An Example Launch Vehicle taking off

https://www.clickorlando.com/video/space-news/2024/04/17/spacex-
launches-falcon-9-from-floridas-space-coast/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnoNITE-CLc

Sorry for the commercials!

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Launch Vehicle Design and
Sizing
By

B. Zandbergen
TU-Delft, AE, SSE

Lecture material: Slides + reader

Delft
University of
Technology

Challenge the future

Background

• Follow on to AE1110-II course

• From AE1110-II
• What is a launch vehicle
• Different types of launch vehicles
• Rocket equation
• Fundamentals of rocket motion
• Ideal single-stage launch vehicle
• Real single-stage launch vehicle (gravity, atmosphere)
• Launch constraints (launch direction, g-loads)

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Launch vehicle (definition)
From: AE1110-II

• In spaceflight, a launch vehicle (or space rocket) is a vehicle used to

carry a payload from the surface of a planet (or other celestial object),
i.e. ”ground”, into space.

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Learning goals (this course)

• The student is able to:

• List the main steps in launch vehicle design
• Explain the LV mission
• Establish LV requirements
• Set up LV options
• Explain the purpose of launch vehicle analysis
• Discuss the principles of rocket staging and how it determines rocket performance
• Apply a simple method to perform a first analysis and/or design of a launch vehicle
• Apply the above method to perform simple design trades

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Launch vehicle (LV) design: The process
DE S A CME

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Contents of presentation

• Introduction
• Generating LV requirem ents
• Generating LV options
• Analyze options:
• Single stage rockets
• Multi-stage rockets
• Design details (rocket stages, aerodynamics and stability, structure, avionics and other subsystems)
• Estimation of LV dry mass, cost, etc.
• Compare, make choice, evaluate
• Summary

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

The launch vehicle mission is …

… to bring a payload of certain mass and size from the surface of a

planet* into some target orbit** (this all at the lowest possible
expense)

Sometimes in the mission goal also some other criteria / challenges for mission success
are included like low cost, high reliability, high operability, low launch loads, high injection
accuracy, etc.

* Usually Earth, but may also be our Moon or planets like Mars or even other
celestial objects (comets)
**Target orbits about Earth can be roughly divided into LEO, MEO, GTO or GEO

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Example: New Mission
• In 2014, it has been agreed upon in Europe (under the direction of ESA) to develop a
replacement LV for Ariane 5, named Ariane 6 (6th generation). It should be capable of lifting
6.5 tonnes to the Geosynchronous transfer orbit for €70 million (2014) at a launch rate of 9
per year with maiden flight in 2021. Current maiden flight is planned for early July 2024 (or
about 3 years late.

Ariane 5 (5G) can lift 6.9 tonnes in GTO at about twice the cost ( € 120-130 million)

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Further examples of New Missions
• SpaceX has developed the Falcon 9 rocket with a target launch price of M$ 54, it
should be capable of launching 8.5 – 10.5 ton in LEO and 4.5 ton in GTO. First flight
was in 2010. In 2022, launch cost were reported to be M$ 67. Currently, Falcon 9 has
been launched 384 times over 14 year.

• In 2012, Boeing started a program to develop of a Small Launch Vehicle, or SLV, with
as purpose to launch small payloads of 45 kg into low-Earth orbit. The program is
proposed to drive down launch costs for small satellites as low as US$ 300,000 per
launch ($7,000/kg) and could be fielded by 2020.

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

New mission challenges (trends)
• Over time, missions themselves may not change much, but we should also consider
advances to be made, like:
• Increasing payload mass and/or size (less important nowadays)
• Reducing cost while maintaining performance
• Decrease launch cost with about a factor 10
• Reduce launch vehicle cost => Reuse of first stage (Falcon 9)
• Reduce operations cost
• Reducing risk
• Decrease launch cost
• Enhance reliability
• Increasing (operational) availability
• Availability = uptime/(uptime + downtime)

Main challenge for the designer is to ensure that the above challenges can be tackled
at the lowest possible expense.

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Establish Requirements

• What target orbit/what delta v?

• What mass into orbit? Follow from the mission
• What payload volume/dimensions?
• What success probability?
• What cost?
• What launch loads?
• What injection accuracy?
• Etc.
Identify critical/key requirements !!!

How? By comparison with performances of existing similar launch vehicles !!!

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

What target orbit?
• We distinguish:
• Sub-orbital targets where a launch vehicle (or sounding) rocket reaches space, but does not
attain a stable orbit
• For Earth, apogee of a sounding rocket may be up to about 1500 kilometres, but any value in excess
of say 120 km is OK.
• Orbital targets where the rocket delivers a payload from the planet surface (“ground”) into a
stable orbit about the planet
• For Earth, we distinguish LEO (up to 1000 km altitude), MEO (10000-2000 km altitude), GEO (~36000
km altitude) and deep space orbits.

With increasing distance to the attraction centre, the more delta-V is needed.

Lecture notes/reader provide(s) for typical velocity increment (delta-V)

values for a range of LV missions (for background info, see AE1110)

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Establish requirements (data)

[Xu, 2019]
More data can be obtained from:
• Reader
• http://www.b14643.de/Spacerockets_1/index.htm
• User manuals/guides
AE1222-II of Engineering
Design and Systems existing Elements
launchI vehicles
Some further examples of specific questions that may lead to the generation of requirements:
See additional slides on Brightspace as part of lecture slides!

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

What mass into what orbit?
To date, the US Saturn V rocket is the most capable rocket in terms of
payload mass (useful load) into orbit. Saturn V was cappable of lifting
upto about 118 tons into Low Earth Orbit. Current launchers are of a
much smaller capability

Types of launch vehicles by payload mass

• Small lift launch vehicle can lift up to 2,000 kg of payload into low
Earth orbit (LEO)
• Medium lift launch vehicle can lift between 2,000 to 20,000 kg of
payload into LEO
• Heavy lift launch vehicle can lift between 20,000 to 50,000 kg of
payload into LEO
• Super-heavy lift vehicle can lift more than 50,000 kg of payload
into LEO

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

What mass into what orbit?

• Example
• European Ariane 64 (62) is expected to have a total mass at lift-off of 746 ton.
• It is capable of lifting:
• 20000 kg (10000 kg) into a 250 km, 51.6o inclined orbit (ISS servicing)
• 15900 kg (7000 kg) in a sun-synchronous orbit (90o incl.) at 900 km altitude
• 11500 kg (4500 kg) into 250-35786 km, 6o GTO

Mass into orbit depends on the target orbit

*All values taken from Ariane 6 User’s Manual

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

What launch loads?
• Launch loads need to be constrained as
otherwise spacecraft that are carried as
payloads become too heavy.

*Table taken from Ariane 6 User’s Manual

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

What (Specific) Launch Cost: Example

• Launch cost of Ariane 5G are reported at 125-155 million dollar (2004).

• It is capable of lifting:
• 18000 kg into a 550 km, 28.5 deg inclined orbit
• 9500 kg in a sun-synchronous orbit (98.6 deg incl.) at 800 km altitude
• 6640 kg into 560-35890 km, 7o GTO
• Specific launch cost (cost per kg) is:
• 140 M$/18000 kg = 7800 $/kg into LEO
• 140 M$/6640 kg = 21000 $/kg into GTO

Specific launch cost to some target orbit is actually the number that should be compared!

NOTE : Specific launch cost vary strongly with target orbit

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

NOTE : Specific launch cost vary strongly with the selected LV.
AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I
What success rate?

• Reliability: Of the 4378 space launches conducted worldwide between

1957 and 1999, 390 launches failed (success rate is 91.1%), with an
associated loss or significant reduction of service life of 455 satellites
(some launches included multiple payloads).

Failure rate (f) in terms of number of failures/launch:

f = 390/4378 = 0.089 = 8.9%

• More recent: Over the period 2005-2014 a total of 748 launches (of
which 58 manned) have been conducted. Of these 748, 705 launches
were successful. It follows a historical success ratio of 94% and a failure
ratio of about 6%

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Example LV top level requirements (from FESTIP)
• Layout as a reusable launch vehicle • Launch from and nominal return to the Centre Spatial
• Reduction of the specific transportation cost to 30% of the Guyanais in Kourou, French Guyana
present respective value of an expendable launch vehicle, • Evolution capability to unmanned payload retrieval and RVD
such as Ariane 5 (2nd generation)
• Technology readiness target date of 2005 • Evolution capability to manned missions and operations (3rd
• Initial operational capability target date of 2015 generation)
• Maintained system lifetime of 30 years • Mass margin of 14% on structural components of orbital
• Fleet size of 3 vehicles (2 operational, 1 in maintenance stages and of 12% on structural components of booster
cycle) stages
• Nominal yearly launch rate of 24 missions • Mass margin of 12% on rocket propulsion
• Maximum yearly launch rate of 36 missions • Mass margin of 10% on subsystems
• Unmanned transport of 7000 kg into a circular orbit of 200 • Single engine out abort capability over the entire powered
km/5° inclination and return with payload to Earth in an trajectory
abort situation • Orbital manoeuvring delta v capability: 150 m/s
• Usable payload bay envelope with 5m diameter and 10 m
length

From [Bayer]
And this list is not complete yet!

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

More on requirements generation

• Consult reader => for self-study

• Reader provide(s) for typical velocity increment (delta-V) values for a range of LV missions.
Also, we have added a pdf document on Brightspace that provides for a simple analysis
showing how mission characteristic velocity (mission delta-V) is affected by drag and
gravitational loss; Small LVs have higher drag loss than large LVs (see tutorial 4).

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Contents of presentation

• Introduction
• Generating LV requirements
• Generating LV options
• Analyze options:
• Single stage rockets
• Multi-stage rockets
• Design details (rocket stages, aerodynamics and stability, structure, avionics
and other subsystems)
• Estimation of LV dry mass, cost, etc.
• Compare, make choice, evaluate
• Summary

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Earth Launch vehicles
Current Earth launch vehicles are mostly ground
launched, vertical take-off, rocket propelled,
expendable, multi-stage rockets.

Earth surface AE1222-II

to space Design and Systems Engineering Elements I
orbit launch vehicles
Planetary ascenders

Moon ascent launch vehicles

Mars ascent launch vehicles

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I
Air-launch or ground (sea) launch

Air-launch
Ground-launch

Sea-launch

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

LV advanced options

Skylon vehicle:
Reaction Engines
single stage to orbit LV

Boeing X37 B and Phantom

Various Winged RLV Concepts Express TSTO vehicle
Studied in ESA FESTIP

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Types of launch vehicles
From: AE1110-II

• The following distinctions are made when considering the technical

options for LV design
• Single- or multi-stage LV
• Expendable or reusable LV
• Most launch vehicles today are of the expendable type. They are designed for one-time
use and hence cannot be reused.
• Re-usable launch vehicles are designed to be recovered intact and launched again
• By launch platform:
• Ground-launch (from land or sea)
• Air-launch (e.g. Pegasus)
• Aerodynamically shaped or not

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

LV concepts
• In 2012, ESA started the NELS study: New European Launch Service. For this study
over 700 launch vehicle concepts were generated for further study on several
different factors including cost, payload, reliability, development cost and risk.

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Choice of concept and flight operations

Representative flight profile expandable rocket Representative flight profile manned reusable Space Rocket

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Contents of presentation

• Introduction
• Generating LV requirements
• Generating LV options
• Analyze options:
• Single stage rockets
• Multi-stage rockets
• Design details (rocket stages, aerodynamics and stability, structure, avionics
and other subsystems)
• Estimation of LV dry mass, cost, etc.
• Compare, make choice, evaluate
• Summary
Focus is on analysis of performance, but …

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Analyze Options (intro)
Purpose: Design options shall be analyzed
to allow determining their effect on vehicle
functional and operational performance!

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

The basic (single stage) rocket
• A single stage rocket essentially comprises a
payload (including payload fairing) and the rocket
stage itself
• Rocket stage consists of (usable) propellant and
structure (everything else)

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

The rocket equation - revisited
From: AE1110-II

M begin
∆V w ln = I sp g0 ln Λ
=
M end

( w = I sp g0 ; M begin / M end = Λ )

For Earth-space launch vehicles Isp varies with altitude =>

use effective specific impulse (𝐼𝐼𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 )

(Introduced in: AE1110-II)

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Example: V2 rocket

• For the V2 rocket we have

• Total mass at take off: 12700 kg
• Payload mass: 1000 kg
• Propellant mass: 8800 kg
• Structure/construction mass: 2900 kg
• Propellant is a mixture of alcohol and liquid oxygen.
• Effective specific impulse: 290 s (exhaust velocity is 2845 m/s)

• It follows:
12700𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
Δ𝑉𝑉 = 2845 𝑚𝑚/𝑠𝑠 ln = 3359 𝑚𝑚/𝑠𝑠 (3.36 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘/𝑠𝑠)
3900𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘

3.36 km/s is less then the 9.5-9.8 km/s we need to get into space
from Earth surface!!

How to increase performance? Select other propellant

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I
Typical performance characteristics (from literature)
SELECTED ROCKETS AND THEIR PROPELLANTS

Rocket Engine Propellant Specific Impulse

V2 (1945) V2 engine LOX/Alcohol 284s sl/ 338s vac

Rocketdyne YLR89-NA7 LOX/RP-1 259s sl / 292s vac

Atlas/Centaur (1962) Rocketdyne YLR105-NA7 LOX/RP-1 220s sl / 309s vac

P&W RL-10A-3-3 LOX/LH2 444s vacuum

Titan II (1964) Different propellants lead

Aerojet LR-87-AJ-5
to differences in
NTO/Aerozine 50
specific impulse!!
259s sl / 285s vac
Aerojet LR-91-AJ-5 NTO/Aerozine 50 312s vacuum

Rocketdyne F-1 LOX/RP-1 265s sl / 304s vac

Saturn V (1967)
Rocketdyne J-2 LOX/LH2 424s vacuum
Rocketdyne SSME LOX/LH2 363s sl / 453s vac
Space Shuttle (1981)
Kaiser Marquardt R-40 & R-1E NTO/MMH 280s vacuum

Rocketdyne RS-27 LOX/RP-1 264s sl / 295s vac

Delta II (1989)
Aerojet AJ10-118K NTO/Aerozine 50 320s vacuum

Falcon 9 FT (2015) SpaceX Merlin 1D LOX/RP-1 282s sl /311s vac

Proton-M (2001) NPO Energomash RD-275M NTO/UDMH 288s sl/315.8s vac

Long March 6 (2015) AALPT YF-100 LOX/RP-1 300s sl/335s vac

Vacuum specific impulse is about 10-20% higher than

sea level specific impulse!!
AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I
Effective specific impulse From: AE1110-II

Exhaust velocity (w) and specific impulse (Isp) vary with flight altitude. e.g.
Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster: Isp,sealevel = 242 s, Isp,vacuum = 268.6 s

Therefor we use an average value over burn time:

tb tb

∫ T dt ∫ m w dt w
Isp = =
tb
0 0
=
tb
g0
∫m g
0
0 dt ∫m g
0
0 dt

Isp is a figure of merit for M begin

∆V w ln =
= I sp g0 ln Λ
(effective) rocket exhaust velocity M end

In this course: indices “effective” deleted, but….

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

The rocket equation - revisited
M begin
V2 rocket
∆V w ln =
= I sp g0 ln Λ
M end

( w = I sp g0 ; M begin / M end = Λ )

Velocity increment increases with increasing …

• rocket exhaust velocity => Need to attain a high exhaust velocity
• rocket mass ratio => Need to construct lightly

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Example: V2 rocket (modified)

• For the V2 rocket we have

• Total mass at take off: 12700 kg
• Payload mass: 1000 kg
• Propellant mass: 8800 kg
• Structure/construction mass: 2900 kg
• Selecting a propellant with an effective Isp of 390 s leads to:
12700𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
Δ𝑉𝑉 = 3826 𝑚𝑚/𝑠𝑠 ln = 4.51 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘/𝑠𝑠)
3900𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘

4.51 km/s is still less then the 9.5-9.8 km/s we need to get into
space from Earth surface!!

How to further increase performance? Construct lighter

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

 Rocket mass
• Rocket initial/start/begin/lift off mass:
Mbegin = Mo = MU + MS + MP

• Rocket end/final/inert mass:

Mend = Mf = MU + MS

• (Useable) rocket propellant mass:

Mpropellant = MP = Mo - Mf

How efficient is our rocket?

MU
Payload fraction: λ =
Mo

1) Final/end/inert mass may include reserve and residual propellant!

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

 Typical payload ratios/fractions
Vehicle Country GLOW Payload Payload Orbital incl. Orbital
(kg) (kg) ratio (deg) altitude
(km)

Payload ratio (to some orbit) varies with size of rocket

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I
Rocket mass => Vehicle mass fraction

How efficient is our rocket (consider the case of

two different rockets with same payload ratio)?

M
Vehicle mass fraction: Λ = o
Mf
1 Mf
Inert mass fraction: δ= =
Λ Mo

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Some more Mass Ratios/Fractions
MS
(Vehicle) Structural Mass Fraction: fs =
Mo

Mp r opellant mass MP
(Vehicle) Propellant Mass =
fraction: fp =
Minitial mass Mo

Mstructure MS
Structural coefficient (or efficiency):
= σ =
Mpropellant MP

Mass ratio/fraction is seen as a measure of efficiency

Warning: Many mass ratios/fractions can be defined.

Make sure definitions are clear!!

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Example: V2 rocket

• For the V2 rocket as described in ae1110-II, we have

• Total mass at take off: 12700 kg
• Propellant mass: 8800 kg
• Inert/empty mass: 3900 kg
• Structure/construction mass: 2900 kg (inert mass – payload mass)

• It follows:
• Vehicle mass fraction Λ = 12700/3900 = 3.26
• Vehicle payload ratio λ = fu = 1000/12700 = 0.08
• Stage structural efficiency σ = 2900/8800 = 0.33
• Vehicle propellant fraction fp = 8800/ 12700 = 0.69
• Vehicle structural fraction fs = 2900/12700 = 0.23

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Example: Moon rocket
Ascent stage

• Mass, dry: 2,150 kg

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Lunar_Module
• Mass, gross: 4,700 kg
• Vehicle mass fraction: 2.2
• Vehicle inert mass fraction: 45%
• Payload mass: two crew + 108 kg
• Ascent propulsion stage (APS) propellant mass: 2,353 kg
• APS thrust: 16,000 N
Ascent stage • APS specific impulse: 311 s (3,050 N·s/kg)
on top of • APS delta-V: 2,220 m/s
lander stage

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

It can be shown that …
1+structural efficiency
Λ=
payload ratio+structural efficiency

1+ σ
Λ= Verify!
λ+σ

Note: For given mission characteristic velocity and exhaust velocity the mass
ratio is determined and hence it follows that payload ratio and structural
coefficient are directly related.

Typical value of the structural coefficient of rocket stages is in range 0.05-0.15,

but still higher values (e.g. for upper stages) can be found,
see reader for details!!

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Payload ratio & structural coefficient
∆V = w × ln ( Mo / Me )
Rocket exhaust velocity is 3000 m/s
∆V= w × ln (1 + σ ) / ( λ + σ )

NOTE 1: For decreasing structural coefficient (constant ∆V), payload ratio

increases => For same payload mass, rocket becomes lighter

NOTE 2: For increasing ∆V at constant payload ratio, structural coefficient

must decrease => Construct lighter

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

 Payload ratio & structural coefficient (2)
∆V = w × ln ( Mo / Me )
∆V= w × ln (1 + σ ) / ( λ + σ )
Rocket exhaust velocity is 3000 m/s

𝜕𝜕𝜕𝜕
= 𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐?
𝜕𝜕𝜎𝜎

Question: Can you derive a relation that links

the change in payload ratio due to a change in
structural ratio?

Question: How would payload ratio change with a change in rocket exhaust velocity?
(all other parameters kept constant).

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

How much ∆V can a rocket generate?
Exercise: A rocket propelled by oxygen and hydrogen (Isp = 390 s)
has a lift-off mass of 100000 kg. What velocity change can be
accomplished in case we have a payload mass of 5000 kg and
structural efficiency of 0.15?

 1+ σ 
∆V = Ve ⋅ ln Λ = g ⋅ Isp ⋅ ln Λ = g ⋅ Isp ⋅ ln  
λ+σ

Answer (with g = 9.8 m/s2) : ∆V = 6.7 km/s

Still not sufficient to get into orbit!!

How can we increase the velocity change??

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Contents of presentation

• Introduction
• Generating LV requirements
• Generating LV options
• Analyze options:
• Single stage rockets
• M ulti-stage rockets
• Design details (rocket stages, aerodynamics and stability, structure, avionics
and other subsystems)
• Estimation of LV dry mass, cost, etc.
• Compare, make choice, evaluate
• Summary

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Rocket staging (an example)

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Rationale for staging

• A space vehicle has to carry along all the required propellant right from the start

• Given a certain payload, we attain a high ΔV in case we:

• load a high mass of propellant on board, i.e. a high propellant fraction and/or
• limit structural mass.
• Since structural mass is limited by technology and structural loads, it makes sense not to carry
along non-useful structural mass
• Staging means to throw away no longer useful structural mass like empty propellant tanks
during flight to minimize the mass to be further accelerated
• In the end staging allows higher ΔV’s to be reached for a given technological level in terms of
lightweight structures and propulsion system performance

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Types of staging: Serial and parallel staging

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Sub-rockets (Definitions)
• Sub-rocket: Assembly of one or more launcher stages with a payload, as it occurs
during the launch of a satellite.

nth sub-rocket is defined as rocket section for which nth stage is

bottom stage

Payload or
useful load
Mu

Ms2 2nd sub-rocket (Mo)2

2nd stage
Mp2

Ms1
1st stage Mp1 1st sub-rocket

(Mo)1
Booster stage sometimes is referred to as
zeroth stage

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Stage characteristic mass fractions

Example: Solid
rocket stage
data

* Space Shuttle SRB. PAM-D, Shuttle IUS values are all in [kg].

Structural coefficient (σ ) in range 7.7 – 41.9% (0.077-0.419)

Stage (not vehicle) propellant mass fraction (µ = Mpropellant/Mstage fully loaded) in range
70.5 – 92.8% (0.705-0.928)
1
σ and µ are related using 𝜇𝜇 = 1 + 𝜎𝜎

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Total velocity increment

• For an N-stage vehicle the total (ideal) velocity increment follows from
the sum of the velocity increments achieved by the N sub-rockets:

N
( ∆v )total = ∑ (V )
n=1
e n ⋅ ln (Mo / Me )n
N
( ∆v )total = ∑I
n=1
sp, n ⋅ go ⋅ ln (1 + σn ) / ( λn + σn ) 

Total ΔV depends on specific impulse of engines used, stage propellant

mass fraction and payload ratio of the various sub-rockets
(typical data can be obtained from literature!)

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

 Effect of staging on payload mass (example)

• Mission velocity requirement:

ΔV = 9200 m/s

• Given are the following design data:

• Effective exhaust velocity of engines:
Ve = 4400m/s
• Launch mass: Mo = 100 Mg (100 ton)
• Stage propellant mass fraction: µ =
0.9

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

 Effect of staging on payload mass (example)
• Mission velocity requirement:
ΔV = 9200m/s ∆v =9200[m / s]

• Given are the following design   ∆v 

−  

data: Mpropellant 
= 1− e  ve  
⋅ Mo =87643[kg]
 
 
• Effective exhaust velocity of
engines: Ve = 4400m/s
1 
M
= Mpropellant =
 − 1 9738[kg]
• Launch mass: Mo = 100Mg (100 structure
µ 
ton) Mpayload = Mo − Mpropellant − Mstructure =
2619[kg]
• Stage propellant mass fraction: µ =
0.9 Mpayload 2619
=λ = = 2.6%
Mo 100000

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Effect of staging on vehicle mass & payload

 
 4.6 
− 
Mpropellant,1 =
1− e  4.4 
 ⋅ 100000 =
64847[kg]
 
 
1 
M
=structure,1 M =
propellant,1  − 1 7205[kg]
 µ 

Mo,2 =
Mo − Mpropellant,1 − Mstructure,1 =
27948[kg]

 
 4.6 
− 
Mpropellant,2 1− e
=  4.4 
 ⋅ 27948 =
18123[kg]
 
 
1 
M
=structure,2 M =
propellant,2  − 1 2013[kg]
 µ 
Mpayload =
Mo,2 − Mpropellant,2 − Mstructure,2 =
7811[kg]
Mpayload
=λ = 0.0781
= 7.81%
AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering
Mo Elements I
Results summary
• Given:
• Mission velocity requirement: ΔV = 9200 m/s
• Effective exhaust velocity of engines: Ve = 4400m/s
• Launch mass: Mo = 100 Mg (100 ton)
• Stage propellant mass fraction: µ = 0.9

• Results:

Mpayload 2619 Mpayload

=λ = = 2.6% =λ = 0.0781= 7.81%
Mo 100000 Mo

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Payload ratio of multi-stage rocket

• Payload ratio of multistage rocket is product of payload ratio of individual

sub-rockets.
• For an N-stage rocket: N
λtotal = � 𝜆𝜆𝑖𝑖
𝑛𝑛=1

Example: Two stage rocket

Payload ratio second sub-rocket: λ2 = MP/(Mo)2
Payload ratio first sub-rocket λ1 = (MP)1/(Mo)1
As (MP)1 = (Mo)2 we find for the overall payload ratio:
λtotal = MP/(Mo)1= MP/(Mo)2 x (Mo)2/(Mo)1 = MP/(Mo)2 x (MP)1/(Mo)1
λtotal = λ1 x λ2

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Staging

• For a two-stage vehicle, the payload mass fraction λ of the rocket with respect to a
given mission ΔV can be obtained from the following equation (verify):

1 1 1 1
𝜆𝜆 = 𝜆𝜆1 � 𝜆𝜆2 = Δ𝑣𝑣1
−1 +1 � Δ𝑣𝑣2
−1 +1
𝜇𝜇1 �𝑉𝑉 𝜇𝜇2 �𝑉𝑉
𝑒𝑒 𝑒𝑒,1 𝑒𝑒 𝑒𝑒,2

or:
   
1 1
λ = λ1 ⋅ λ2 =  ∆V1 (1 + σ 1 ) − σ 1  ⋅  ∆V2 (1 + σ 2 ) − σ 2 
 (Ve )1   (Ve )2 
e  e 

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Optimum staging (by example)

Ideal velocity change of vehicle = 9.2 km/s

Rocket with identical specific impulse and propellant mass

fraction for each stage has maximum λ at ΔV1 = ∆V2
AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I
Optimum staging

• Rocket with identical specific impulse and propellant mass fraction for each stage has maximum λ
in case ΔV is equally distributed over the sub-rockets.
• For a two stage rocket: ∆V1 = ∆V2

• Optimum distribution of total ΔV between rocket stages depends on specific impulse of engines
used and stage propellant mass fractions

• (Without proof) for a launch vehicle the described theoretical optimum is additionally influenced by
the ascent trajectory due to:
• Gravity and drag losses
• Change in engine performance (Ve depends on ambient pressure)

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

How does thrust enter in the picture?
• Motion in presence of gravity field (and planetary atmosphere)

Weight = M ⋅ g ; M ⋅ a = Thrust - Weight - Drag

• Thrust must be high enough to lift the launcher from ground (counterweight
and drag)
• At lift-off (T/W ≥ ~1.2)
• The higher the thrust is, the lower the gravity loss
• However, thrust level is limited by maximum allowed acceleration level. Also with
higher thrust, you might need a heavier engine and so on.

Vehicle T/W Scenario

Space Shuttle 1.5 Take-off

Space Shuttle 3 Peak (throttled back for astronaut comfort)

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Need for thrust magnitude control?

• Why
• To reduce gravitational loss by reducing burn time while limiting peak loads on
astronauts (manned mission) or on delicate equipment.

• How?
• Switching off (some, not all) engines; Requires multiple engines that can be
switched on/off at will.
• Reducing the thrust produced
• Liquid and hybrid rocket engines: Throttling => TMC
• Throttling (or thrust programming) is applied on most space

launchers as well as such vehicles as lunar landers (to allow for

soft landing).

• Solid rocket motors: Thrust programming.

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

Thrust control (examples)

Thrust profiles for Apollo lander (left), Viking lander (bottom right); taken from the
MSc. work of B. Pal and Space Shuttle Solid Booster (top right) taken from
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11668-020-00878-x
AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I
Burn time
• Once thrust has been established, burn time follows from propellant mass and (effective)
exhaust velocity.

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I

AE1222-II Design and Systems Engineering Elements I