A.5.2.

1 Propellant Tanks

A.5.2.1.3 Preliminary Design

Preliminary design for the propellant tanks and pressurant tanks is carried out by sizing the tanks
to contain the required amount of propellant and designing the tanks to withstand maximum inflight internal pressure. We use a safety factor of 1.25 to account for transient spikes in pressure
and to cover other failure modes. We also add 5% additional volume to the propellant tanks to
account for internal structure and dead space. We specify a minimum tank wall thickness of
0.75mm in the preliminary design algorithms for manufacturability and practicality.
A.5.2.1.3.1 Tanks
The propellant tanks for liquid fuel/oxidizers are designed as cylindrical tanks with
hemispherical ends for the purposes of structural efficiency and ease of manufacture. The
hemispherical end configuration is stronger and lighter than using elliptical ends, but takes up
more space.1 Due to the small size of the launch vehicle, the space savings from using an
elliptical-end tank are negligible, so we incorporate the hemispherical end configuration instead.
Should a spherical tank be small enough to fit into the stage, we choose a spherical tank instead
of a cylindrical tank for structural efficiency. For cylindrical tanks, a maximum length to
diameter (L/D) ratio of 6.0 is chosen in preliminary design as a tradeoff between drag and
structural efficiency/dynamic stability. This value is later refined to 3.0 in final design based on
scaling from existing launch vehicle designs; provided more time to analyze the interaction
between size and drag/controllability, a more optimal aspect ratio range could have been
determined via simulation runs. However, since the final designs do not reach anywhere near the
maximum L/D ratio, we regard this exercise as not crucial to our current design and do not
pursue it any further.
Propellant tanks for solid propellants (and the solid components of hybrid rockets) are designed
as an open-ended cylinder with an elliptical cap. The same maximum L/D ratio is applied as with
the liquid propellant tank design. Spherical tanks are not appropriate for solid rocket fuel, so the
tanks were kept cylindrical.
The pressurant tank is designed as a spherical tank, as it is rated to a much higher internal
pressure (12 MPa) compared to the propellant tanks (typically ~ 2.0 MPa for liquid propellant

Author: Chii Jyh Hiu

A.5.2.1 Propellant Tanks

tanks and ~ 6.0 MPa for solid propellant tanks). The spherical tank configuration provides the
highest structural efficiency for a pressure vessel1 and is the ideal layout for a small, highpressure tank.
A.5.2.1.3.2 Inter-tank Couplers
The inter-tank couplers connect the pressurant tank to the oxidizer tank, and the oxidizer tank to
the fuel tank. They are designed as cylindrical skin sections with longitudinal and hoop
stiffeners, and are designed to carry axial and shear load at maximum flight g-loading.

Author: Chii Jyh Hiu

A.5.2.1 Propellant Tanks

A.5.2.1.4 Stress Analysis

A.5.2.1.4.1 Tanks
For the purpose of our analysis, we assume that the tanks carry only axial and bending loads, and
that the inter-tank couplers and inter-stage skirts carry only axial and shear loads. Tanks are
analyzed as thin-walled structures. We consider these assumptions to be a conservative and
reasonable approximation of the actual loads seen in the vehicle.
The oxidizer tank is manufactured from Aluminum 7075 spun in two halves, with a fullthickness circumferential weld at the butt. This provides the optimal weld conditions for strength,
as the hoop stress in a cylindrical pressure vessel is twice the axial stress (Eqs.(A.5.2.1.4.1) and
(A.5.2.1.4.2)). Assuming a weld strength factor of 0.851 for a spot-examined joint, this ensures
that the tank wall thickness is designed entirely by the hoop stress due to pressure, as the reserve
factor for axial loading will consequently always be greater than for hoop loading.
As mentioned above, the propellant tank is designed to the hoop stress seen due to pressure
loading due to internal pressure and hydrostatic pressure at maximum flight g-loading.

ox _ hoop
ox _ axial

Pox Dox / 2 ox g max h

ttan k _ ox

Pox Dox / 2 ox g max h P ox Dox2

2 ttan k _ ox
4

(A.5.2.1.4.1)
(A.5.2.1.4.2)

where ox_hoop is the hoop stress in the oxidizer tank (Pa), ox_axial is the axial stress in the oxidizer

tank (Pa), Pox is the internal pressure in the oxidizer tank (Pa), gmax is the maximum in-flight
acceleration (m/s2), h is the height of the fluid level (m), ttank_ox is the thickness of the tank wall
(m) and Dox.is the diameter of the oxidizer tank (m).
We then subject the model to further failure mode analyses, buckling and bending, and either add
structure or increase the wall thickness as needed to meet our strength requirements.

Author: Chii Jyh Hiu

A.5.2.1 Propellant Tanks

Tank buckling strength is calculated by using Bakers buckling criteria 3 (Eqs. A.5.2.1.4.3) for
unpressurized tanks, and using experimental data from Bruhn Figure C8.114 for pressurized
cylinders to determine the proportional increase in strength due to pressurization.

2 k s E
Pcr
12 1 2

t

L

(A.5.2.1.4.3a)

2 L2
2
1
D t

(A.5.2.1.4.3b)

k s 0.85 z 0.75

(A.5.2.1.4.3c)

Pcr _ press Pcr 1 Pcr

(A.5.2.1.4.3d)

where Pcr is the critical buckling stress of the structure (Pa), ks is the buckling coefficient, E is the
Youngs Modulus of the material (Pa), is the Poissons Ratio of the material, t is the thickness
of the inter-tank coupler (m), L is the length of the inter-tank coupler (m), D is diameter of the
tank (m), Pcr is the non-dimensionalized increase in critical buckling strength (see Section
A.5.2.1.6.2) and Pcr_press is the critical buckling stress of a pressurized tank, (Pa).
Tank bending strength is assessed using test data from Bruhn Figure C8.13a 4 for unpressurized
cylinders and deriving the increase in tank bending allowable due to pressurization from Bruhn
Figure C8.144 for pressurized vessels.
Similar to the oxidizer tank, the pressurant tank is manufactured from spun Aluminum 7075 in
two hemispheres and joined together with a full thickness weld. Due to the higher criticality of
the tank, the weld of the pressurant is to be fully radiographically tested after manufacture.
Fortunately, as the pressurant feed tank is smaller than the oxidizer tank, this is easily achieved.

The pressurant tank is designed to withstand a wall stress calculated from Eq. (A.5.2.1.4.4).

Author: Chii Jyh Hiu

A.5.2.1 Propellant Tanks

press

Ppress D press / 2 press g max h

ttank _ press

(A.5.2.1.4.4)

where press is the stress in the pressurant tank (Pa), Ppress is the internal pressure in the pressurant

tank (Pa), gmax is the maximum in-flight acceleration in (m/s 2), h is the height of the fluid level
(m), ttank_press is the thickness of the tank wall (m), and Dpress.is the diameter of the pressurant tank
(m).
The LITVC tank is found in the second stage of the rocket, and is designed as a spherical tank to
similar principles as the pressurant tank. We place the tank near the nozzle throat. If the need
arises, the LITVC tank could be redesigned as a toroidal tank, but this will require additional
work not covered in this report.
The LITVC tank is designed to withstand a wall stress calculated from Eq. (A.5.2.1.4.5).

LITVC

PLITVC DLITVC / 2 LITVC g max h

ttank _ LITVC

(A.5.2.1.4.5)

where LITVC is the stress in the LITVC tank (Pa), PLITVC is the internal pressure in the LITVC tank

(Pa), gmax is the maximum in-flight acceleration (m/s 2), h is the height of the fluid level (m),
ttank_LITVC is the thickness of the tank wall (m) and DLITVC is the diameter of the LITVC tank (m).

Author: Chii Jyh Hiu

A.5.2.1 Propellant Tanks

A.5.2.1.4.2 Inter-tank Couplers

The inter-tank couplers are designed to carry axial and shear load at maximum flight g-loading.

1.1264 m

1.1527 m

Fig. A.5.2.1.4.2.1: Inter-tank coupler showing internal supports, 1kg payload

(Chii Jyh Hiu)

The inter-tank couplers are manufactured from rolled Aluminum sheet welded at the seams, with
equally spaced I-section hoops and z-section stringers riveted to the inside walls.
We design the inter-tank couplers to withstand axial loads by satisfying the Baker buckling
criteria3:
Pcr

2 k s E
12 1 2

(A.5.2.1.4.6)

where Pcr is the critical buckling stress of the structure (Pa), ks is the buckling coefficient, E is the
Youngs Modulus of the material (Pa), is the Poissons Ratio of the material, t is the thickness
of the inter-tank coupler (m) and L is the length of the inter-tank coupler (m).
I-section hoops are added in evenly spaced increments until the inter-tank coupler meets or
exceeds the buckling criteria.

Author: Chii Jyh Hiu

A.5.2.1 Propellant Tanks

We also design the inter-tank couplers to withstand shear loads using the following relations for
shear stress:

y
Br Ar t skin r 2 r 1
6
yr
I xx Br yr 2

y
2 r 1
yr

(A.5.2.1.4.7a)
(A.5.2.1.4.7b)

S y
Br yr
I xx
q
r r
t skin

qr

(A.5.2.1.4.7c)
(A.5.2.1.4.7d)

crit max r su

(A.5.2.1.4.7e)

Sy

t_skin

Fig. A.5.2.1.4.2.2: Inter-tank coupler stringer schematic for analysis

(Jesii Doyle)

where tskin is the skin thickness in m, is the angle between stringers (rad), yr is the vertical
distance from shear center to stringer r (m), Ar is the area of stringer r (m2), r is the stringer
number, Ixx is the area moment of inertia (m4), qr is the shear flow through stringer r (N/m), r is
the shear stress through stringer r (Pa), Sy is the shear force at shear center (N).

Author: Chii Jyh Hiu

A.5.2.1 Propellant Tanks

A.5.2.1.5 Effects of Propellant Type on Tank Requirements

In preliminary design, we considered 4 major propellant types: Cryogenic (Liquid Oxygen
oxidizer + Liquid Hydrogen fuel), Storable (Hydrogen Peroxide oxidizer + Kerosene), Hybrid
(Hydrogen Peroxide oxidizer + HTPB fuel) and Solid (HTPBAPAN) propellant.
For the most part, the design requirements of the different propellant types is similar to the
blanket analysis covered in Section A.5.2.1.3 to A.5.2.1.4, but there are several nuances worth
mentioning here for anyone who wishes to replicate our preliminary design work.
The first challenge is that the MATLAB code for preliminary design tanks.m has to be versatile
enough to consider different propellant inputs and to perform different algorithms for different
cases as needed.
Cryogenic propellant presented a unique challenge, as the propellant tanks need thermal
insulation for the liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen. We opt to use similar foam insulation to
that used on the Space Shuttle Main Tank5, with a 25.4 mm thick layer of foam insulation on the
fuel and oxidizer tanks, which adds a small amount of weight to the tanks. The low density of
hydrogen also necessitated very large tanks, which increases both the length and diameter of the
fuel tank. This is the prompt for us to implement the maximum L/D ratio of 3.0 discussed in
Section A.5.3.2.1.3.1. As the diameter and length of the tank increases, its structural efficiency
worsens, and we end up with larger inert mass fractions. In addition, it is found that despite the
low thermal conductivity of the insulating foam 6, it is insufficient to keep the propellant cooled
for the rise time of a balloon launch, and thus limits us to ground launches (aircraft launches
were likewise limited by the large diameter and weight of the tanks).
Solid propellant tanks (Hybrid fuel and solid rockets) also require a separate branch in the code,
specifically that the tanks have to be cylindrical in shape. As the solid propellant tank is also the
combustion chamber, it develops high chamber pressures and also high internal temperature. The
solid propellant itself serves as a form of thermal insulation for the tank casing during burn, but
additional thermal insulation material may be required on the inner surface of the tank to prevent
the aluminum from melting. We assume that this extra weight is accounted for in the otherwise

Author: Chii Jyh Hiu

A.5.2.1 Propellant Tanks

nonexistent engine mass budgeted for the solid/hybrid motor, but further work will have to be
done in the area of thermal protection for more detailed design of the solid/hybrid motor. In
addition, the solid rocket motor used in the second stage requires a separate tank for LITVC,
which is accounted for in the MATLAB code.

References
1

Huzel, D.K., Huang D.H. Design of Liquid Propellant Rocket Engines, NASA SP-125, pp 329-352

Megyesevy, E.F., Pressure Vessel Handbook, 10th Edition, Pressure Vessel Publishing, pg 172

Baker, E.H., Kovalevsky, L., Rish, F.L., Structural Analysis of Shells, Robert E. Krieger Publishing Company,

Huntington, NY, 1981, pgs. 229-240

4

Bruhn, E.F., Analysis and Design of Flight Vehicle Structures, Jacobs Publishing, 1973, Chapter C8 pgs. 347-353

National Aeronautics and Space Administration, External Tank Thermal Protection System, FS-2005-04-10-

MSFC, Pub 8-40392, April 2005

6

Hart, G H, Grounding The Space Shuttle, NASAs Foam Insulation Problem,

www.insulation.org/articles/article.cfm?id=IO51204

Author: Chii Jyh Hiu