximum efficiency comes in this system when the inter-disk spacing approximates the thickness of the boundary layer, and since boundary layer thickness is dependent on viscosity and pressure, the claim that a single design can be used efficiently for a variety of fuels and fluids is incorrect. A Tesla turbine differs from a conventional turbine only in the mechanism used to transfer energy to the shaft. Various analyses show that the flow rate between the disks must be kept relatively low to maintain efficiency. Reportedly, the efficiency of the Tesla turbine goes down with increased load. Under light load, the spiral taken by the fluid moving from the intake to the exhaust is a tight spiral, undergoing many rotations. Under load, the number of rotations drops and the spiral becomes progressively shorter. This increases the shear losses and reduces the efficiency.





They look awfully similar, huh?

But what's the two plates behind the tesla turbine in the MPD thruster? They are an anode and a cathode with a vacuum chamber in the middle. Charging the plates causes a force to pass through the vacuum. By taking advantage of this we can can answer our question on building an MPD thruster that does not generate heat.

Theory

In quantum field theory, the vacuum state (also called the vacuum) is the quantum state with the lowest possible energy. Generally, it contains no physical particles. The term 'zero-point field' is sometimes used as a synonym for the vacuum state of an individual quantized field.

* Q: So how does this apply to us?
* A: According to quantum theory, there's nothing in the vacuum, nor the quantum vacuum state, but there is energy according to the Cassini affect. And it's called zero-point energy. How utterly coincidental...

S-matrix
In physics, the scattering matrix (or S-matrix) relates the initial state and the final state for an interaction of particles. It is used in quantum mechanics, scattering theory and quantum field theory.
Feynman Diagrams

Feynman diagrams are really just made up to make understanding S-matrix quantum start and final state calculations easier.

In this diagram an electron and positron annihilate producing a virtual photon that becomes a quark-antiquark pair. Then one radiates a gluon. In this different diagram, a kaon, made of an up and anti-strange quark, decays weakly into three pions, with intermediate steps involving a W boson and a gluon.

* Q: Wait, bosens and gluons? Those sound kinda familiar somehow.
* A: The Large Electron-Positron Collider has been designed to detect this particle.
* Q: No wonder they're so hot to trot to build them!
* A: According to Universe Today it is postulated that this very same process can be used to open wormholes.

Time: The 4th dimension

We know that gluon particles appear and disappear when waves are passed through a vacuum chamber even though no material passed through the vacuum. What pushed this particle out to appear and then disappear? What force is acting upon the gluon? Like they say, we live on the corner of space and time. We know the dimensions of space are made up of mass and energy. We know that no mass exists inside the vacuum. We also know that there is energy present in the form zero-point energy. But what force is used to draw this energy out? Time.

Time is the force/work you input as the viewer of the quantum state to draw the zero point energy. As they say, time is energy and spending time is doing work.

Towards the microscale

MEMS uses the etching processes developed to print computer chips to etch tiny little gears, pistons and entire working motors such as steam engines. The US government is already doing it. Here's the controller card they made to throttle the nano-thrusters and a mini-thruster

Revisiting the Casmir effect we find that On a submicrometre scale, the force of attraction/repulsion becomes so strong that it becomes the dominant force between uncharged conductors. In fact, at separations of 10 nm - about 100 times the typical size of an atom - the Casimir effect produces the equivalent of 1 atmosphere of pressure (101.3 kPa) (the precise value depending on surface geometry and other factors)

Revisiting the Tesla turbine we find that At the nanoscale, this motors drawbacks become advantages:

Tesla's design sidestepped the key drawbacks of the bladed turbine. It does suffer from other problems such as shear losses and flow restrictions. Some of Tesla turbine's advantages lie in relatively low flow rate applications or when small applications are called for. The disks need to be as thin as possible at the edges so as not to introduce turbulence as the fluid leaves the disks. This translates to needing to grow the number of disks as the flow rate increases. Maximum efficiency comes in this system when the inter-disk spacing approximates the thickness of the boundary layer, and since boundary layer thickness is dependent on viscosity and pressure, the claim that a single design can be used efficiently for a variety of fuels and fluids is incorrect. A Tesla turbine differs from a conventional turbine only in the mechanism used to transfer energy to the shaft. Various analyses show that the flow rate between the disks must be kept relatively low to maintain efficiency. Reportedly, the efficiency of the Tesla turbine goes down with increased load. Under light load, the spiral taken by the fluid moving from the intake to the exhaust is a tight spiral, undergoing many rotations. Under load, the number of rotations drops and the spiral becomes progressively shorter. This increases the shear losses and reduces the efficiency.

Using a standard graphics card GPU and some control circuity connecting output pixels on the DVI line to control wich thrusters to fire. Using 3d accelerated physics game engine of course one can fly a ufo

MEMS Thruster Controller

Open Zero Point Energy Consortium

There's a better form of the source there.