0
$\begingroup$

Edit: instead of using neutrons emitted from a rod, could it instead use alpha particles emitted from a sheet, the radioisotope perhaps being the commonly used plutonium 238. This sheet either resembling solar sails. Or maybe being a rose like shape open at the back, this rose shape would probably be much less propulsively efficient because alpha particles would likely undergo many reflections before being ejected, but might make up for that by potentially having much greater surface area and perhaps being much lighter for a given amount of surface area The sheet would consist of a main layer material that would reflect the alpha particles. Alpha particles should be very easy to reflect. Perhaps this could be a thin aluminum foil (or is there a more suitable material?). On that layer would be a thin layer of the alpha emitter (pu238 maybe?) that would be deposited onto the reflector layer. The α emitting layer would probably need to be incredibly thin as to not absorb the alpha particles that it produces. Excess heat would probably just be given off radiatively. This means the probe would need a separate energy source. Electromagnets might be used to deflect the ejected α particles to produce torque on the body, or the sail could partially retract on one side to change the center of thrust. This would be done to desaturate the reaction wheels of the reaction control system. The propulsion cannot be throttled, but if need be it can simply periodically rotate 180 degrees to produce net zero thrust over time. These sails would be used for long term mission and produce only a very small amount of thrush.

Old but somewhat relevant section: Is it possible for a propulsion system that uses neutrons directly for space propulsion. The high speed particles are produced by a radioisotope fuel rod, it would likely be long and very narrow to decrease the amount of neutron kinetic energy absorbed. Neutrons ejected backwards would produce an impulse for the craft. Neutrons that move forward would be reflected by a neutron mirror imparting a forward impulse on the craft. This neutron reflectors's shape is not greatly considered in this hypothetical. The radioisotope fuel rod would be cooled using very small channels on the inside being cooled by a circulating fluid. This system would combine the propulsion and a radioisotope generator into one. The direction of thrust relative to the the craft's center of mass fan be done by articulating the entire thruster. It could not, however, modulate the thrust output of the thruster. My idea is that it wont use any additional propellant, the only propellant used would be the high velocity neutrons emitted from the radioisotope. Would this work? Could it rival a conventional radiothermal powered electric ion rocket that carries additional propellant?

New contributor
Tyson Zimmerman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering. Check out our Code of Conduct.
$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ How are you going to deal with neutron damage on your reflector? $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 9 at 6:18
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Why neutrons? You can't steer them with electromagnetic fields, and isotopes that decay by pure neutron emission have very tiny half-lives. So you'd need to use something like californium, which is fissile, or produce the neutron beam some other way. See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_emission & en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_source $\endgroup$
    – PM 2Ring
    Commented Dec 9 at 8:06
  • $\begingroup$ @naturallyInconsistent degradation from neutrons would be expected, but i wouldn't expect it to be too much of a problem. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 9 at 17:28
  • $\begingroup$ From what i have heard, neutron emitting isotopes would not work very well. I had previously and incorrectly assumed that plutonium 238, the radioisotope commonly used in space applications, undergoes neutron decay. This was incorrect, pu238 undergoes alpha decay. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 9 at 17:37
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It doesn't changes anything. The total impulse of the decay products is too small for propulsion. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 10 at 17:01

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

Firstly, such an engine cannot be turned on or off.

Secondly, to obtain a noticeable thrust, a large amount of radioisotopes, perhaps close to the critical mass, would be required. Not to mention that the mass of neutrons is much smaller than the mass of ions.

Therefore, no, such an engine cannot compete with conventional ion engines.

PS: If you replace neutrons with alpha particles you will get another problem: they are slow while propellant must have a high impulse (i.e $mv$). Still conventional ion engines win because of the high $m$ of the used xenon, even if $v$ is smaller.

For such an engine to be plausible you must find a radioisotope that could decay completely, leaving no products other than high-speed particles.

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_particle "When produced in standard alpha radioactive decay, alpha particles generally have a kinetic energy of about 5 MeV and a velocity in the vicinity of 4% of the speed of light". And of course you can accelerate them electromagnetically. However, the quantity of alpha particles produced by decay is generally pretty low. You can't get much flux if the half-life isn't extremely short. $\endgroup$
    – PM 2Ring
    Commented Dec 10 at 13:51
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @PM2Ring Yes, that's my point. They are faster than xenon ions in the ion engines but momentum to mass ratio is still awful because the engines can use whole mass of the propellant while radioisotopes emit a very small percentage of their mass. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 10 at 17:07
  • $\begingroup$ How would it compare to ion propulsion being powered by a radio thermal generator using plutonium 238 $\endgroup$ Commented 2 days ago
  • $\begingroup$ @TysonZimmerman This would be an interesting case. Since all the energy released by the decay is in the form of kinetic energy, directly using the decay products for propulsion should beat converting them to electricity and using it for ion propulsion, at first glance, simply because of the law of conservation of energy. But the decay products are ejected in all directions, making the total momentum zero, and only a small fraction goes in the right direction, so the ion engine still wins. $\endgroup$ Commented 2 days ago
  • $\begingroup$ Part 1@user13964273 i didn’t think the directionality of the α particles would be an issue, this is a complete guess, but in practical use i'd guess that the propulsive efficiency could be 20-30 percent or higher. Assuming that from a single point, that point being a pu 238 atom, an α particle can go in any direction, if it the particles have a forward vector relative to the spacecraft, they are reflected. $\endgroup$ Commented 22 hours ago

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.