A Two-Stage, Single Port Hybrid Propulsion System for a Mars Ascent Vehicle

Hybrid rocket propulsion systems for outer planet exploration missions

“…Reference [3] and Reference [5] investigated utilizing hybrid motor technology for a Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV). According to the analysis presented in Reference [3] a hybrid MAV could have a mass saving of up to 79 kg, representing a 22% total system wet mass saving, compared to the baseline solid propulsion system. Reference [4] investigated using a hybrid propulsion system for a main in-space propulsion motor and found that the hybrid propulsion system could have a significant propellant mass saving over the baseline liquid system.…”

“…DESIGN METHODOLOGY A simplified overview of the design process adopted to calculate all primary propulsion system masses presented in this paper is shown schematically in Figure 1. Current literature on hybrid rocket system design, References [3][4][5][6], does not describe the methodology used to generate the final hybrid rocket motor design. This detail is provided here in order to both provide guidance for researchers wishing to evaluate hybrid rocket motor designs for other missions and applications, and to elucidate some of the challenges involved with designing these systems given the current Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of hybrid rocket motor technology and the limited availability of test data for these systems.…”

“…Preliminary design studies have shown hybrid motors to be viable alternatives to conventional propulsion systems for some exploration missions [3][4][5][6]. Reference [3] and Reference [5] investigated utilizing hybrid motor technology for a Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV).…”

“…Preliminary design studies have shown hybrid motors to be viable alternatives to conventional propulsion systems for some exploration missions [3][4][5][6]. Reference [3] and Reference [5] investigated utilizing hybrid motor technology for a Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV). According to the analysis presented in Reference [3] a hybrid MAV could have a mass saving of up to 79 kg, representing a 22% total system wet mass saving, compared to the baseline solid propulsion system.…”

“…[2] [3] Where σ y is the yield stress of the tank material, P is the Maximum Expected Operating Pressure (MEOP) of the tank, and r is the tank radius. The mass of the metallic oxidizer and pressurant tanks is then able to be determined based on the density of the selected materials, along with the external geometry and thickness of the tanks.…”