Ignition: An Informal History of Liquid Rocket Propellants (1972) [pdf] | Hacker News Reader

Ignition: An Informal History of Liquid Rocket Propellants (1972) [pdf]

library.sciencemadness.org

150 pointsColinWright34 comments

The book was out of print for a while, and this PDF was the only way to,read it for less than $400. But now it's back in print for $17: https://www.amazon.com/dp/0813595835/ Basically the same content, highly worth reading in either format.

He addresses the calamity that engineers don't read several times in the book - formulations are attempted a few years after someone proved it didn't work. Makes me wonder if a similar approach wouldn't be advisable in programming...

Thanks much for the heads-up about the paperback edition! I've got an order in now with Books, Inc., to pick one up.

It's also available on Audible in audiobook format too.

https://www.audible.com/pd/B07CTTXLL6

Thank you for making me aware.

It's available from Amazon for Kindle too (I bought it last time it was discussed here).

The kindle version apparently used to be a shoddy PDF scan. Any idea if amazon's been updated to the 2018 reissue and if that's any better?

All of the reviews claim it's crud.

The copy linked above is a proper Kindle ebook, not a scan.

It's been submitted before, but it's come to hand again, and I'm reminded once more just how much of a fantastic read this is:

"A fluorine-aluminum fire is something to see - from a safe distance"

"Everyone who uses a computer has, from time to time, a mad urge to attack the precocious abacus with an axe."

"... a fearsome cutting torch burning powdered aluminum with gaseous flourine"

I have to admit that:

    "What if I replace a hydroxide
     group with flourine"

is a question I've never asked myself.

My favorite quote from Ignition is this description of Chlorine Trifluoride (CTF):

It is, of course, extremely toxic, but that’s the least of the problem. It is hypergolic with every known fuel, and so rapidly hypergolic that no ignition delay has ever been measured. It is also hypergolic with such things as cloth, wood, and test engineers, not to mention asbestos, sand, and water-with which it reacts explosively. It can be kept in some of the ordinary structural metals-steel, copper, aluminium, etc.-because of the formation of a thin film of insoluble metal fluoride which protects the bulk of the metal, just as the invisible coat of oxide on aluminium keeps it from burning up in the atmosphere. If, however, this coat is melted or scrubbed off, and has no chance to reform, the operator is confronted with the problem of coping with a metal-fluorine fire. For dealing with this situation, I have always recommended a good pair of running shoes.

That's hilarious, never thought about rust being another reason we are here today.

I've forgotten the reference but read an engineer mention they tried stainless steel tanks for some application. And they all developed pin hole leaks from pit corrosion in less time than it took a plain steel tank to rust through.

Also a suspended concrete ceiling above a swimming pool that fell into the pool, thankfully at night when it was closed. The designer thought stainless tiebars wouldn't rust in the humid environment above the pool. They didn't. They developed chlorine mediated stress crack corrosion.

Me every time I've seen someone naive deal with a materials problem it's been sadness and tears.

Not sure if there were several such swimming pool incidents, but the one I recall in Uster, Switzerland, happened during business hours and 12 people were killed: https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1985-05-10-mn-18105-...

Oxides are your friend, my friend. Without them, everything would be stuck together!

> "A fluorine-aluminum fire is something to see - from a safe distance"

When I was about 11, I first got some sodium. OK, so throwing sodium in water was dramatic. Then I did a crude hack to remotely drop it in warm concentrated nitric acid.

That was very dramatic.

An amazing read which makes Kerbal Space Program look like a documentary based on real life events. See also: Things I Won’t Work With [0] series by Derek Lowe, another long time HN favorite on dangerous chemistry.

[0] https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/category/thin...

You beat me to it! Such a wonderful read!

I pray I am never exposed to the FOOF family of chemicals :)

Never a good idea to be playing with Satan's kimchi!

Love that blog. Am always delighted whenever it appears on HN and tend lose at least an hour or two down an exploding rabbit hole.

I’d like to throw out a mention for a book that takes one of the topics from Ignition! and covers it in depth. The Green Flame https://www.amazon.com/Green-Flame-Andrew-Dequasie-ebook/dp/... is a book about the Borane fuels project, which is covered briefly in the chapter of Ignition! on exotic fuels, and will probably be a worthwhile read for anyone who loves Ignition!.

The introduction is by Isaac Asimov (!), who says that John Clark was a great science fiction writer, who, when he stopped writing, allowed lesser authors like Asimov (!!!) to come to prominence. An amazing (and amazingly gracious) statement.

The full title has a bang (!) in it, pun most assuredly intended. One of my favorite books about science of all time, and don't miss the author of the forward.

Yes, the bang was there when I submitted it, removed by the submission process, and so I edited the title to put it back. The title as I eventually submitted it was:

IGNITION! An Informal History of Liquid Rocket Propellants by John D. Clark

Subsequently that was modified by the mods.

Another fantastic memoir you'll find recommended on chemistry blogs is Max Gergel's Excuse Me Sir, Would You Like to Buy a Kilo of Isopropyl Bromide?

http://www.sciencemadness.org/library/books/gergel_isopropyl...

A thread from 2017: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15155394

2015: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10683778

Aaaand it's still "one of the best technical books ever written."

Anyone marginally interested in the periodic table of the elements or rockets needs to read this.

"if you, gentle reader, have never seen a nervous rocket mechanic, complete with monkey suit, being buzzed by nine thousand demented bats and trying to beat them off with a shovel, there is something missing from your experience. "

I will upvote this every single time it surfaces, without shame.

I have the book on my Kindle and it seems quite good but I found it hard to read without much chemistry knowledge.

I studied Physics so there are some parts I can understand but nonetheless it felt like I wasn't truly able to appreciate the book.

It's cool that such a specialised book exists though.

My friend was wondering why we don’t use ATP as rocket fuel? You can’t get any better than the energy currency of the cell.

Yes, you can, much better in fact. ATP makes sense in the specific context of the inside of cells, but it doesn't compare to e.g. methane + liquid oxygen in terms of cost or performance.

Think about it this way: are cells in the business of needing the maximum amount of energy per volume / weight, at the expense of explosive instability?

Or would the be better off making a trade off for less efficient performance in exchange for more stability and biocompatibility?

Ignition! devotes an entire chapter (Chapter 7) to the topic of propellant performance.

One crucial point is that you are aiming for as high an exhaust velocity as possible, and that means that all else being equal you want exhaust products with both a high heat of formation and low molecular weight. It's not just about the energy balance (not that ATP is particularly outstanding on that measure anyway).

> You can’t get any better than the energy currency of the cell.

laughs in FOOF https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2010/02/23/th...

biochemical compounds suffer from all sorts of annoying limitations which stem from being made by a living creature (such as not turning aforementioned living creature into a cloud of steam.)

I briefly remember April Fools article about using pure adrenaline as a rocket fuel. Comparative tests suggested it's so potent, that just the amount of adrenaline produced by astronauts during launch could lift whole rocket 4m off the ground.

ATP is closer to a battery than a fuel. Most enzymes use an ATP->ADP+P step to deliver energy, so the respiration process in the mitochondria produces ATP from ADP+P. The actual biological fuel is glucose, and the oxidation of glucose in successive stages is turned into usable energy.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com