38th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit
7-10 July 2002, Indianapolis, Indiana
STUDENT DEVELOPMENT AND TEST OF A GIMBALED ANNULAR
AEROSPIKE ENGINE
Eric Besnard*
Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department
California State University, Long Beach
John Garvey
Garvey Spacecraft Corporation
Huntington Beach, CA
Abstract
The paper presents a summary of the California
Launch Vehicle Education Initiative (CALVEIN) and
focuses on its propulsion aspects. CALVEIN was
established at California State University, Long
Beach (CSULB) in partnership with Garvey
Spacecraft Corporation (GSC) in 2001. The first
experience included the student development of two
1000 lbf thrust ablative rocket engines using LOX
and ethanol. The engines powered the CSULB
Prospector rockets P-1 and P-2 which were
launched and recovered in June 2001 and Feb.
2002, respectively. One of the components of
CALVEIN is an Aerospace System Design
curriculum, which, in one year, takes the students
through the product development cycle, from
requirement definition to the manufacture and test of
an aerospace product. The curriculum was applied
to the development of a 1000 lbf annular aerospike
engine and of a thrust vector control (TVC) system.
The student designs and tests are presented. The
aerospike engine operated successfully for 200 ms
after which the spike nozzle structurally failed. The
TVC system is being completed and the aerospike
engine is being revised. The paper ends with a
summary of the lessons learned and of the benefits
of such industry/academia partnerships.
1. Introduction
In the Spring 2001 semester, California State
University, Long Beach (CSULB) initiated a
* Lecturer, AIAA Member
President & CEO, AIAA Member
Independent contractor
Professor, AIAA Associate Fellow
Copyright 2002 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Inc. All rights reserved.
Copyright 2002 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc. All rights reserved.
AIAA 2002-4184
AIAA-02-4184
Tom Holleman, Tom Mueller,
Hsun Hu Chen, and Hsin-Piao Chen
Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department
California State University, Long Beach
collaboration with a local small aerospace company,
Garvey Spacecraft Corporation (GSC) specialized in
the development of prototype liquid-propelled
rockets, a.k.a. Kimbo rockets. One notable
accomplishment of GSC was the first flight of a
composite material cryogenic LOX tank onboard
Kimbo IV in 2000. In January 2001, GSC provided
CSULB with a kit-rocket based on their latest
vehicle, the Kimbo V (K-V). K-V is a 150 lb rocket
with LOX and ethanol as propellants and uses an
ablative engine, which provides 500 lbf of thrust. The
rocket is approximately 12 ft long and 10 in in
diameter. K-V flew to approximately 10,000 ft and
was successfully recovered in Jan. 2001. The K-V
was designed specifically for the academic
environment and CSULB students provided fiberglass
door panels and participated in launch operations.
The objectives of the cooperation between
CSULB and GSC were two fold; (1) for engineering
students, from Freshmen to graduate, to gain hands-
on experience on a flight vehicle; and (2) for teams of
students to gain design experience on flight
hardware by improving subsystems on the vehicle.
Section 2 provides examples of student projects
conducted by Aerospace and Mechanical
Engineering students related to the development of
conventional 1000 lbf thrust engines, which were
tested and flew on Prospector-1 and 2 rockets.
Another objective was added to the program,
which now became the California Launch Vehicle
Education Initiative (CALVEIN). The goal was to
develop a formal Aerospace System Design The opportunity was given to students to develop or
curriculum. Over the span of two semesters, improve vehicle subsystems and come up with
students go through the product development cycle, projects in their various disciplines. The base K-V
from requirement definition to the actual vehicle was powered by a 500 lbf thrust ablative
manufacturing and test of an aerospace product. engine and a group of students decided to develop a
This is accomplished using a Systems Engineering 1000 lbf thrust engine with a flat head injector in
approach in an integrated product team order to increase the thrust-to-weight ratio at take-off.
environment. Section 3 describes the Aerospace This is a pressure-fed system with the tanks
System Design curriculum in more detail. pressurized at 390 psi and a typical pressure drop of
For the 2001-02 academic year, the objective 90 psi across the face of the injector, resulting in a
was to develop and test a gimbaled 500 lbf thrust chamber pressure of 300 psi.
aerospike engine. This engine, if successfully The engine, developed over four months, was
developed and tested, was to power in May 2002 successfully static-fire tested on May 20th (Fig. 1) at
the third liquid-propelled rocket developed by the Mojave Test Area (MTA), site owned and
CSULB students, Prospector-3 (P-3). These project operated by the Reaction Research Society. The
topics were selected because of the renewed engine was tested on the Vertical Test Stand
interest during the now-defunct X-33 program for number 1 (VTS-1) and a thrust of 920 lb was
developing aerospike engines. Unlike the bell measured. Two weeks later, P-1 took flight and was
shaped nozzle, which is optimized for only one successfully recovered (Fig. 2). For the flights, the
altitude, the aerospike nozzle allows the flow vehicle tanks are only half filled and the system
expansion to adjust with altitude, thus leading to operates in a blow down mode.
higher efficiency at altitudes below the design point.
See Ref. 1 for a partial list of publications
addressing aerospike nozzle research and
development. This increase in thrust coefficient
below design altitude is particularly important for
Single-Stage-To-Orbit (SSTO) vehicles such as the
then-planned VentureStar which was to be based on
the technologies developed during the X-33 program.
As part of this program, Boeing Rocketdyne
developed the RS-2200, a linear aerospike, which
was static fired several times. However, no
aerospike engine is known to date to have powered
a rocket in flight after more than four decades of
research. The application of the curriculum, results
of tests and current project status are discussed in
Sect. 4. Section 5 presents a summary of the
Fig. 1. Student engine static fire test, May 20, 2001
lessons learned from the program.
2. Previous rocket engine development 2.2. Improved 1000 lbf engine and P-2 flight
This section presents experience gained by the Using a similar approach, another engine, this
team during the development of two conventional time using a pintle injector, was designed (Fig. 3),
1000 lbf rocket engines. These were designed, manufactured and tested during the Fall 2001
manufactured, and tested by CSULB students. In semester. The P-2 airframe and new engine were
contrast with the formal Aerospace System Design fitted to the VTS-2 at the MTA and successfully
curriculum where formal reviews, etc. take place, tested in Dec. 2001. The P-2 vehicle was then flown
these were developed in the framework of typical and recovered in Feb. 2002 (Figs. 5, 6).
student projects.
2.1. First 1000 lbf engine development
As part of the initial CSULB-GSC collaboration,
students assembled their first vehicle, the
Prospector-1 (P-1) during the Spring 2001 semester.
2
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 Fig. 5. P-2 before flight, Feb. 2001

Fig. 2. Prospector-1 in flight, June 3, 2001

Fig. 3. 1000 lbf engine with pintle injector

Fig. 6. P-2 at take-off and after parachute deployment

3. Aerospace System Design Curriculum

Fig. 4. Static Fire Test of the 1000 lbf student engine on
VTS-2, Dec. 2001.
This section describes the formal Aerospace
System Design curriculum. Process, format and
roles of various participants are discussed.
3.1. Process
The curriculum is articulated over a two-
semester period, which takes the student team(s)

3
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
through the entire product development cycle, albeit
at a faster pace and in less depth as would be done
in industry. Yet, most formal steps of an aerospace
program are included, following a systems
engineering approach.
The outcome of the first semester is a
preliminary design review. From top-level system
requirements defined by the customer (e.g. faculty,
or alternatively some industry partner interested the
system being developed and willing to provide
expertise and mentoring on the topic), the students
perform functional analysis, define the various
subsystems and derive their requirements. These
are presented at the Systems Functional and
Requirement Reviews (SFR & SRR). The methods
used for validation and verification are determined.
Specifications and Interface Control Documents
(ICD) are generated by the student team(s). Several
concepts are identified for meeting the
requirements. Trade studies are identified and
conducted. The most promising concept is rapidly
selected and refined, leading to the Preliminary
Design Review (PDR).
A detailed design follows, culminating in a
Critical Design Review (CDR), a Test Readiness
Review (TRR, e.g. prior to a static fire test), and a
System Verification Review (SVR, e.g. after all tests
have been completed) and prior to launch.
3.2. Format
CSULB is an urban university of over 30,000
students in which most students finance their
education through at least part-time employment.
As such, times convenient for all team members to
meet are rare and the class must be formatted in
order to ensure contribution of all team members to
the project. Therefore, the course is organized to
include both lectures with lab work focused on
team meetings and training on engineering tools
needed for the project. Then, students complete
their assignments either on their own or in smaller
teams and report at the next meeting or using
electronic media for communications.
3.3. Students, faculty and industry advisors
An Integrated Product Team (IPT) is formed by
the students. It includes a project manager, a
systems engineer, and the various disciplines
needed for the project (propulsion, aerodynamics,
structures and materials, mass, CAD, thermal,
fluids, etc.). Each student works with a Faculty
4
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
member or industry advisor who is a specialist in
his/her area.
Faculty and industry advisors complement the
basic aerospace curriculum by lectures specific to
the problem at hand. They also play the role of
consultants to the student team.
4. Application to gimbaled aerospike engine
During the 2001-02 academic year, the
curriculum of Sect. 3 was applied to the development
of a gimbaled annular aerospike engine. This section
presents the project scope, main outcomes and
deliverables. Thrust vector control system and
aerospike engine are treated separately.
4.1. Scope
The gimbaled annular aerospike engine project
was selected by the faculty for two main reasons.
First, the basic Prospector rockets are passively
stabilized and their trajectory depends on wind force
and direction. Removing this dependency would
greatly enhance the performance of the vehicles.
Second, to date, no aerospike engine is known to
have powered a rocket in flight and the potential of
being the first to do so would further stimulate the
interest of all team members. Fig. 7 shows the
scope of the aerospace system design project as it
relates to the launch system. Initially, the gimbaled
engine was to be integrated into the Prospector-3
vehicle. While the complete aerospike engine was to
be developed as part of the course, the scope of the
thrust vector control (TVC) system development was
restricted to designing the mechanical actuation
system and defining requirements of the avionics
system.
System level Components
Launch GSE Prospector 3 Payload
Vehicle Aeroshell Propulsion Aerospike
Thrust
Vectoring
Avionics
System Engine Syst.
System
Injection Combustion
Engine subsystem AE 478/479 Nozzle
System Chamber
Fig. 7. Scope of Aerospace System Design I & II 01-02
academic year
4.2. Thrust vector control system
Fig. 8 shows the TVC requirements. Two
seconds after lift-off, the rocket is to initiate a pitch
maneuver reaching 30 deg. and returning to close to
0 in another 2 seconds. The rocket would still be
outfitted with fins to ensure stability. Universal Space
Lines (USL) was contracted to assist the team in
the development of the TVC. A rigid body pitch
analysis showed that an engine deflection of 5 deg.
would be sufficient to induce rocket deflections in
excess of 30 deg. The analysis, however, also
showed that in the absence of damping in the
control system, the rocket would exhibit a fishtail
motion across the sky. Therefore, it was decided to
include an active control loop with rate gyros to
sense pitch and yaw motion (Fig. 9). Analysis also
showed that the actuation mechanism would have to
provide at most 200 lbf at 4 in.
P-3
trajectory
3 < 5o
A mechanical actuation system was designed to
allow for a two-axis engine motion (pitch and yaw) by
10 deg. in each direction. Fig. 10 shows the solid
model rendering and actual picture of the actuation
system. The solid model is shown with and without
the servomotors (and top-plate) to help visualize how
the actuation is performed at 45 deg. of the pivot
axis. This arrangement was selected to avoid
interferences. The control electronics are currently
under development. A static fire test is planned for
the Summer followed by a launch in the Fall 2002
semester.
4.3. Aerospike engine
NORTH
Requirements: from 500 to 1000 lbf thrust

2 > 30o Initially, the engine was to be mounted to the

Ground track Prospector-3 vehicle and integrated into the thrust
of trajectory 1 < 3o vector control system. Because of the Prospector-
class propulsion system, the chamber pressure is
T+4
Launch rail limited to about 300 psi and the propellants are
T+2 ethanol and liquid oxygen (LOX). Also, in order to
Blockhouse
avoid large velocity variations during the maneuver,
the engine was required to provide 500 lbf of thrust
Observation (the loaded vehicle at take-off is almost 200 lb,
Bunker
depending on the configuration) instead of 1000 lbf of
Fig. 8. TVC system requirements thrust for previous vehicles (P-1 & P-2). After the
successful flight and recovery of P-2 in Feb. 02, it
Pitch
Engine deflection
command actual
was decided to decouple the development of the
Flight
Actuator Airframe
attitude
command
computer engine
deflection dynamics thrust vector control system, which would fly on P-3,
from the aerospike engine. The P-2 vehicle would be
pitch rate
Rate reused for the aerospike engine maiden flight. For
sensor
this reason, and because all the design models done
Fig. 9. Active control loop at the time could be easily scaled, the decision was
made to change the thrust requirement from 500 lbf
to 1000 lbf.
Design and manufacturing
This section summarizes the development of the
aerospike engine. The reader interested in more
details can consult Ref. 1. From the constraints
imposed by the propulsion system and the design
requirements, several concepts were analyzed and
down-selected. The system main parameters (throat
area, mass flow rate, combustion chamber volume,
etc.) were calculated and flown down to engine
subsystems (injector, combustion chamber and
spike nozzle). Fig. 11 presents the engine designed
to meet all requirements.

Fig. 10. Solid model and prototype of engine gimbaling

system

5
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Fig. 11. Solid model of the aerospike engine
A series of 16 split triplets was selected for the
injector with additional outer and inner film cooling
holes in order to reduce the erosion rate at the
graphite throat (the design throat gap is
approximately 4.5 mm). The drilling of the film
cooling holes was particularly challenging because
of their small size (0.022 for the inside and 0.016
for the outside, see Fig. 12). Also, the many
grooves and manifolds added to the time needed to
machine the injector.
The combustion chamber was sized to ensure
proper burning of LOX and ethanol. Like for previous
engines, an ablative chamber was made (silica
fibers and phenolic resin) with a steel outer shell.
Fig. 12. Seth Quitoriano drilling the 0.016 film cooling
holes at 15o inclination to impinge on the spike
center rod
The nozzle was sized to expand the gases
optimally at 12,000 ft. Its shape was determined
using the method of Refs. 2 and 3. Ref. 1 describes
in more details this methodology and presents
some Computational Fluid Dynamics analyses
performed for the truncated nozzle used here. The
6
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
throat insert and the spike rod and nozzle were
machined out of a single piece of graphite. The spike
was held to the injector face through a rod
approximately 3 long.
Tests and status
A water flow test was conducted to verify proper
impingement of the various flows (Fig. 13), determine
the actual pressure drop across the face of the
injector, and trim the feedlines for proper mass flow
rates. The pressure drop was larger than anticipated
(150 psi instead of 90 psi) on the fuel side because
of the complex fuel flow pattern inside the injector
(the fuel enters the injector from the center and must
also reach the outer rim of the injector). Trim orifices
were added to obtain the proper mixture ratio.
Fig. 13. Water flow test of the injector
The engine was integrated into the GSC-
developed static fire test (SFT) stand, which includes
a propulsion system and load cells for thrust
measurements. Fig. 14 shows the SFT stand fitted
to VTS-2 at the MTA. Three load cells are located
between two half-inch aluminum plates. Also,
chamber pressure is measured by a pressure
transducer mounted on the side of the chamber.
Engine ignition is performed by lighting a small solid
motor also mounted on the side of the chamber
which provides approximately 3 seconds of burn.
Fig. 15 shows the engine 200 ms after ignition in
which a stable combustion is observed.
Unfortunately, the spike failed structurally right after
that, chocked the throat and lead to an explosion in
the injector (Fig. 16). The failed bottom portion of the
spike can be seen in the middle of Fig. 16 as it is
being ejected away from the engine. The left over
from the spike rod and where it failed are shown in
Figs. 17 and 18, respectively.
 more information as to what changes to make in the
next version of the engine.
The test, however, validated the ignition
sequence and, for a few ms, the soundness of the
design. Students are already at work machining the
next injector and preparing the revised engine. A
static fire test is planned for the Fall 02 and, if
successful, will be followed by a launch of the
previously-flown Prospector-2 vehicle.

Fig. 14. Aerospike engine on static fire test stand

Fig. 16. Explosion in injector right after spike failure

Fig. 17. Main injector plate and failed center rod

Plug failure
Fig. 15. Aerospike engine 200 ms after ignition
location
Interestingly, the graphite did not break near the
base of the injector where bending moments would
have been larger nor near the end of the rod
supporting the spike suggesting that bending was
probably not the cause of failure. Instead, having Fig. 18. Location of spike failure
used a very brittle material like graphite in tension
without additional support through the entire length 5. Conclusions
of the spike was probably the cause of the failure. The paper describes the California Launch
Analyses are currently being conducted to gain Vehicle Education Initiative and focuses on rocket
engine developments as part of the program. These
7
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
engines all produce around 1000 lbf thrust and burn educational institutions by getting them involved in
ethanol with LOX at 300 psi in an ablative the project. For industry, small and large businesses
combustion chamber pressure. To date, three alike, such projects help enhance technical
different engines have been developed, two of which capabilities by leveraging university assets, allow for
employ conventional bell-shaped nozzles. The third low cost technology development and/or validation,
one, a 1000 lbf thrust annular aerospike engine, was and give employers the opportunity to recruit
developed as part of the Aerospace System Design students who truly understand the product
Curriculum at CSULB. In this curriculum, students development cycle and pick among the best.
go from requirement definition to the manufacture
Acknowledgements
and test of an aerospace product. In the case of the
aerospike engine, it was designed, manufactured The authors would like to acknowledge the
and tested over a one-year period. The static fire California Technology Trade & Commerce Agency for
test was successful for 200 ms after which the partially funding CALVEIN. In addition, they would
engine spike nozzle structurally failed, resulting in like to recognize the work performed by the student
an explosion of the engine. Nevertheless, the team on the design of the aerospike engine, and
program met its educational objectives and the more particularly Seth Quitoriano, Jeffrey Lang,
students are now improving the baseline design to Collin Corey and Brandy Irish. Finally, they would
be able to test a new engine in a few months. The like to thank John Engberg and Stanley Baksi for
engine will then be static-fire tested and, if their contributions to the TVC system.
successful, the test will lead to the reuse of P-2 for References
the first flight of an aerospike engine in the history of
rocket propulsion. In addition, the thrust vector 1. E. Besnard, H.H. Chen, T. Mueller, and J.
control system described herein will be static-fire Garvey, Design, Manufacturing and Test of a
tested and flown in the next few months as well. Plug Nozzle Rocket Engine, AIAA Paper No.
One of the other outcomes of the program is a 2002-4038, July 2002.
series of lessons learned which can benefit any 2. G. Angelino, Approximate Method for Plug
type of hands-on student project. Some of these Nozzle Design, AIAA J,. Vol. 2, No. 10, 1964.
may seem obvious but have been included for 3. H. Greer, Rapid Method for Plug Nozzle
completeness. They are: Design ARS Journal, April 1961.
The goals should be achievable, not only in
terms of technical skills required and
capabilities available, but also cost and
schedule
Having a schedule with measurable
outcomes and sticking to those
milestones is paramount
Students need not design/build/test
everything
The focus should be on incremental
improvements
Teaming with industry and get a hardware
kit can help jump-start a program
Students need experienced mentors, for
both technical and managerial
aspectsStudents put more attention and
effort into a piece of hardware which they
truly believe is going to be operated or fly
Beyond benefiting the students, such programs
based on industry-academia collaboration add great
value in other ways as well. At the university, such
programs can help expand research and technology
capabilities and foster collaborations with other

8
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics