(The case for an intermediate manned mission to Venus space/Mercury using solar power)īoeing/Spectrolab: Solar cell efficiency of 41.6% with concentrator, developed for the “FAST” program for space solar arrays. Clearly a noīrainer for Lunar and NEO even Maned Venus flyby and/or Mercury Here is what I think SEP powered VASMIR looks like. VASIMIR is more complex and heavier than MPD as well. Solar thermal/electric may use two separate engines to do the same thing, but they both use the same large concentrator and solar thermal engines are low in mass for their thrust vs. VASIMIR's advantage is that it can operate at a large range of exhaust velocities. An all-electric has to have enough electricity to go from LEO to escape at fairly high Isp ( to compensate for its need to spiral out and the high mass of its power source ) and would need a source of electric power production far beyond anything reasonably available in the near future. For Mars electric can then be used to speed things up, but need not have the kind of power levels that any all-electric needs to be useful. SEP and take a week or two as opposed to weeks or months with SEP. Solar thermal has lower Isp, but can take advantage of the Oberth effect when going from low orbit to escape velocity to largely compensate for this vs. ![]() If electric propulsion is added to solar thermal, high efficiency high specific power concentrator type PV can be used to power it. However if the comparison is with solar thermal/electric the fact that solar thermal does not require sunlight to be converted into electricity first, but rather can use it directly and thereby have lower mass( no conversion equipment required ) and higher efficiency. If you are only comparing electric propulsion systems and cost isn't an issue this is true.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |