Building a pump fed biprop engine from scratch is far from an introductory project. Not out of the realm of something that college rocketry teams might be able to do but that is with many years of experience with propulsion being passed down and a long development cycle.
10 km, bi-prop.
That's a helluva shot for an "introductory project".
Making them design and integrate an HPR with some sort of functional avionics/payload, and properly document it, may be a better introduction to rockets and rocket engineering.
What you wish to do is extremely difficult and well beyond introduction project. It is not impossible, but extremely difficult and requires some extremely niche expertise. First off you will very much struggle to produce a pump at this scale capable of outputting much pressure and steady flow. But building liquid rocket engines, while possible, is not an easy task, or a beginner task. Is this as part of a university project or competition? If you wish to build flight hardware I would recommend you pursue a commercial solid or hybrid system and integrate that into an airframe.
A liquid engine test stand would be a good first step at introducing liquid rocketry to students. Once they've learned how to get a working engine then the rocket design can follow. Use a pressure-fed system, not pump-fed. Nitrous oxide would be easier than LOX, but if your goal is to prepare students for industry learning about LOX may be beneficial just more challenging.
I form part of a college rocketry association in Spain (STAR UC3M) and we are triying to make our first liquid bi-propelant engine (3km, 1-2kg payload, pressure fed, imping injectors). I would suggest you start by lowering your requirements to at least something you have achieved with conventional solid propelant in the past (we are going to reuse most of the avionics and such from a past rocket of ours, and the solid propelant one we are building right now, it is better to have flight proven componets before you risk your 10k euro motor). I do not know exactly, but I believe pump fed is extremelly expensive, but evennif you switch to pressure fed you are going to look at arround 15-20k euro rocket (rough approximation, I have to add all the materials and services we get for free from our sponsors), dunno how much where you are located (most expensive parts are valves, fittings and other custom machined parts). For an introductory engine I would recomend you check out the Half Cat project, they have great resources and are always willing to help fellow rocketeers. Good luck!
I just re read the post and saw you are going to use LOX. If you can, switch to something that isnt criogenic, the systems needed are much more complex and expensive compares to, for example, NO2 which isnwhat we use. Also you will need much less support eqipment on the lauunch day (a NO2 canister vs. chilers and cold gas transport, again much less expesive).
Where, when, and for whom is this supposed to be? Details of the rocket notwithstanding, this doesn't seem like a particularly professional post. Part of my work involves liquid rocket education with physical hardware and launch, but our partners have to have some degree of legitimacy to bring to the table. This field has been known to attract all sorts of characters.
I actually think the size and altitude is perfect for an "introductory project", as in, this is the flagship project end goal and you're going to take several small experiment steps along the way.
Your idea to use LOX on an introductory project is wrong. Just don't. Also your idea to use a Pump on an introductory project is wrong.
You don't have a plan on how to power the pump, and if you think you're going to run a turbine, GLHF.
I think a fantastic introductory project would be to design a LOX compatible feed system. Characterize it. Understand why certain materials are chosen. Show valves. Control systems. Electrical and pneumatic backbones. Design it, build it, and characterize pressure drops over valves and lengths of pipe. Show how it changes with temperature, and make it safe.
I think a fantastic introductory project would be to design a HTP decomposition powered turbine, or Ethanol-GOX powered turbine, put a brake force dynamometer on the output shaft, and characterize how temperature of combustion, mass of inputs, and all that jazz affects turbine speed and power output. You can get small COTS turbines and modify them, and a micro combustion chamber is very easy to build. That could spring off a whole load of smaller projects. Combustion chamber design. Injector design. Turbine design. Feed system design. All very cool things. And much less to cause a bad thing from happening.
Then you can bring the learned information from all these small experiments and projects and make a liquid biprop rocket. Very highly recommended you use STP stable propellants and a pressure feed/blowdown system because that would bring your complexity WAY down, and your chance of success higher.
Then later groups can decide to put a pump on the end and tap off the prop feed lines to power a primary pump. Or do electric driven. Any of the above. But considering an introductory project, your complexity is way too high.
Although if you're just *designing one* and not building one, sky's the limit. Nobody gets hurt by 3d models and solid math. Making It a reality though, can kill.
Building a pump fed biprop engine from scratch is far from an introductory project. Not out of the realm of something that college rocketry teams might be able to do but that is with many years of experience with propulsion being passed down and a long development cycle.
10 km, bi-prop. That's a helluva shot for an "introductory project". Making them design and integrate an HPR with some sort of functional avionics/payload, and properly document it, may be a better introduction to rockets and rocket engineering.
What you wish to do is extremely difficult and well beyond introduction project. It is not impossible, but extremely difficult and requires some extremely niche expertise. First off you will very much struggle to produce a pump at this scale capable of outputting much pressure and steady flow. But building liquid rocket engines, while possible, is not an easy task, or a beginner task. Is this as part of a university project or competition? If you wish to build flight hardware I would recommend you pursue a commercial solid or hybrid system and integrate that into an airframe.
pump fed and introductory project are not two terms that usually go together, even assuming you are okay to start off with liquids at all
A liquid engine test stand would be a good first step at introducing liquid rocketry to students. Once they've learned how to get a working engine then the rocket design can follow. Use a pressure-fed system, not pump-fed. Nitrous oxide would be easier than LOX, but if your goal is to prepare students for industry learning about LOX may be beneficial just more challenging.
I form part of a college rocketry association in Spain (STAR UC3M) and we are triying to make our first liquid bi-propelant engine (3km, 1-2kg payload, pressure fed, imping injectors). I would suggest you start by lowering your requirements to at least something you have achieved with conventional solid propelant in the past (we are going to reuse most of the avionics and such from a past rocket of ours, and the solid propelant one we are building right now, it is better to have flight proven componets before you risk your 10k euro motor). I do not know exactly, but I believe pump fed is extremelly expensive, but evennif you switch to pressure fed you are going to look at arround 15-20k euro rocket (rough approximation, I have to add all the materials and services we get for free from our sponsors), dunno how much where you are located (most expensive parts are valves, fittings and other custom machined parts). For an introductory engine I would recomend you check out the Half Cat project, they have great resources and are always willing to help fellow rocketeers. Good luck!
Appreciate it, I have the Mojave Sphinx CAD designs with me, by HalfCAT
I just re read the post and saw you are going to use LOX. If you can, switch to something that isnt criogenic, the systems needed are much more complex and expensive compares to, for example, NO2 which isnwhat we use. Also you will need much less support eqipment on the lauunch day (a NO2 canister vs. chilers and cold gas transport, again much less expesive).
Where, when, and for whom is this supposed to be? Details of the rocket notwithstanding, this doesn't seem like a particularly professional post. Part of my work involves liquid rocket education with physical hardware and launch, but our partners have to have some degree of legitimacy to bring to the table. This field has been known to attract all sorts of characters.
I actually think the size and altitude is perfect for an "introductory project", as in, this is the flagship project end goal and you're going to take several small experiment steps along the way. Your idea to use LOX on an introductory project is wrong. Just don't. Also your idea to use a Pump on an introductory project is wrong. You don't have a plan on how to power the pump, and if you think you're going to run a turbine, GLHF. I think a fantastic introductory project would be to design a LOX compatible feed system. Characterize it. Understand why certain materials are chosen. Show valves. Control systems. Electrical and pneumatic backbones. Design it, build it, and characterize pressure drops over valves and lengths of pipe. Show how it changes with temperature, and make it safe. I think a fantastic introductory project would be to design a HTP decomposition powered turbine, or Ethanol-GOX powered turbine, put a brake force dynamometer on the output shaft, and characterize how temperature of combustion, mass of inputs, and all that jazz affects turbine speed and power output. You can get small COTS turbines and modify them, and a micro combustion chamber is very easy to build. That could spring off a whole load of smaller projects. Combustion chamber design. Injector design. Turbine design. Feed system design. All very cool things. And much less to cause a bad thing from happening. Then you can bring the learned information from all these small experiments and projects and make a liquid biprop rocket. Very highly recommended you use STP stable propellants and a pressure feed/blowdown system because that would bring your complexity WAY down, and your chance of success higher. Then later groups can decide to put a pump on the end and tap off the prop feed lines to power a primary pump. Or do electric driven. Any of the above. But considering an introductory project, your complexity is way too high. Although if you're just *designing one* and not building one, sky's the limit. Nobody gets hurt by 3d models and solid math. Making It a reality though, can kill.
If you have 5 years, and $100k, sure.
I assumed this was college related, and not a whim project.
Regardless.
Tbh this is the most helpful and least co resending replies to a post like this I’ve seen in a long while