I Built The First LAMINAR FLOW ROCKET ENGINE

[@integza]

3D Models Resin Rocket:integza.com/collections/3d-models/products/resin-rocket GYROID ROCKET:integza.com/collections/3d-models/products/laminar-flow-rocket-engine K3D:k3d.nl/en/ Metafold 3D: metafold3d.com ([e-mail]) RPA Software:www.rocket-propulsion.com/index.htm Materials High Voltage Generator:amzn.to/3XwKkbB

[@𠀖cock]

yooo new intezgzag video les gooo

[@chitrankshsangolkar1088]

In which field did you do your graduation from ? I want to pursue my career in engineering experimenting and inventing like you , please let me know.

[@rexmann1984]

This is a work of beauty. ❤

[@baileyjerman5573]

Great pic of Mark rober in the back

[@Callsign_viper100]

I started building a water cooled jet engine because of your videos

[@jeppelarsen6582]

Hi Integza, I'm a research assistant in a research group researching in combustion engines. Personally I specialize in injection of liquid ammonia fuel into into IC engines, and I'm an old fan of rocket engine design! For me rocketry is the ultimate engineering problem combining so many engineering fields together! Let me just say i think your concept is absolutely awesome in the department of OF mixing. But in regards to the feasibility in real applications, I can foresee a cooling problem of the internal mesh if you are thinking of pushing the engine to its max capacity reliably everytime, to achieve the ultimative goal of maximizing thrust. Ultimately, the higher temperature you can create in the chamber the better efficiency, and the more thrust available, thereby creating the beautiful trade-off balance between efficiency and structural integrity. This is also one of the reasons to use pure oxygen, because then you don't waste a lot of energy heating up the 79% nitrogen in the air. Make it with pure oxygen! 😂😅🤪 (I really hope we get to see the divergent nozzle as well in the future!) I'm quite surprised that you did not use your software to create a regenerative cooling jacket around your nozzle chamber, maybe I have missed some details in this regard? If you decide to run with pure oxygen some time in the future, maybe you could consider using the liquid Butane in the flask to run through a cooling jacket in the outer wall of the rocket engine. Instant cooling AND potential higher fuel pressure! But absolutely fantastisk video! Super fan of your work! Br Jeppe

[@spudd86]

The fuel and air are flowing through the internal mesh, that's probably doing a fair bit of regenerative cooling, and they also flow around most of the combustion chamber, just not the nozzle.

[@lubricustheslippery5028]

The fuel was going around a big part of the engine and should somewhat cool it. So it may not be that bad.

[@Hector-bj3ls]

How many times can you say research in one sentence?

[@sk8pkl]

In regards to the cooling jacket, i know you can print in a "fractal latice" pattern so you get 2 "chambers" that have different internal volumes. You could run water or whatever into 1 of em.

[@YMandarin]

​@@sk8pkl but Integza is already using both chambers, that's why he is using the fractal pattern he runs in the oxygen into one side which then gets dispersed through the metal into the other side, where it combusts

[@inoob26]

Somewhere out there in Alabama, Destin is fist pumping the air

[@Gunny1971]

No doubt.

[@drethedog]

Crazy how that video is imprinted in my brain, that's the first thing that I tought when I read the title.

[@demonthewolfmovieproductio6884]

Here is the ironic part. My name is dusfin and i live somewhere in alabama....i also use petril and compressed air for my glass blowing torch

[@custos3249]

Wrong. Pumping produces pulsations that induce turbulence in a flow stream.

[@maliniv8043]

why which video reference are u talking about?

[@Skatuser]

Hello, Integza! Rocket engine designer/test engineer here. Very good to see you using RPA, if you can please share your config, very interested to see it (your L* is about 1.5?). Main problem with your injector type is heat managment. At low pressures, low flows and fuel-rich mixture ratios it will work, but at some point your combustion chamber inner wall will overheat and melt.(with beatifull but dangerous explosion). To answer your question "Is this a viable way of injecting propellant into the chamber?". It is, for your specific case. Ideas of using porous walls for fuel injectors was proposed and tested since invention of powder metallurgy. The problem is - wall overheats and then combusts. Problem with flame detachment comes from very low flowrates and as a result very small combustion chamber. You flame detachment is like 3/4 of your chamer length. I think you got numbers for injections speeds somewhere from literature, but this numbers are for normal-sized rocket engines. If you want to go with such low flowrates, next time search for "rocket engine igniters", some of them are very low power and low pressure rocket engines, exact thing you are searching for. Also you can cheat by using tangential flows. If you want to go in this field, you need invest some money and time in your instrumentation. Your way of raising butane pressure was very dangerous (I think you know it yourself, and if someone saw that in my test facility, it will be very bad). If you need more pressure, you can switch no natural gas in cylinders, they are about 13 bars, with pressure reducer you can get it to about 5 bars, and have cylinder installed outside your garage, with flame arrestors and purge lines, as it should be. You can use something like nodered for control interface and arduino hardware and modules for test control (Won't recomend NI hardware:) for it's huge price, therefore arduino). For your next designs invest in modular water-cooled jacket. It will make your experiments more safe, because your walls will always be as cool as water. If you have questions, feel free to contact me. I would like to discuss your safety measures, your instrumentation and data collection.

[@sliman-v2l]

hope integza sees this very intersting comment

[@TheSandurz20]

I would like to see him not explode, so I hope he does contact you.

[@dragonhearthx8369]

Wouldn't oil cooled be better? They can absorb alot more heat. Radiator fluid might be better as well.

[@pierce6456]

@@TheSandurz20 oh I was kinda thinkin I wanna watch to butane explode

[@pierce6456]

@@dragonhearthx8369 Another comment mentioned repurposing the liquid butane to run through a cooling jacket, I think that's a super neat idea

[@TheDarkmaster2160]

Very cool video! But a few minor (non-rocket) things. K3D isn't the only shop in the world that 3D Print porous metal structures, I've worked with some in the US that do as well. The structure you have is primarily lattice based with porous walls. If you can regulate the pore size (which is very time and money intensive testing various printing parameters [$250k + 6 months in my experience]) you can find the optimal pore radius and porosity for your mixture and flow rate, and could eliminate the lattice entirely, creating a more unilateral flow instead of the fuel and air taking a sharp left, then right, another right (all relative of course) then squeezing through the pores to the combustion chamber. The sparks at the beginning of your second print might not have been the spark plug, at least not entirely. The printing process can leave behind powder that can be blown out with rocket forces (which we obviously have here), and the heat + increased surface area (compared to a solid) can ignite them. It's why when you order powdered metals, they come with flammability warning labels on the side (depending on the metal), but solid metal doesn't (again, depending.... looking at you sodium and potassium). This engine is amazing for the fuel it's using, but personally I can't see it being used on things like SpaceX without some exponential redesigns. Like you said, butane has a flame speed of about 40 cm/s, but the fuel the use to go to outer space with has a flame speed of at least 3 meters per second, a full order of magnitude higher. Getting the right pore size and the right amount of pores meeting that size is one of the problems of the current printing process, which will hopefully be worked out in the near future. Metal 3D Printing hasn't been around that long, so we could be in the Nokia Brick era of metal printing, and 10-15 years down we may hit the smart phone phase equivalent of printing. The mixing of fuel/oxidizer before the combustion chamber is something I work with every day, and hopefully will revolutionize the combustion industries (not just rockets, but cars and other engines too). Like you said, it's a Win-Win-Win on that front. If you want to know more, check out Swiss Roll Volatile Organic Compound Incinerators to see what I'm doing. Tomatoes really do suck, I pull them out of everything if they even remotely resemble what they were before being turned into paste.

[@ruzziasht349]

Patent lawyer here, can you tell me who's printing 3d porous metal structures, as K3D holds the exclusive patent rights in this domain, I therefore request information regarding any parties involved in such activities.

[@TheDarkmaster2160]

@@ruzziasht349 I can't imagine that they hold ALL the patents to all porous metal 3D printing processes. There are at least 3 companies in the USA that do this on a variety of machines, but the machine that stands out the most is the Renishaw Am 400. Companies like Castheon and i3D MFG do porous metal printing regularly

[@ruzziasht349]

@@TheDarkmaster2160 I don't care what can can or cannot imagine, I need names. K3D holds a patent for creating hierarchical porous metals using 3D printing and a de-alloying process. This technology involves additive manufacturing to create nanoporous structures with multi-scale pore architectures. The unique aspect of the patent is the ability to control the pore sizes at different levels, enabling custom geometries and enhanced properties like increased surface area and faster charge transfer. This makes the porous metal structures particularly useful for applications in catalysis, energy storage, and filtration

[@TheDarkmaster2160]

@@ruzziasht349 You got your names if you read my comment. Castheon and i3D MFG. Have fun suing them, or trying to at least.

[@Kuchiriel]

@@ruzziasht349 You are disgusting. Worst kind of shit.

[@Wuzzup129]

Bob is the true hero of this story.

[@phyzzx]

Hell yeah, 3 cheers for Bob!

[@Mrwednesday84]

I salute Bob!

[@Miller190589]

Thank's Bob

[@DUKE_of_RAMBLE]

We love you Bob! Thank you for helping out in such an epic way! (and Bob's *_employeer,_* for letting Bob help in this epic way! lol 🫶)

[@unixnut]

Thanks Bob

[@nikaross7646]

Professional rocket engine designer here (and fan of your videos). Interesting idea using gyroidal geometry for injection. Very creative solution to a common problem with small liquid injectors. Without access to super expensive equipment to hold tight machining tolerances small injectors are very difficult to get good mixing out of and it's easy to run into a lot of stability problems like a lot of your attempts at more traditional injector types (impinging doublet, coax swirl, premixed showerhead) did. The gyroidal geometry will create a lot of turbulence and disruption in the flow down the combustion chamber which significantly improves residency time and mixing (both allowing for more steady combustion). Before I get into why the gyroidal injector geometry likely isn't a great I thought I'd point out that there is quite a bit of research going into 3D printed gyroidal geometry as a base for catalyst beds for monopropellant thrusters. 3D printing gyroidal geometry and plating or coating the high surface area bed with a catalytic element can result in a high specific surface area and a low restriction which results in better monopropellant performance for catalytic decomposition like the operating principle of a lot of the industry standard monopropellant hydrazine thrusters. Anyway, at the performance levels required for getting things to orbit, I foresee a couple of issues with the gyroidal injector element design. Namely thermals, pressure drop, and performance issues. Thermals: Generally, the performance requirements for liquid rocket engines require the combustion temperatures to be well above the melting point of any metal. This means you need to have mitigating circumstances to contain the combustion and any metal the is in the flow will likely erode away very quickly (like the gyroidal injector). The propellant flowing through the injector would likely provide some cooling, but it is almost certainly not enough to prevent any material from eroding very quickly. Pressure Drop: In a rocket engine, pressure drop from the highest pressure point to the combustion chamber is ideally minimized (excluding stability and throttling concerns). This is done to prevent losses which benefit nothing to the engine efficiency. If your supply pressure is limited like in this case, this results in lower chamber pressure and thus lower performance, and likely a less stable nozzle flow. In a context with pumps, this would mean that more input energy is required for the pumps to achieve the same chamber pressure as a lower pressure drop design (meaning more wasted energy). Performance: This one is kinda complicated, so I'll keep it a touch higher level. The high-level explanation of a rocket engine is that mass is accelerated as quickly as possible out the nozzle which provides a reactive force. Efficiency or performance comes from what percentage of the heat energy is converted into kinetic energy in the correct direction. Many things can effect this like exhaust products, combustion temperature, nozzle geometry etc. Something else that can effect this is to create more turbulence than required in the combustion chamber. Any swirling or non-axial flow effects result in energy losses and a lower exhaust exit velocity. The gyroidal geometry creates a lot of these non-axial flow effects. Unsolicited advice on if you attempt to approach this again with a more traditional injector design: 1.) Start with your constraints to work out your engine parameters. In this case it would likely have been the propellants you're using and the supply pressures from your tanks. 2.) As a general rule of thumb, injector stability should be fine at dP - Pc ratios of ~10% (dP - Pc ratio is the ratio between the pressure drop across the injector and the chamber pressure). In this case, that would mean a 10% total drop from your supply pressure in the chamber. I'd probably guess the chamber pressure should be a touch under 1.8bar. 3.) From the above, you should be able to use the combustion byproducts to figure out a good throat geometry (use the combustion byproducts to find the gas constant and the speed of sound, from there work out the throat diameter and decrease it a touch to make sure the flow gets to M=1 with the efficiency losses from imperfect combustion, chamber wall losses etc. 4.) Double check your numbers with RPA at a few different OF ratios and mass flow rates to make sure your rocket will stay choked over a range of your possible operational conditions. (I would go for a smaller throat than RPA needs due to inefficiencies stated above, and a throat that isn't sonic results in a 'fast candle' with pretty minimal thrust. 5.) Once you have the above, move onto an injector element design. The next bit is a bit dependent on your element choice, but there is literature out there for a lot of them (old NASA papers go hard). Essentially, you're aiming to get your pressure drop right, while making sure your flow rate of each propellant is correct for the OF and mass flow rate you're trying to target. With a propellant combination of air and butane it's about 15:1 Air:Butane by mass ratio for stoichiometric combustion. Good practice is to try and run rich of stoichiometric for better performance and even richer if you're aiming for low temperatures. If you're not looking for too much performance I would look to run at about 11:1 or so, will help keep the heat down. Each element type has other considerations to try and optimize mixing (momentum ratios, cone angle, jet angles, etc.). Another tip could be to try and use some film cooling to keep thermal issues away (just very tiny holes around the outside of the injector head that just get fed fuel) 6.) Next thing to consider would likely be the length of your chamber. Ideally you want to minimize this to minimize heat loss and potential longitudinal instability issues, but it needs to be long enough to allow for proper mixing. Again, I'd recommend checking literature for your element type (gas-gas flow is usually pretty low chamber lengths required) 7.) Send it (safely, please use appropriate pressure vessels for your propellants) Side note on point 6, the raptor engine uses really high pressure, hot-hot, gas-gas mixing in it's injector elements (the injector uses the exhaust from the pre-burners/turbines). This means the mixing and combustion happen super quickly and they can get away with using a really short chamber. This is likely partially why you were having issues with the exact replica as the propellants didn't have time to mix properly before entering the contraction at the throat. p.s. or maybe I'm not a rocket engineer, don't believe everything you read on the internet

[@jacks19822]

You are very serious there.. Internet is beautiful because of people like you. Showed my kid your comment he's like "woooow", he's working on model rockets too.

[@timkoehler]

@nikaross7646 Isn't the value for the chamber pressure the pressure after combustion? I might be wrong but i believe to remember that the chamber pressure is the pressure of the heated exaust gases in the combustion chamber. So I'd think he needs to use a higher value than 2 bar in RPA.

[@D-Vinko]

The entirety of the combustion chamber is a fuel line. I don't see the argument that there's not sufficient cooling.

[@nikaross7646]

@@timkoehler for the propellant to flow through the injector and into the combustion chamber there needs to either be higher pressure in the injector than in the chamber. Or you need a positive displacement pump (or similar system). Rockets use an injector pressure higher than the chamber pressure. Combustion adds heat, and expands the volume. It’s a balancing act to keep this at the right pressure though

[@nikaross7646]

@@D-Vinko you may need to extrapolate on what you mean here. If I’m correct in my interpretation my answer would be: Chamber wall temperature is the driving factor for melting or erosion. It is a heat transfer problem. Generally, the main inputs are the temperature of the combustion gas, the heat transfer through the chamber wall into the regen fluid, the regen fluid flow rate, and the regen fluid temperature. In this gyroidal injector case, the high surface area compared to the comparatively smaller mass flow of the propellants through the walls will result in melting if the combustion temperature isn’t kept super low

[@connor_mckinley]

Hi Integza, Professional KZbin Commenter here, I see some problems with your rocket in that it is attached to a table and not something that has wings, perhaps this is a design flaw that you could not have foreseen, however it is vital to the design of a rocket motor that it be attached to something which can bring people to space, or even perhaps monkeys. Come up with some news designs and make a new video by next Thursday, thank you.

[@brettgoldsmith8584]

This incredible comment satire proves you are indeed a Professional KZbin Commenter

[@RuffianTux]

Now THIS is what I came down here for.

[@drmaybe7680]

He's thinking big, plans to loft the whole lab into orbit.

[@profwoland8942]

As one Professional KZbin Commenter to another, I demand that you perform your duty and insult my intelligence.

[@DavidNightjet]

I would also like a rocket that brings me to monkeys

[@joaohenriqueneuhaus2023]

11:30 I'm sure everysingle engineer who managed to master their rocket engines must feel that way.

[@sinesurfing6029]

this is exactly how Wernher von Braun used to celebrate

[@maxk4324]

Hi integza! Huge fan here! So to cut straight to it, I'm a propulsion engineer, specifically I work on liquid rocket engines, and I have a very very important warning about your design! The porous injector idea is fascinating, and tbh I didn't expect it to work as well as it did, but it also poses a huuuuuge safety risk to you. In the region upstream of the porous injector you effectively have an enclosed volume of premixed fuel and oxidizer that, if the engine gets hot enough, will spontaneously combust before ever reaching the combustion chamber itself. However while the combusion chamber has the nozzle to allow the gasses to flow out, this volume does not. It would most likely result in an explosion within the injector inlet volume. Best case scenario is it blows the hoses off. Worst case scenario is it shatters the thin and brittle (strong, but still brittle because it's 3D printed) walls of the injection volume and sends metal shrapnel flying everywhere. Please stay safe, and looking forward to your next video!

[@superslash7254]

In other words, it's a surprise grenade.

[@Tarvoskemwer]

one could even call it a holey handgrenade

[@jackriekse4596]

whats a potential fix? heatsinks with waterjackets? electronic temp sensors with automatic shutoff?

[@briansliker226]

tesla valve built in upstream

[@kiwiman9754]

​@@jackriekse4596best way is to avoid mixing fuel and oxidant until it's in the place it's designed to burn. Alternatively a flame arrestor or explosion hatch/relief

[@Jesse-sf5hh]

Coffee machine technician here, that is probably too hot to make espresso. Carry on

[@thecursed01]

so you say it makes espresso quicker?

[@QUACKHEAD-45]

Pfft amateur, I am espresso technician, you could instantly boil water. Carry on

[@Supercohboy]

I believe in world where, one day, we have jet-powered espresso machines that create a cup of espresso near-instantly. We need more-robust beans that can withstand the higher temperatures, we just haven't gotten there yet with our current bean crops!

[@aleonflex6611]

I like my coffee vaporized

[@Tao_Tology]

​@@Supercohboy#DriveThruEspresso

[@HexerPsy]

I like how this attracted some real professionals in the comments :D It was worth the read and the watch!

[@boywonder2120]

Why wouldn't it?

[@joefinch4340]

Engineer here, inventor is better

[@LucNau-y2s]

Video suggestion. You should build a wood or coal powered rocket engine, let me explain myself. The exhaust of the combustion would be harnessed (by a turbocharger or something) and then used to feed air into the combustion chamber, accelerating the combustion and making it so even more air came into the combustion chamber. As the exhaust grew bigger it would reach a point where thrust is generated. Just make sure it has an emergency gas relief valve. Also, I wanted to tell you I love your videos.

[@TheWhiteDragon3]

It really has been absolutely wild that this last decade has produced such incredible advancements in metal 3d printing.

[@lvdovicvs]

When I saw the cutaway view printed in PLA it made me think of what passes for "alien tech" in sci-fi movies these days

[@Heroo01]

@@lvdovicvs AI designed parts are even crazier. They look organic because of how they only include the most necessary structural elements

[@drkastenbrot]

@@Heroo01 they are not ai designed, its good old generative design which uses simulations to determine where material is needed.

[@Heroo01]

@@drkastenbrot It's basically AI designed to the layman "Generative design is a method of using AI algorithms to generate and evaluate multiple design alternatives based on input from the user" first google result from "generative design"

[@TV3MASTER]

​@@Heroo01 Wrong kind of generative, what drkast is talking about is actually called "'Topology Optimization" and has nothing to do with AI, it's just math. In fact, there is a 2022 paper describing how AI assisted topology optimization is actually worse then pure (og) math based. I mean it makes sense, because you train AI on known solutions, so it's not going to make new ones, just combinations of old things. They even go as far as suggesting using AI for this is wastefull, as the compute you need to train the AI model and afterwards use it, would generate an order of magnitude better results when used for topology optimization directly. You can find an interview with the authors of that paper on cdfam, summarizing the important stuff.

[@ryanforbes5275]

Delivery driver here and this was pretty awesom.

[@Aidan-wilson]

this made me laugh, thanks

[@harleybmx9725]

I'm not rocket scientist and do not know very much towards this subject, however I do play with jet engines, and the biggest no no towards small turbines is the use of pure butane, it doesn't provide the heat required nor the combustion, using an ISO/butane (60 butane/ 40 propane) you should definately see different results, unless that is what you use. The properties of the fuel that is used is key to the magic of internal combustion in both jet and rocket applications.

[@superiorflanch6645]

Honestly I do nothing related with this comment but I see how that can possibly improve it.

[@miscbits6399]

or skip the isobutane and jump straight to using propane (which is cheaper and higher pressure anyway)

[@Momossim]

Another big no no is boiling propane inside the bottle

[@jerry3790]

@@miscbits6399butane is a bastard gas after all

[@andersjjensen]

@@Momossim If you get "safety twitches" then this channel is not for you. Integza is notoriously sketchy. Personally I consider that half the fun (because I'm a few thousand kilometers of internet cables away from him).

[@The-Dom]

What a crazy time to be alive with this technology. Dude's printing rockets with a 3d engineering program that's easier to use than ordering lunch on uber.

[@ursa0607]

Now you can try improving it even further by pre-heating the fuel and the oxygen pre-combustion. You can dry doing it the way it's done on modern rockets by having them flow around the engine before entering the combustion chamber, but that means either making a new engine or printing a metal attachment to this one, like spiraling tubes that sit tight around the engine. Very excited for your projects and love to see the progress! Well done!

[@tritiumdotca]

When I first saw the design on the engine I was hoping he had done this

[@M2rsh]

he could probably just wrap copper pipe around the engine and add something like thermal paste between the rocket and pipes to improve heat conductivity

[@AndyFromBeaverton]

Post running the engine, he should keep the compressed air flowing until the engine cools down.

[@Platypus_Warrior]

The weight of the chamber might be an issue. There must be some data about fuel efficiency/thrust/weight out there. Could the gyroid shape be up scaled to space rockets? How efficient would that rocket be ? Can it allow air as a comburent ? So many questions... Very interesting

[@lolzdatguy4987]

Yeah and maybe use cryogenic propellant and oxidizer, to cool the engine

[@the_mister_magister]

8:00 yes, but integza, CAN MIGHT NOT BE RATED FOR SUCH PRESSURE

[@gnorts_mr_alien]

it's in the name: "can" so obviously it can duh

[@tychormthorp]

Yeah, I feel like there's a safer solution to pressurize butane

[@I_am_looking_for_GF]

Yeah that got me screaming, i do not want him to die

[@Alexander_Kale]

As soon as he mentioned heating up the can to increase the pressure, I started waiting for a scene where the can exploded. Maybe he got lucky, or he came to the same conclusion and didn't try to push his luck. Either way, I would not be surprised if those butan cans can actually withstand some heating and the accompanying pressure increase. The designers presumably put some nice safety margin on them to account for hot days and rough handling, especially in camping utensils.

[@williamnixon3994]

@@Alexander_Kale "So I got the butane boiling over here" I was waiting to hear the can become the bomb he was turning it into with that kind of a statement. Christ almighty, did he get lucky

[@kennyhagan5781]

Strangely, the more organic looking the components are, the better the performance is. I am impressed.

[@tylerdancey6085]

Not strange at all whan you think about it, living things have a dramatically higher efficiency than most things engineers design. Our muscles and brain can run on twinkies and root beer.

[@harrymu148]

@@tylerdancey6085 also mother nature had literal millions of years to try and fail things. Pretty hard to match millions of years of R&D time

[@miguelcanoe6774]

More organic form does not necessarily or inherently lead to higher efficiency. Higher efficiency tends to be more organic in form than simple to machine parts drawn by draftsmen with pens and ruler.. on average. There is almost a limitless variety of organic forms. Some more complex, convoluted, sexy?, simple or elaborate than others. Some efficient, some not. Running rocket fuel through the GI tract of a bumble bee is only 33% as efficient as rocket fuel through a moose ass. Both are very organic. And both are better than through a VW muffler. But the ultimate efficiency and very organic by coincidence, is rocket fuel through a worm hole. Not a worm hole. A worms hole.

[@DundG]

Not at all strange. Unlike buildings and tools which we can easily replace and change for better tools, living things are done once they fail, so of course the highest evolutionary pressure is to be as energy efficient as possible to ensure survival until procreation.

[@JMurph2015]

I think the squares and rectangles thing applies. Not all organic things are efficient, but most efficient designs have some organic analogue. This is especially true with regard to maximizing surface area for reactions, we just have tons and tons of examples of that in living things since that's kinda the whole business of living. On the other hand though, some hyper efficient structural designs are not organic looking because organisms aren't great at building *extremely* regular structures. Honeycomb is pretty good, but still has slight cell-to-cell variation that we can do better than.

[@nickrobertson9533]

I absolutely love your projects!!! I love trying to build things as well even though most people around me think im crazy for constantly "tinkering". Thanks for being an amazing inspiration!!!

[@RHYS.TV123]

You engineer mindset is showing; having the foresight to make the engine modular is extremely practical, keep the combustion chamber the same and experiment with the nozzle so you don’t have to request a new combustion chamber if you are trouble shooting the nozzle. Alternatively, you could like the nozzle design and think you need a new combustion chamber, and you only order 1 part instead of 2. Extremely intelligent guy, glad to have this in my recommended 10:31

[@jerseybound717]

it's also very dangerous what he just did.

[@kylemoran455]

One of the many things that I love about your videos is, you go down each individual train of thought when approaching a problem, and that leads to situations with a burning rocket and the statement “mission accomplished!” on the screen.

Taking your top comment to say my reaction to the sight of this video was: "Wait, nobody bothered to use laminar flow in rocket engines? Millions of dollars, but apparently that's not worth making your engine work smoothly?"

[@Adventures_EC]

We love you BOB and K3D. You rock

[@bobvanlochem5593]

Thank you sir

[@SibaNL]

@@bobvanlochem5593 Hey Bob, ben jij werkzaam in Eindhoven? Ik zou graag een keertje rond willen kijken.

[@karunakaranlokamitravelblg7070]

A theme I would suggest for a future video would be Aerospike VS Bell Nozzle Engine. You could compare both engine. Love your videos! 😊😅

[@skyeline9228]

@integza Safety Engineer with a degree in Aerospace Engineering here: NEVER stand next to an experimental rocket motor during testing. If there is an error in the design, or something unexpected happens, that rocket motor will explode. Especially with complicated internals like this, if an inside part melts and clogs the nozzle, that combustion chamber will become a bomb. Please put more safety disclaimers in your videos. Most people don't have the tools to make these, but you don't want someone blowing themselves up because they tried to copy you.

[@harrymu148]

This should be upvoted more. More blast shields at least.

[@beardedchimp]

With the pressures being fed in, even with a catastrophic failure I don't see how it could explode like a bomb. If the nozzle clogs the air+butane intake will stop, even with a pressure spike it will backfeed rather than build up. This simple prototype doesn't have turbopumps forcing high pressures that could explode. That said, I'm in general agreement that youtubers routinely have a flagrant disregard for safety as being gung-ho makes for better videos. With their reach they should realise the widespread influence their content holds. Being overly safe should be seen as cool, the Hydraulic Press Channel does this well, building an entire bunker while constantly mentioning the serious danger from the extreme forces involved.

[@InquirerAshen]

I dont think safety disclaimers are necessary, its a rocket, the danger is self evident and the requirements needed to even get close to building a functional design similar to this pretty much guarantee that anyone attempting to follow in the footsteps of integza will have to be fairly knowledgeable. Long story short if youre smart enough to build a rocket youre probably smart enough to take precautions, if youre not smart enough to take precautions youre probably not smart enough to build a rocket. Dont get me wrong accidents do happen but they are often a result of people knowing what the right thing to do is, but failing to execute or becoming complacent.

[@pjaworek6793]

Should see some of the old experiments in the attic, so much fire

[@aaronunterseher1627]

While I agree with you, this is also low velocity fuel, low pressure, and room air With what he's using, the idea of it blowing is unlikely Now, with pure or liquid O2 under 300 bar with a high velocity fuel, then I would absolutely agree to the fullest

[@nmasty3466]

Nice video, try to make a leaf-blower out of this one :)) make it bigger !?

[@mikels4459]

That will be in theme with the season… summer is gone 🥲

[@teaganthornbrue]

I love this

[@mad_goddess2830]

I can’t imagine blowing fire at dry leaves would end well

[@Muffffin]

So a flame thrower?

[@nmasty3466]

@@Muffffin :)) exactly

[@Talik13]

It's not every day that someone just stumbles across a super cool engineering feat that nobody tried before. This was so dope

[@lephtovermeet]

In engineering it's actually not terrible uncommon. What's rare is having the opportunity and ability to pursue it.

[@unvergebeneid]

​@@lephtovermeetwhat's even rarer is that it's actually better

[@ManBearSquirrelGuy]

What's rare is seeing this technology applied and then actively suppressed.

[@Talik13]

@@lephtovermeet Very good point

[@KarmaCadet]

You may be surprised to find that similar methods have been pursued since the 1950s.

[@dealsaua]

The algorithm always points me towards your videos because I always end up watching them fully and sharing, so I finally just subscribed lol. A video on Tesla's conceptual wireless transmission of electricity at room to room distances will be cool 🙂

[@ErinMoth296]

This is actually fucking crazy, you have an engine that could easily be self cooled, cryogenically too, that could possibly use HHO det gas, and have a constant detonation, not a rotdet, not a pulsedet, just the det. This is insane just from the fact that a civilian could make something with an ISP of roughly 1.3 km/s, be self cooled, and be roughly the size of a water bottle. I love this.

[@williamnixon3994]

Do note the engine ran VERY hot on the inside, so I'd have questions about the longevity of the interior geometry especially when scaled up to full rocket motors

[@ErinMoth296]

@@williamnixon3994 The thing with this is that it has coolant/fuel/oxidizer running through the entirety of the engine, including the inside of the pieces of the insides, considering the RS-25 only uses pipes that don't directly intake heat, thus most of the internal walls taking the heat, and the pipes basically make up this engine, if you use LH2 it would get extreme cooling, way more than the RS-25 has, and if you run this on HHHO or HHOO non-det gas it would probably also get way more cooling than needed.

[@adamhixon]

@@williamnixon3994 I bet there's a lot of optimization that can be done in the geometry to maximize the cooling effects of the fuel flowing through the .. "injection gyroid?". There could also be some changes made to the combustion chamber side of the gyroid walls to better move the hot gas toward the exit nozzle rather than bake the gyroid. Velocity is key and I think that current shape is probably restricting flow.

[@mythoti]

​@@williamnixon3994we'll have unobtainium eventually 🥹

[@fabuilds7155]

@@adamhixon Rifling it's gonna make its way to rockets now

[@AdamosAdamou-d7e]

Hello Integza, been watching you for a while and as someone who spent 4 years on my PhD related to additively manufactured combustion chambers for micro gas turbines (Very niche topic but its gaining some interest due to off grid power demand and jet powered drones), I was pleasantly surprised when I see your latest video. Although for rockets as many others have pointed out, you have an issue in mass, for stationary gas turbines that’s not as much of an issue, although pressure loss is. Your second concept is actually similar to something I had designed a few years ago for a catalytic combustor. Issue with them is that they can only run as hot as the substrate can stand so they typically run relatively cold (~800 degC) and are made of ceramics. So my idea was to use metal AM and include an internal structure with airflow pathways integrated into them, so your inlet air cools down your substate and heats up the inlet air acting as a heat exchanger and then the other side of the surface is coated in a reactive coating that creates an exothermic reaction from the air/fuel mixture passing by it. Never got it past some CAD concepts but always wondered how well it would work. The porous media would also be good for both cooling and air/fuel mixing for micro gas turbines. In any case, great videos. Look forward to seeing more. Cheers Adam

[@5Stringslinger]

My thought is: What if, instead of feeding it butane as gas, turning the can around so the butane would phase change inside the rocket. That would take a lot of heat away. Don't know, if you can control a nice combustion, tho.

[@MrJdsenior]

Did you see the 2.9 Richter blast just achieved by Ukraine with their latest jet drone? Just standard off the shelf propulsion, obviously, but it was quite a show. Skads of stuff from all the way back into the Soviet era is still popping off in that dump, a day later. Ammo and weapons that won't be killing Ukrainians now, and it was a bit further away from Ukraine than Moscow. It's a bitch when you pick a fight with an enemy who is smarter than you are, and is forced to then apply those smarts to figuring out how to hurt you, I guess. And this was their 'state of the art' model weapons facility bunkers touted to withstand nuclear strikes. There ISN'T a bunker that will withstand a direct nuclear strike, unless it is buried deep under a mountain, and maybe not even then. This 'nuclear hardened facility' didn't even withstand an oversized RC jet with a few high explosives on board. :-) Sorry to go off topic, my bad.

[@ConnorSinclairCavin]

The post-burnout shell actually looks like something you would see in a museum about the first step toward some new branch of technology, i hope you kept it, its rather cool, looks almost like old medicine bottle glass

[@Fr0sty-mq2zb]

Hey Integza, could you make a video of a mini thrust block? I'm a huge fan of rocket engine testing (big and small), and I think it would be neat to see a homelab mini concrete launchpad / thrust test station! Thanks for the awesome videos, keep it up!

[@chrisblake4198]

You're basically discovering the principles of lungs and lung disease, but in reverse. Healthy tissue is like your final design, and efficiently draws a lot of air in and absorbs it. Disease destroys those wrinkles and voids and leaves larger voids with less surface area. A lung essentially unmixes your fuel air combo and puts it back in the tanks.

[@Cane4092]

Welp were pretty good at discovering things that we can already do

[@xipietotec]

That’s also what high temperature combustion, and high pressure fuel injection will eventually do to the the porous injection membrane, eventually causing lung cancer again.

[@Cherrybomb-rp1vx]

Woah that’s actually dope

[@gonehunt]

Hey, late to the party, but test engineer here. Mainly aerospace fuel and hydraulic systems but some high pressure high flow pneumatic applications. I can't add or even come close to the depth of knowledge from some of the great replies here. What I CAN speak to is the danger of the systems you are playing with. You are very well knowledgeable and sensible, but one quick mistake can be the losing an eye or your hearing or your life. Butane and compressed air = fire. Butane and Pure O2 as some of these comments are talking about using to increase efficiency, can very quickly = BOOM. Just be safe man, and keep up all the awesome work and creativity!

[@SpencerHHO]

As someone even less qualified but with experience with metallurgy, industrial chemistry and doing dangerous shit I can also add a safety concern: pure oxygen and high temperature can and will ignite many metals including iron alloys. So a pure oxygen burner could result in spraying molten metal oxides in a spectacular fashion. If this is stainless you can also liberate chromium and nickel oxides which can be incredibly toxic too. I think you can get industrial oxygen mix with an amount of CO2 or nitrogen present. I've seen 80% O2 with 20% N2 available. Probably safer with plenty of extra oxygen. Regardless, a thick acrylic blast shield should be a minimum between meatbags and experimental high energy objects.

[@sfgunnner]

@@SpencerHHO

[@gonehunt]

@@SpencerHHO silly squishy humans

[@SyberSmoke]

Integza, you may face the same issue as an Aerospike. That being, because you have metal in the combustion chamber, that metal will get hot, very hot. And the heat has no where to go...so it will just get hotter. The Aerospike has a heating issue they are trying to solve. But if you get prolonged use from the engine...you need a way to cool the stuff in the combustion chamber or...well...it will melt.

[@re-bot9855]

the difference between this and an aerospike is that aerospikes don't really cater well to using the fuel lines to give regenerative cooling, meanwhile integza's design here has basically the entirety of the combustion chamber benefiting from regenerative cooling as both the entire chamber and the metal pattern inside of the chamber are completely enveloped in active fuel flow. long as the fuel flow is good enough it should have plenty of active cooling, I'd be more worried about the nozzle overheating as it completely lacks any sort of active cooling.

[@Stephenson-2-18]

One person who has common sense

[@genin69]

When that engine starts moving thru the air at speed wont the air cool it? Or would that not be enough?

[@bkucenski]

You can probably create hollow tubes throughout that metal interior now that go in one side and out the other and fill the metal with coolant. The other thing they do is cool the fuel going into the rocket. So you could use that interior metal with internal pipes to pump the cold fuel in instead of heating the fuel to put already evaporated fuel into the engine.

[@benbennit]

Moar curvy tubes inside. If you're using cryogenic liquid propellant, pump it through those new tubes. It's a pretty amazing design tbf.

[@bladkingz]

Integza, your innovative 3D-printed rocket engine is mind-blowing! The unique combustion chamber design is a game-changer, and I'm thrilled to see you pushing the envelope of DIY aerospace engineering. Building on your brilliant work, I've got some ideas that might take your thermal efficiency to the next level: 1. **Nozzle Cooling Extension**: While your internal mesh is doing a great job with regenerative cooling around the combustion chamber, the nozzle might be at risk of becoming a hotspot. What if you extended the fractal lattice pattern into the nozzle itself? This could create micro-channels for coolant flow, addressing the current cooling deficiency without compromising structural integrity. 2. **Tri-Layer Fractal Cooling Matrix**: Imagine a three-layer cooling system: - Inner layer: Your current fuel circulation for initial cooling and pre-heating - Middle layer: Cryogenic oxidizer flow for intense cooling - Outer layer: A separate coolant (maybe water or liquid methane) for final heat dissipation This multi-layer approach could dramatically improve heat management and potentially allow for higher combustion temperatures and greater thrust. 3. **Adaptive Thermal Distribution**: What if you incorporated a network of micro-sensors throughout the engine to monitor temperature in real-time? You could use this data to dynamically adjust the flow rates in each cooling layer, optimizing heat distribution on the fly. 4. **Smart Material Integration**: For your next 3D printing endeavor, consider a composite material that combines: - Low thermal expansion alloys for structural stability - High thermal conductivity elements to efficiently channel heat to cooling systems - Shape-memory alloys that respond to temperature changes, automatically adjusting critical clearances for optimal performance 5. **Thermal Energy Recapture**: Here's a wild idea - what if you implemented a thin layer of thermoelectric generators in the outer cooling jacket? This could convert some of the waste heat into electricity to power your engine's control systems and sensors. It's like getting free energy! I'm incredibly excited to see where you take this next, Integza. Your work is inspiring a whole new generation of rocket enthusiasts and makers. Have you considered any of these approaches? I'd love to hear your thoughts on their feasibility in your setup. Keep pushing the boundaries of what's possible!

[@KadenJones-e4d]

I was doing homework, but this is more interesting than free body diagrams.

[@AaranyakBose]

Ayo bro which class you read in ? Because I read in class 11 , India and I have been doing the same Free Body Diagram problems 😂

[@imperialguardsman135]

brother I'm trying to learn the same thing and getting distracted by the same thing lmao

[@analogsergal]

i feel that

[@1mariomaniac]

Way more interesting than writing an informative speech too.

[@dpride00]

Few things are less interesting than free body diagrams

[@fbi1397]

An aeronautical engineer… I’d recommend that you let the air and fuel mix in a way where it is not a ready mixture next to the combustion chamber.. it is literally a bomb waiting to explode.. You should design a mixer system in a way that if it pre-ignites by any chance all of the combusted air has to leave through the nozzle or a pressure release valve. Yet it’s a great invention

[@ScareAlien]

And I'm spiderman U got anti return valves in gaz reservoir...

[@spider-man8222]

I'm Spider-Man ​@@ScareAlien

[@dlaerospace]

The J-2 engines on the Saturn V used a combination of coaxial injectors and a pourous injector plate to help them atomize their hydrogen fuel, so yeah. This is a really neat solution to a complex problem. Would love to see some turbopumps powering your engines in the future!

[@drkastenbrot]

getting things small is always the neat solution, fluidics and mechanics will have their very own transistor moment soon enough

[@Simple_But_Expensive]

Using Tesla turbines!

[@Techenthusiast652]

Hi 👋 Im 12th grade student from india Following ur works coz I have interest on them and it's understandable, easily learnable and pure entertainment for me.(Recreated ionic plasma thruster(V1 , V2, V3) and plasma wing(V1, V2), tesla turbine, coil gun) I just think how u r going to deal with the thermals as the gyroids inside the chamber melts it may block the pores or it may burst(?). I think it would be efficient for deep space travel, fighter planes(maybe I don't know exactly) but for sure it would be a boon for spacecraft probes/modules which needs efficiency for deep space travel if it could run on minimum fuel and produce high thrust. Big fan of u and ur works After Nambi Narayanan, Missile man of India, RJ Oppenheimer, N.Tesla, u r the living inspiration for me 🎉 I tried to break 2nd law of thermodynamics 😅 which isn't psble but i tried to create a loop so that no energy in the system will be wasted. Try to create a engine or a system that breaks 2nd law of thermodynamics 😊

[@somrupnaga4324]

I don't know i count as a specialist but I have taken some courses on Rocket propulsion, by viable if you mean in commercial rockets, 1. Using a gyroid will definitely increase the weight and complexity of the rocket chamber decreasing specific impulse 2. more over it may not be up-to the task of living in that kind of pressure 3. currently used Impinging injectors are pretty good enough

Gyroid is also a baffling structure, so that means your thrust relies on the expansion of gas via temperature alone, which means it won't scale well to a liquid engine.

[@MustafaKhan-hz5mr]

I would highly suggest setting up a load cell to measure thrust since you have been building soo many rockets. it would be a nice addition and your results will be more quantitative

[@ПётрСемерич]

It physically hurts me watching these people make rocket engines, and then measuring the wind they generate. Just save our time and don't include these measurements, they are not informative anyways.

[@MustafaKhan-hz5mr]

@@ПётрСемерич exactly

[@ikeeichenberger8072]

I love your videos. Definitely think you should replace the gyroidal geometry interior with a hyper or logrithmic spiral to reduce the turblance and create a rotating thrust to get flow very tight and consistent.

[@stuarthamilton5112]

COMBUSTION INSTABILITY!!! You are encountering a similar problem to what the engineers of the F-1 engine on the Saturn V ran into! You need baffles! Now, I am typing this comment at about 29 seconds in, and I am pretty sure that is exactly what you did and the results were amazing. Now to continue watching. Ok, by about 3 minutes and 30 seconds you didn't use baffles, but you DID add holes, which was ONE solution the Saturn V engineers used on the F-1. The injector plate is FULL of holes! This is so cool to watch!

[@malteser0212]

I have a few comments on this: 1. Try using oxygen instead of air. 2. Whatever fluid is of higher pressure, use it and the bernoulli principle to pull the fluid with lower pressure out of it's container. High speed fluids can create a vacuum in the right geometries, which can pull other fluids with it. With this you can greatly increase the throughput of your fuel. 3. A detached flame can work in your favor I think. If you optimize the speed so that the flame is only just detached from your internal nozzle, you won't have to worry about temperature resistance of the nozzle. As long as the combustion stays inside of your combustion chamber, you're golden. 4. With the lattice geometry you get great surface area, which is good for smooth and consistent fuel injection, but awful for internal overheating. The lattice at the front of the nozzle will probably get far too much heat, and risks getting burnt. At least it risks getting burned if you have an oxygen surplus. If your chemistry is in perfect balance, then the nozzle can't burn from inside out, all it can do is melt. Still worrysome though. Great work! And I doubt that 7 beers would make it up. Considering the price of baseline metal 3d printing... It feels more like 70 to 7000 beers to compensate him.

[@TheAruruu]

if you're designing the engine for mostly atmospheric operation, such as the primary lifting boosters, perhaps he could design a chamber that uses a secondary porous section for the nozzle section that could have regular air pumped into it to create an insulating barrier against the combustion (and maybe introduce a bit more oxygen) that extends down to the point where you would switch to a more heat tolerant material for the diverging cone. assuming that he switched from atmospheric air to pure oxygen for the main mixing chamber, that should provide a good method of A) reducing cooling needs overall, especially with optimizing the flame displacement to not contact the internal gyroid, and B) preventing the converging section from melting, while potentially reducing stress on the overall structure from the detonations since the insulating air can also act as a bit of a shock absorber reducing the spikes into a more constant force on the housing. even as it is, it would probably be a pretty good design for a control surface type thruster. one that doesn't run continuously, but still needs to produce smooth thrust, and needs to start quickly. though, this would probably only apply to large structures like the ISS, with high inertia and won't need rapid small adjustments like the various modules that dock with the ISS.

[@Snake756]

I've got to imagine getting practical examples of your one-of-a-kind tech in front of a lot of eyes is worth the cost of making a part like this. I'd imagine at least half the people watching this video have engineering degrees, so it's some great marketing imo.

[@alsmith2764]

I love everything about this video. The innuendos. The “here’s my rocket engine, here’s my butane can that I’m boiling, and here’s my windex bottle with water for safety” and the badass engineering. Here. Have a like. And a subscribe!

[@PriyadarshiNandan]

Hi Integza! Rotary Vane Engine: A Unique Power Source A rotary vane engine is a type of internal combustion engine that offers several advantages over traditional piston engines. Its design features a rotor with vanes that seal the combustion chamber, creating a variable compression ratio. This unique configuration can result in improved fuel efficiency, reduced emissions, and smoother operation. I believe that building a prototype of a rotary vane engine would be a valuable educational and experimental project. make a video on this topic .!!!

[@TDMCrecher]

8:19 "Mark Rober has a six pack now" What XD

[@Jujukungfu]

He totally does lmao

[@noobmuch-k4r]

He always wears a hoodie in every video so you could never tell

[@البراء_فكرة]

14:50 i am not a specialist but you did a great jop

[@coalthedergsune]

he did, in fact, do a great jop.

[@bigchungusus]

Very good jop indeed

[@Flesh_Wizard]

He knows how to get the jop done

[@wescom.vallen]

very great jop done

[@DEATH-flare]

A job that's better than government work 👍

[@sebastianmichaelis6640]

No matter how many times I watch a rocket fire off, it never gets old. The sheer power, precision, and human ingenuity behind this engineering is absolutely mind-blowing! Hats off to Integza.

[@flyingsharks3290]

Great Idea for a new way for fuel injection. But i just got an idea whilst i was in my shower (the best place to think imo), on all your videos i saw, you work on nozzles issues, combustion chamber issues, injection failures or materials issues mostly. But i think you forget a major flaw on all your designs : the fuel presure. I think you should work on a turbo-pump on a side project to ease a lot of your injection problems and combustion chamber pressure issues. Keep it simple, a turbine powered by an electrical motor, some pressure sensors to check ins and outs and a small algorithm to control the speed of the pump depending on pressure data. No need to resist high heat, just pressure, so tou can maybe 3d print it or even maybe recycle an old turbocharger turbine (making rocket engine while saving the planet, what a great deed :D)

[@Morndenkainen]

I love the novel design on this. Here's what I'd do next if it were me. 1. Get a lexan shield in case that thing decides to become a grenade. The more you play with that engine, the higher pressure you're going to be tempted to run. At some point, it WILL fail. Safety first. 2. Design a cooling jacket around the engine to help keep the case cool. Don't burn your ears. :) 3. Huge bonus points if you can find a way to liquid cool the Gyroid as well. The biggest problem with your design is going to be keeping that thing cool so it doesn't melt. The heat has nowhere else to go, and without a slight gas buffer between the fuel/air and the metal, it's going to absorb heat instead of using the fuel/air as a pass-through coolant. 4. Switch from compressed air to pure oxygen so you don't have to waste energy on the pre-heat. Also, using pure oxygen instead of air will reduce the amount of "air" you have to feed the thing by 78%... Unless you want to feed it more. :) 5. Raise your pressures and expirement with fuel types. Be aware, that you may need to reduce the size of your gyroid depending on the flame speed of the fuel you change to. 6. Maybe find a way to capture the H2 and O2 from your HHO generator to use as fuel? Don't be surprised if a couple of guys from SpaceX use this idea, it's pretty awesome.

[@raylenn4444]

Why not dry cool it?

[@greenaum]

Also he might wanna switch from his bedroom to at least the garage. If his home insurace company ever sees his videos, bang goes his coverage. You can't burn your house down with rocket engines indoors and expect them to pay out a claim.

[@Morndenkainen]

@@raylenn4444 The KISS principle. Plus, if for whatever reason he does eventually decide to push this thing to its absolute max, he'll already have the hard part done for using the liquid fuel/oxidizer as coolant. Less parts to break.

[@Morndenkainen]

@@greenaum At this scale and fuel type? Meh, it's safe enough. It really all depends on how far he wants to push things.

[@raylenn4444]

@@Morndenkainen i see. That's a fair point.

[@Orlaz92]

Hi Integza! Wow, the way you've managed the airflow is truly impressive. It would be fantastic to see a project where this engine is used to power a low-altitude hovercraft or a Bladeless Turbine power generator! You could combine the laminar flow technology with some advanced control systems to create something unique. Keep up the great work, Integza, your inventions are always amazing! 🚀💡

[@lolekpllolekpl7560]

0:31 half life 2 strider sound

[@tmylve3495]

HL3 confirmed

[@quantumbrainium1904]

Video ideas: Make a a rocket/jet engine boomerang. Make a jet engine so small you can fit it on a paper airplane(maybe inexpensively with sacrificial 3D printed parts so you can have a large initial thrust). Make a jet engine that repels the rain. Jet engine propelled and powered lawn mower. This one is a bit more technical(microcontrollers, custom code work gyro controls, etc.) but I’m sure Integza could do it - Make a table tennis(for more ridiculous entertainment) or regular tennis match with rocket power paddles that fire every time you go to hit the ball. Also…PLEASE GIMME DAT PRINTER ID LITERALLY JUMP OUTTA A WINDOW OF A 10 STORY BUILDING FOR ONE…though fr I live in total poverty, and just about everyone does in my area…literally no one I know can afford one, and it would be nice to bring such a thing to the community. I’d like to be able to start tinkering and teaching others myself(though I take up what hobbies I can already and do so, it would be reallllyyy beneficial)

[@yoface2537]

Half of the comments: Hi integza, (relevant scientist) here, something something, explosion, something something, rockets

[@jeslinmx22]

Absolutely wild that chatter like this that was once confined to the offices of rocketry companies or university aerospace departments is now in a KZbin comments section

[@Uthael_Kileanea]

If you have credibility, you'll not only have more support, but also fewer unqualified people throwing in counterarguments. Don't misunderstand. Counterarguments are welcome. Having to educate other people why they're wrong just to remain credible is a pain and a waste of time. That's why they introduce themselves. To dissuade uneducated people from saying "no".

[@yoshyoka]

Not a rocket scientists but thermodynamics engineer. First of all: I am impressed, keep it up! There are two issues you will encounter. The first is overheating. As soon as you substitute air with only oxygen temperatures inside the combustion chamber will quickly exceed the melting point of your materials, unless you can guarantee that the flow of un-combusted fuel and oxidizer can keep them cool from within. The next issue is that having a complex matrix inside the combustion chamber might create shockwave issues. I can envision a similar lattice developing as a cone from the bottom of the combustion chamber, leaving an open exit towards the exit nozzle.

[@raylenn4444]

Why not substitute it with hydrogen, seeing how that's highly reactive and combustible? Also, wouldn't it benefit from the regenerative cooling of the system? As Well, by using themrally reactive plates at key points and combining a heatsink with dry cooling, we could create an external mayer that handles the heat, thus suppressing the overheating problem back to manageable levels.

[@DesignedByMayo]

You did notice he is doing this indoors right.

[@Mind_Idiot]

@@raylenn4444 he's talking about substituting the air with oxygen, since air is only ~21% oxygen whereas oxygen is 100% oxygen. Hydrogen is a fuel not an oxidizer, so replacing "air" with hydrogen is just putting two fuels of different densities and ignition points in the same chamber, and then still relying on air to act as the oxidizer. Complete nonsense.

[@games-tech-sciences]

You could make a rocket engine by fusing some concepts of engines you made, like for example, a watercooled plastic pulsjet/shockwave reactor, burning hydrogen and oxygen made with an electrolysis. The HHO could be compressed by a compressor powered by a V2 rocket steam turbine rotating thanks to a hydrogen peroxyde and potassium permanganate reaction, and the dioxygen be reinjected in the reactor. Maybe a bit complicated.

[@HavocStylesJoe]

"Maybe a bit complicated." Ya think!? Geezus I don't want to step foot in your head. 😜

[@simonl7784]

Cute...

[@JCtheMusicMan_]

🥰🤣😅🤣 I love how you think! Given enough time, this idea is something I would have thought of 😎👍🏻

[@ransesziade4134]

WWII German inventions.

[@HavocStylesJoe]

@@ransesziade4134 Imagine science without the FAA

[@philgott8118]

Love your show. I love how you bring crazy fun to science. For an upcoming build, I would love to see an ionic thrust powered drone. It would be quite the challenge to make the components light enough and powerfull enough to fly. Plus you would make the process super fun to watch!

[@mohitrahaman]

0:10 No, thats a Menstrual cup

[@juangalton999]

No. It's a rocket engine.

[@CaptainHamsterPants]

That was my nickname in high-school for all the RIGHT reasons.

[@rabies5179]

​@@CaptainHamsterPants bro, lovingly, seek Christ

[@rattledroar2426]

Lmao😂

[@99milesaway41]

Soon as I started the video, this is the first comment I see. Figures 😂😂

[@Pystro]

The flame detachment probably plays a role in keeping the combustion chamber walls from overheating. If the flame only starts a certain distance away from the combustion chamber wall, then that wall can only get heated by radiation, not by conduction. The problem with your nozzle design at 2:32 is more that your combustion chamber is so small that the "flame detachment distance" is half of the length of your combustion chamber.

[@TheMongooseOfDoom]

Yes, this is called quenching and it explains why the resin prints last so long.

[@Heroo01]

Nothing gets me more pumped about science than an Integza video. I would have KILLED for content like this when I was a kid!! I was just stuck watching Science Channel documentaries!

[@xXCharli03Xx]

Hello, maybe you could use the heat from your engine to get higher butane pressure, so it act like a coolant and getting butane to pressure. Or you could even heat the butane/air mixture before getting in the combustion chamber going around it. I don't know if it would have a huge impact, but for me more T° means more pressure + it would be used as coolant for 'realiability'/structure integrity. Anyway, just throwing an idea, I love your videos, keep it like that (real science and a lot of fun) !

[@user-uu9ru3de1y]

over the years watching you, and taking a break after a long time, your enlish has gotten better from the beginning to now. proud of you!~

[@edvinasguzauskas5036]

This dude just casually comes up with rocket engine ideas no one’s thought of before, and they work perfectly right away (well almost). Meanwhile, I’m still struggling with Arduino and simple 3D projects on Onshape. Absolute legend! For the next one, how about a rocket that actually flies?

[@rodriguezangel62]

Video idea: Design and miniaturize pumps so you can make standalone versions of these rockets for use on RC cars, boats etc as you work your way up to an actual integza mini rocket! 🎉 This would likely be a series of a bunch of videos but it’s the inevitable path of integrating your rocket engine progress into something to play with!

[@actionman228]

Hi Integza, I’m a huge fan of your videos and really admire how you break down complex technologies for two years now. I thought you might be interested in a few project ideas for your next video, especially related to jet engines and lesser-known inventions from the past. Some suggestions for your new movies: Pulsejet engine based on the V-1 Wouldn’t it be awesome to build a miniature version of the pulsejet engine from the V-1? It would be fascinating to see how the pulse combustion cycle works and how such an engine could be used to power simple UAVs or model planes. René Lorin's Ramjet Engine I think reconstructing one of the earliest ramjet engines, designed by René Lorin in the 1920s, could make for an amazing video. A simple ramjet with no moving parts that only requires high inlet speed would be a thrilling DIY challenge. Jet Engine Using the Coandă Effect The Coandă Effect is such a cool concept. Building a jet engine based on this effect, which generates thrust by directing airflow along curved surfaces, could yield some awesome results. This could be a perfect new experiment with drones! Steam and Water Propulsion à la Alexander Graham Bell Creating a miniature boat or land vehicle powered by steam or water, inspired by Alexander Graham Bell’s experiments with water jet propulsion, sounds like a perfect fit for your channel. Water and steam are simple mediums but could be used to build an impressive DIY propulsion system. Turbojet Engine Made from Cans One of the more ambitious projects - how about creating a simplified turbojet engine using aluminum cans? It would be fascinating to see how you could replicate the workings of a turbojet using available materials in everyday shop. I think these ideas would resonate well with your spirit and would definitely grab attention! Looking forward to seeing your future projects, and best of luck with your next experiments.

[@MeepMu]

Very cool, I really hope that you keep developing this concept! Some analysis, suggestions and warnings: - I don't think choked flow means what you think it does. The flow probably isn't choked in your porous injector. It just has so much surface area and so many twists and turns inside that it significantly impedes flow. Choked flow is a condition that happens at a constriction in the flow when the flow conditions are such that the local Mach number reaches 1 (the flow speed becomes equal to the local speed of sound in the gas in question). If a constriction with choked flow is constricted further (the cross-sectional area decreased) the mass flow rate will simply decrease as the flow speed stays the same. To increase speed one needs to counter-intuitively increase cross-sectional area on the other side of the constriction. This is what happens in a rocket nozzle! - The mass flow required to get choked flow (local Mach 1 in the throat) is related to your stagnation (chamber¹) pressure and throat area linearly and related to your stagnation (chamber¹) temperature by the square root of the reciprocal (sqrt(1/T)) (higher chamber temperature at the same pressure means lower density). Assuming that your exhaust gas is the result of a prefect combustion of oxygen and butane it will be 8 parts CO2 and 10 parts H20. Taking the weighted averages of their respective heat capacity ratios (denoted γ) we get 1.3. Throw some nitrogen from the air in there with γ=1.4 and let's say we have an effective heat capacity ratio of 1.35. This gives us a stagnation to critical pressure ratio of ~1.86. Since your nozzle basically doesn't have an expanding section let us assume that the pressure at the nozzle throat and exit is the same, at atmospheric pressure (say, 1 bar). This means that your chamber pressure has to be 1.86 times atmospheric (=1.86 bar) to get choked flow in the throat. This does seem possible with your setup, but your flow rate is probably not what you entered into the rocket design software. Various flow restrictions (primarily your porous injector I would think) all affect the flow rate, and so I very much doubt that your setup is able to deliver enough mass to keep up the required chamber pressure for choked flow with you current throat diameter. While having never designed a rocket engine myself (I have done a lot of research and analysis though), I suspect finding a correct throat area and mass flow combination is somewhat of an iterative process (though most large rocket engines probably deliver way more mass flow than the minimum required to keep up stagnation so they can choose the throat area a bit more freely). By characterizing your fuilds system you should be able to come up with a pretty decent first guess though. To do this you need to establish the relationship between pressure drop and mass flow rate for each of the major components in your fluids system. As far as I see, this is your injector and the pressure regulators. I would suggest getting a special engine printed without the constricting part of the nozzle, such that it can be assumed that the pressure on the chamber side of the injector is atmospheric. Then add some T-junctions before the injector inlets and add pressure transducers/gauges there. Then, at different pressure regulator settings, measure what the pressure is before the injector. The pressure drop over the injector is then just the difference between what the gauge says and atmospheric pressure. You can measure the butane used by weighing the tank before and after. With the air you can measure the compressor tank pressure before and after and then use the tank volume and ideal gas law to calculate the mass difference (just remember to take the pressure measurements at the same temperature before and after - gas heats up when compressed and cools down when it expands during the test, so wait a bit after having run the compressor and having run the tests to let temperatures equalize! Alternatively you can also somehow measure the air temperature in the tank). You can characterize the pressure regulators in the same way, removing the injector from the T-junctions, though keeping these attached to the hoses. You should be able to estimate the pressure in the butane tank as the vapor pressure of butane at whatever temperature you're keeping the tank at - at least at low enough flow-rates so that the boiling butane can keep up, and I'm guessing you have a gauge on your air compressor. Once you have a relationship between pressure drop and mass flow for each pressure regulator and the injector (i believe the relationship should be some sort of root) you can introduce a mass flow ratio variable and then you should be able to derive an expression for the total mass flow from the target chamber pressure and either butane or air tank pressure. Once you have a mass flow you can then calculate the pressure required in the other tank. Finally, plug the mass flow rate into RPA along with your specified chamber pressure and see what throat and exit diameter it spits out. If possible, get a few nozzles printed with different target mass flow rate values a little above and below this, so you can see which one actually works best, you can perhaps make the converging-diverging section interchangeable? Might I also suggest going back to the first design with just a simple injector? If you get the injector printed as well you could pretty easily make try different types like an impinging injector, swirl injector or pintle injector. It kind of does defeat the point of this engine, but I still think that you will get more performance per mass with a more traditional injector. - Please add more instrumentation in general! Keep the T-junctions with the perssure sensors before the injector and add a chamber pressure sensor! A pipe with a tiny inner diameter and thick walls poking out from the side of the chamber with a fitting in the end should do the trick. There is not hot gas flowing through the pipe, and the pipe walls should conduct enough heat away such that your gauge/transducer doesn't get damaged. While you're at it you might as well add one in the throat as well! - You could look into regeneratively cooling your chamber walls with the air or butane before they are mixed (heating the mixture of the two seems like a really bad idea, and be careful that the coolant fluid doesn't get so hot that the mixture ignites on the upstream side of the gyroid). Both of your designs are already effectively regeneratively cooled up until the converging section. As the exhaust gas speeds up through the nozzle, the temperature also decreases (kinetic energy from the chaotic microscopic movements of the gas molecules - heat - is becoming macroscopic directed kinetic energy - bulk gas movement) so cooling requirements decrease in step. Your likely non-optimal mixture ratio (and the fact that there's a lot of inert nitrogen present) means that your combustion probably isn't hot enough to melt the walls in the first place, and axial heat conduction through the walls helps a bit too. Nevertheless it could be cool to try - it might allow you to raise your combustion temperature for more efficiency! - Please please please, I implore you to take more safety precautions. This applies to many of your videos 😅. Rocket engines can and do explode! Even in a low-pressure engine like this, liquid butane might for example get into the engine, touch the hot walls and flash to gas, potentially causing an explosion (I am not saying it _will_ happen, but you don't want to be next to the engine when you find out - liquid butane _did_ flow into the chamber at 7:50 after all). Please conduct your tests outside with shielding around the engine and proper safety distance and hearing protection! Being outside is also way better if you have a gas leak. Also, please please please make sure that you are not exceeding the rated working pressure and temperature of that butane bottle! I really hope you already did, but read the warning labels on the bottle! - Lastly, that "laminar" in the title seems to be more clickbait than anything. I fail to see what is especially "laminar" about this engine. 1: Stagnation properties are the properties that the gas would take on if it were to stand completely still. Of course the gas is moving at every point in the engine, but the difference in cross-sectional area between the throat and combustion chamber means that the gas is moving relatively slow in the combustion chamber and thus the pressure, temperature and density here can pretty much be taken to be the stagnation values.

[@stephanerebai8005]

This guy deserves the 3D printer giveaway 👍

all that induces design limitations that will give you a ceiling to your engine design's maximum performance. you'll end up designing yet another raptor copypaste. for example, regenerative cooling gives you an upper limit on how hot you can run that engine at a given flowrate before deformation occurs. something i don't see often enough is creative chamber shaping and acoustics.

[@kendokaaa]

The clickbait title is par for the course for this channel

[@oraziovescovi1922]

Two things: 1) Your best bet at improving performance now is working on the nozzle. By improving the geometry you could get much faster velocities out of the exaust. Consider the ratio between inside and outside pressure of the combustion chamber. There is a critical ratio at which the flow goes sonic (M=1) at the throat, after that it doesn't accelerate much even by increasing the chamber's pressure. To accelerate the flow even further the bell nozzle is required. It is a bit of a pain to compute the exact geometries but I'm sure there's some software out there able to do it precisely. 2) the idea of "just air" vs "combustion" comparison doesn't make much sense if you also add fuel: the total mass flow rate is larger than "just air"! A more accurate comparison would be "air + fuel without combustion" and "air + fuel w/ combustion"

[@malcolmtrivoywest1059]

i like the second part you mentioned. I didnt even think about the butanes velocity without combustion.

[@badasson8825]

Your second point is accurate. The first point not so much, mainly because there’s already a nozzle in the engine! A tiny one for sure, but the geometry is already there. The video hasn’t shown it well unfortunately. My evidence for the tiny nozzle is that you can clearly see the exhaust flame shape clearly directed and linear. The main objective of a nozzle is to reduce radial expansion of the flame, especially in low pressures/ space vacuum. I don’t think a large nozzle skit would actually work because it would have to be very very low aperture and then you are introducing lesser understood fluid-surface interactions and losses without the major gain of tradicional large nozzle (operation on space). Maybe it could get your system efficiency a few % higher, but I wouldn’t bet any money that this is the main cause of loss.

[@naomiam687]

Since he is premixing fuel and air before going through the nozzle and they are both the same pressure, I think the just air is close enough for a good estimate

[@TheYodaFred]

RF/Microwave Eng here - Love Onshape as a side note. I suppose you can call it a rocket but it seems more like a single combustion chamber of a classic turbo jet engine. You know, the pieces they call "flame holders" that look like beer cans. Very cool mobius mixer though. Similar purpose of improving the air/fuel fixing to provide a continuous burn. My eighth grade math project was a burn jet engine that used successive venturis that leveraged the velocity of the acetylene gas to mix in air in the combustion chamber. I welded it together out of steel tubing and used only the acetylene from my fathers welding rig. I didn't have any way of measuring thrust at the time but and it worked well enough to get a solid project grade and impressed the instructor with my Bernoulli calculations. I have no idea why he would not let me started in the classroom......lol. Safety Third - Thanks and keep up the great work.

[@willygwalden4690]

You should try to make a combustion particle accelerator. I’ve been drawing one up in my head for quite some time so if you have any questions, I’ll be glad to answer them.

[@amazingmaker8559]

Next Video Idea: Put the rocket engine on a DIY RC Boat, and see how fast you can get a rocket powered boat!

[@tuseroni6085]

would need to be a pretty big boat to hold the propane tank and the heater for the propane tank, and the air compressor.

[@Google_Is_Evil]

Don't let the comments get you down. This may not scale to Saturn V scale with current fuels and shoot people to the moon, but there will be a good application somewhere for this type of engine.

[@ninjasiren]

If the thrust is good vs its weight and the rocket itself, maybe we can have a new rocket engine design for model rockets

[@afterlunch4732]

Better materials to lighten it, and better fuel engineering could make a scale up to RCS thruster size promising no?

[@thamiordragonheart8682]

The reason real rocket engines basically never use a system like that for fuel injection or cooling, despite the really impressive theoretical efficiency, is the enormous pressure drop across the porous metal layer. You also don't get choked flow at the injector face, which makes getting consistent performance across the throttle range much harder. There's a good reason basically all modern rockets use either pintel or coaxial swirl injectors. They're by far the easiest-to-manufacture solutions with really good mixing. Pintel injectors have a huge effective throttle range for fine control. Coaxial swirl injectors are actually 3D printable in a single piece with no finish machining and are pretty forgiving design-wise for small engines.

[@ishaan863]

my first thought as an absolute layman is that the technique probably doesn't scale up well, is that not an issue?

[@professionalprocrastinator8103]

And also conventional design avoids you having to worry about melting the lining of the porous metal that's used for gas injection. Using a porous material for the injector (and a gyroid to increase injection surface) makes film-cooling way more complex as well. This design, although very interesting for the efficiency it allows to reach, does not scale up to industrial-grade applications where pressures are way more important, and where demands for reliability and robustness are increased.

[@shahabsamkan4027]

and who made you the expert on this?

[@Oystercaulk]

​@@shahabsamkan4027 I must've skipped over the part where they claimed to be an expert.

[@thamiordragonheart8682]

@@professionalprocrastinator8103 the one problem the design doesn't have is actually cooling because the whole setup is inherently film-cooling the entire wall. you do have to worry about it getting clogged though. It also is much more efficient in theory than in practice because a big part of efficiency in a rocket engine is combustion pressure and a porous metal for propellant injection just has such a high pressure drop.

[@brynezuege6495]

Here I am. First time participant. Really like the format, host and the outputs. Have you done anything with designing and printing a catalyst screen for hydrogen production.

[@Pale_Kingg]

8:10 HE HAS A SIX PACK🗿

[@Flesh_Wizard]

Chad Rober

[@TRquiet]

“I can increase the butane pressure by heating the canister!” And that’s the last we ever saw him…

[@franzcampo]

I became a little bit nervous there!!

[@profwoland8942]

Taking a little too much inspiration from Space X and building explosives instead of rockets.

[@lavasiouxwindwater9789]

I think i speak for all of us in adding a special "Thank you Bob!" For helping bring this to life!

[@LucNau-y2s]

VIDEO IDEA 2. It would be really cool to see you make a steam powered "rocket" engine or cannon or just something with steam in general, as fire won't be near some parts you could even 3d print some of them.

[@jackdare]

Steam FTW!

[@mattiacppellino6629]

Suggestion for a next video: You could try to modify the hairdryer jet engine with a bigger fan (or compressed air) before the impeller you are using to propel the air-fuel mixture. In this way you are going to accelerate the air in the tube along its walls (a slightly bigger one this time). You should be able to achive higher speeds along the walls of the tube so combusion will not happen there and you will not melt the plexiglass cilinder. The speed in the central part should be somewhat the same and you might even try to use more fuel, as in more pressure for the fuel (i dont think using hydrogen as a sobstitute fuel will be safe, interesting? maybe, but defenitely not safe XD) Great video as always

[@Nikicusyes]

8:07 excuse me what are you looking at on your monitor Mr Integza

[@mystifoxtech]

"research"

[@TJ-kg1db]

"OH no, he's HOT!"

[@suryaverse]

7:12 "Let me be very clear" quite literally 😂.

[@PauloGomes-se6yu]

Vejo os teus vídeos há anos (embora só hoje tenha subscrito o canal ) e só hoje é que descobri que és português. Parabéns pelo trabalho e conteúdo!

[@waynes7739]

Finally... a project that doesn't end with molten plastic or burnt ceramic. Keep up the good work!👍

[@problyNotJava]

you both look and sound exactly like the kind of person who would do this this is a great video

[@ingenium2229]

13:09 "Bob is the coolest guy ever."

[@Timothy-Clifford]

it's true tho, he's a legend

[@Timothybos]

Amazing. I'd love to see a small array of these and test the fuel consumption rate vs the amount of propulsion you get. That'll help determine the lift effectiveness.

[@theicedragon100]

2:01 no you combust chamber pressure is higher then 2 bar because when gasses combust they heat and expand. This is why rocket engines have compressors to precompress the fuel so there is no backflow.

[@sivelasquez]

Yeah…exactly… I totally was thinking the same thing lol

[@krispycarrots6539]

For your next video you should try adding this rocket to the back of a skateboard sized (or bigger if you need) hovercraft, as winter is coming and there should hopefully be a frozen lake or large ice patches around!

[@TomC-d2r]

I don’t do many comments but your clip is quite inspiring. Seeing something so simple can do so much is great. Maybe a clip of how much better you can make Godard’s first rocket could be improved might be interesting. Thanks again😊

[@jemuelbascom4055]

Integza, for your next video, make models of the best 3 engines you built since the channel began with a functioning rocket and parachute. Compare and launch them. Parameters (Rocket integrity; hight/distance traveled; Deployment of parachute; landing)... if there is anything else that can be added to make this come to life please add....

[@barabolak]

The only company in the world capable of producing porous metal? They're just really good at marketing. 8:38 this is actually a side effect 3D printer manufacturers are trying to combat.

[@Everydaythoughts7]

Future vid theme - You could make a Ramjet engine but since they don’t have a compressor fan you could add it. They are usually mounted on fighter jet engines, they work by taking air from the speed of the planes which gets compressing in the engine itself

[@jameslyndon2049]

so a ram jet with a compressor in front? that sounds an awful lot like a regular jet engine to me haha

[@GP-vl8en]

You're off to a very, very good start, the only problem and real rocket engineers will notice straight away is the sparks fly off during and after combustion that obviously means something is melting. The moment you can solve that issue you may have invented a very nice rock injection system. I believe the melted bits are from the very edges of the gyroid shape that may or may not cause any problems later on. If only the laser process would work on a higher heat tolerance metal or place a bypass valve near the very end of the gyroid to cool it down along the edges Edit: best of luck to your future discovery's

[@stefanblandin]

"Engine rich exhaust"

[@dionysschub5350]

"The engine wants to eat itself"

[@moki123g]

He mentioned it was some starter melting. It also could be some left over metal power from making the part.

[@GP-vl8en]

😂

[@minhducnguyen9276]

Yeah, the two main problems he's having right now is not having a more powerful fuel delivery system and the engine is turning itself into reaction mass.

[@sergarlantyrell7847]

I'm only an aerospace engineer, not a rocket specialist, so I haven't touched rockets since my undergrad, but I'd be confident saying you're going to struggle to cool that kind of injector, especially as you try to increase the size of the engine (think squared-cubed law). Also, if you're using a pre-mixing chamber before "injecting" the mix into the main combustion chamber, you risk the flame front travelling back through the metal and igniting the mixture where you don't want it, unintentionally increasing the pressure in your mixing chamber which could have explosive consequences. Lastly, the geometry in the combustion chamber is likely just adding resistance to the exhaust exiting, causing a loss of efficiency.

[@suspense_comix3237]

You should try this idea but with the Potassium Permanganate and the Hydrogen Peroxide Propellants again.

[@ignaloidas]

That combination is hypergolic(ignites without flame) though, which means that you couldn't mix it before injecting it to the chamber through the porous walls.

[@dca24100]

Angry purple powder that explodes at the slightest touch? Nah

[@บัวสีโรเจอร์-ศ9ฝ]

Yeah, Z Stoff and T Stoff, its been done before and it wasn't so good. But get some C Stoff. . . . Whole new ballgame.

[@Alsphalt_boy_AN2]

Hi Integza, I think the theme for your future video should be a boiler that boils water in seconds to power a steam turbine. I've had the idea for a few months and worked out everything, but not skilled enough to try it out myself.

[@Z-Z-W_origin]

Yesss! LAMINAR FLOW ROCKET ENGINE absolutely deserves ALL CAPS! 💯

[@skinthemanticofficial]

I know im probably not getting the 3D printer lol. But you videos are awesome. I work in a cast iron foundry. Im currently in the process of making a mold to pour a chrome iron rocket engine. I like your approach with the propellants. Im probably going to do something similar to this video. Thanks man.