Author Topic: "Metal fountain" extreme performance dropship cooling system  (Read 93 times)

Lycanphoenix

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 194
  • Amaroq the Kitsune#1092
    • Message me on Telegram
Inspired both by Mass Effect and my a friend's own hard sci-fi setting, this is basically an extreme-performance cooling system wherein a shower of molten metal droplets is expelled at one end of the vessel, and recollected at the other end of the vessel via a powerful electrostatic/electromagnetic field. As the metal droplets are exposed to the vacuum of space, they rapidly radiate away a majority of their heat, with far greater efficiency than even double heat sinks.

This comes at a cost however. The collection system is massive, and there's also the risk of losing coolant to the cosmic void. As such, this system will need to be topped up. Oh, and it's also possible to lose coolant to enemy fire or extreme maneuvers.

Thoughts?

For clarification... My idea for this system, mass-wise, is that there is an initial cost for installing the system (which scales with the size of the ship), but after that there's a break-even point where it outperforms Double Heat Sinks in terms of cooling per ton.
« Last Edit: Today at 03:35:02 by Lycanphoenix »

PuppyLikesLaserPointers

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1817
The problem is, exposed to the vacumn space does not let those debris to reduce its heat. Only the radiation works on the space since there is almost no medium to transfer the heat, but for this you don't need to throw away those little debris in the first place and you could do better such as shoot the lasers instead. Add the big heat sink plate on the surface would serves the similar purpose too.

Also it surely pollute the course with those little debris, and although a few of those won't cause much effect but the constant and frequent uses of this may cause catastrophical result.

If it wasn't vacumn space then it could be work as the heat sink as long as you can keep use this. But... seriously, I'd shoot the steam instead, which is not only easier to gather from the air, but also not pollute the atmosphere as well.

Not to mention that some of the radiations(and the other ways to deliver heats in the case of atmosphere) will strike back the unit that uses it as well, degrade its effectiveness.

It is doubtful that it is even possible to build too. Since battletech world does not have such technology to control electromagnetic field with extreme precision, and making electromagnetic field on the distant area, it would be only justified on the alternative settings. The most close thing to do is the polarity shield to disperse PPC shots but that's all they could. If they were able to fully manage the tech, then they don't need a physical case for the plasma weapon in the first place.
« Last Edit: Today at 05:36:28 by PuppyLikesLaserPointers »

Sir Chaos

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 3094
  • Artillery Fanboy
The problem is, exposed to the vacumn space does not let those debris to reduce its heat. Only the radiation works on the space since there is almost no medium to transfer the heat, but for this you don't need to throw away those little debris in the first place and you could do better such as shoot the lasers instead. Add the big heat sink plate on the surface would serves the similar purpose too.

To the contrary... I think it´s a viable system. Radiating heat only happens on the surface, naturally enough, and lots and lots of tiny droplets have more surface per mass than larger objects of the same combined mass.

The main limitation I see that this would only work as designed in a vacuum and zero-g environment, not in an atmosphere, let alone while landed.
"Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl."
-Frederick the Great

"Ultima Ratio Regis" ("The Last Resort of the King")
- Inscription on cannon barrel, 18th century

Maingunnery

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7189
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist

To the contrary... I think it´s a viable system. Radiating heat only happens on the surface, naturally enough, and lots and lots of tiny droplets have more surface per mass than larger objects of the same combined mass.
But a lot of that extra surface is aimed back at the spaceship.

Also the need to concentrate any heat to create the molten metal droplets will be far less energy efficient than the normal cooling system.
Herb: "Well, now I guess we'll HAVE to print it. Sounds almost like the apocalypse I've been working for...."

The Society:Fan XTRO & Field Manual
Nebula California: HyperTube Xtreme
Nebula Confederation Ships

idea weenie

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4892
If the Dropship is moving in space, then any course change will mean the metal droplets currently in space will be lost.

This results in two options:
1) maneuver freely and lose cooling material with every hard maneuver
2) Send the metal droplet fountain into the new course, letting your opponents know which way you will be turning and where they should aim their weapons

Retry

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1457
But a lot of that extra surface is aimed back at the spaceship.
Let's see if I can dig up some of my thermal systems knowledge from the dusty and possibly-haunted corner of my brain...

A Union-class Dropship has a height of 78m and a diameter of 81.5m.  Being a bit conservative (and a lot lazy), I'll approximate the apparent cross-sectional surface area as seen from the side of the Union as a circle with the larger 81.5m diameter

From droplets X meters away from the Union's hull, the "seen" angle theta is the tangent of the apparent cross-sectional radius divided by the X distance from the hull (basically opposite/adjacent), so theta=arctan(40.75m/Xm).  If the droplet is just 40.75m away, theta is 45 degrees, and the droplet basically "sees" a 45 degree cone from the center of the Dropship's cross section.  At worst case scenarios (X is nearly zero), the droplet would "see" a nearly 90 degree cone (basically a semi-circle).

With a reasonable assumption that the droplet transmits equally in all directions, this is equivalent to a spherical emission.  The "seen" hull is equivalent to a spherical cap cutting into that spherical emission; dividing the "lost" surface area from this spherical cap by the full surface area of the sphere should result in a rudimentary estimate of the % energy returning back to the Union, and 1 - that % = the approximate efficiency of this system.

Total Spherical area: 4*pi*r^2
Spherical Cap area: (1-cos(theta))2*pi*r^2

Spherical Cap area / Total Spherical area = (1-cos(theta))2*pi*r^2/(4*pi*r^2)
||
V
(1-cos(theta))/2

(Note: r^2 = UnionRadius^2+X^2=(40.75m)^2+x^2, but since it cancels out here this doesn't matter in this case)

In its worst case scenario (Droplet right next to the hull, theta ~= 90deg ) about 50% of the energy returns to the Dropship.  Somewhat further away at 40.75m (theta = 45deg, which is still pretty close in terms of the vastness of space tbh) this drops to 14.6% energy return (or 85.4% energy jettisoned away).  Placing the droplets further from the Union dropship will increase efficiency even further, albeit with diminishing returns.

IIRC that is actually pretty high without having to pump the droplets too far away.  For Battletech's level of technological development, it seems feasible.

Note 1: Even though in this test case 14.6% is returning to the Dropship in this example case, that probably doesn't matter in practice.  Unless the Dropship's exterior hull plating is made out of a black body material, not all of that 14.6% returning energy will actually be absorbed; some will be reflected.

Note 2: The energy that is absorbed is being absorbed by a relatively massive area of the Union's exposed hull, which will also tend to eventually re-radiate the energy as thermal radiation (albeit much more slowly per unit area than the superheated droplets since it's "colder").   While that amount of energy stored in a droplet stream can melt Battletech (or real life) plating when concentrated onto a small point like with laser weapons, when not concentrated the energy intensity would be more akin to a glorified flashlight.  It's mostly important to get the waste heat out of your guns and lasers so they don't melt, if a bit of energy is redirected onto the ship's hull and raises it by a degree or two that's still considered a success.
Also the need to concentrate any heat to create the molten metal droplets will be far less energy efficient than the normal cooling system.
BT's normal heat sink systems also involve concentrating heat into material, the difference is that the canonical heat sinks pump it into fluid coolant which goes to a radiator system (SHS using heavy but space-efficient graphite radiators and DHS using lighter but space-intensive polymer radiators), while this version pumps it into molten droplet medium to be temporarily ejected out the ship.  It pretty much has to be since radiation is so inefficient at low temperatures (radiation emission power scales with T^4).
The problem is, exposed to the vacumn space does not let those debris to reduce its heat. Only the radiation works on the space since there is almost no medium to transfer the heat, but for this you don't need to throw away those little debris in the first place and you could do better such as shoot the lasers instead. Add the big heat sink plate on the surface would serves the similar purpose too.

Also it surely pollute the course with those little debris, and although a few of those won't cause much effect but the constant and frequent uses of this may cause catastrophical result.
No, tiny droplets are one of if not the most efficient (in terms of per unit mass) method to increase heat dissipation via increasing surface area.

And the microparticle droplets would be of negligible concern in the vastness of space.  Even if/when small amounts of material escapes the cooling system, the droplets will cool down extremely quickly, so getting hit by these superheated particles is not a major issue, and in Battletech there's already plenty of matter flying around in a fight from matter coming out through the spaceship exhaust, weapons fire, spaceship debris, etc.  Probably far less practical in an atmosphere though, since you'll likely accidentally collect material from the atmosphere into your radiation system which is no bueno.
To the contrary... I think it´s a viable system. Radiating heat only happens on the surface, naturally enough, and lots and lots of tiny droplets have more surface per mass than larger objects of the same combined mass.

The main limitation I see that this would only work as designed in a vacuum and zero-g environment, not in an atmosphere, let alone while landed.
That's basically my take on this as well.

To OP: If you're interested in more hard sci-fi technology, I'd take a look at Terra Invicta for some inspiration.  The technologies are more on the hard sci-fi side with a handful exception (Exotics being the magical alien material that helps some of the plotlines to work and gives them a technological advantage throughout the game), so it could give some ideas of potential technologies rooted in reality.  The game itself is hard and time consuming, but pretty fun if you can get the hang of it.

Maingunnery

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7189
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist
BT's normal heat sink systems also involve concentrating heat into material, the difference is that the canonical heat sinks pump it into fluid coolant which goes to a radiator system (SHS using heavy but space-efficient graphite radiators and DHS using lighter but space-intensive polymer radiators), while this version pumps it into molten droplet medium to be temporarily ejected out the ship. It pretty much has to be since radiation is so inefficient at low temperatures (radiation emission power scales with T^4).
But forcing higher temperatures requires additional energy and it also sounds like a complete nightmare for maintenance. 


Quote
No, tiny droplets are one of if not the most efficient (in terms of per unit mass) method to increase heat dissipation via increasing surface area.
But for optimal efficiency the droplet cloud should also be quite diffuse, which limits the total mass flow. It could be that the ship would be better off with traditional radiators.
Herb: "Well, now I guess we'll HAVE to print it. Sounds almost like the apocalypse I've been working for...."

The Society:Fan XTRO & Field Manual
Nebula California: HyperTube Xtreme
Nebula Confederation Ships

DevianID

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1722
tin droplet radiators are fun, so this is a cool idea.  You dont necessarily need to spray in a vacuum either.  You can make a transparent to infrared liquid material that is enclosed in a transparent to infrared bubble, and pump your metal fountain onto the bubble protruding out of your ship.  The metal, so long as it stays mobile, will cool and flow back down with minimal pumping from the hot internal side to the space side.  This lets you spray metal under some thrust without losing coolant mass, with the infrared heat radiating out into space.  Taking damage to the bubble enclosure from weapon impacts means you start losing reaction mass, as its not being collected, but at the same time now you have open cycle cooling.

For gameplay though, this is tough to implement for space ships.  The reason being that space ships have so much tonnage, cooling systems are a mere afterthought, and heat issues are easily solved.  The fact that warships have heat at all is silly--the math is cumbersome to figure out how many bays your mckenna can shoot.  12650 heat sinks with 900, 135, 40, 255 heat bays is just a pain in the butt to actually add up on the table.  Its the worst kind of gameplay loop IMHO.  Unlike with mechs where riding the heat is a risk reward thing, with various penalties as you heat up leading to dramatic shutdown or ammo rolls, heat is aerospace has no gameplay pay off, and the numbers involved are WAY higher then the 30 scale we have for mechs to count.  You just cant/arnt allowed to over heat in space.  Thus, its just useless math homework, and for just .2% of the ships tonnage you can easily add more HS to a mckenna to avoid stupid busywork.

I bring that up because, while I think the 'metal fountain' idea is cool, the base system the idea is working with is totally pointless to begin with.  HS tonnage isnt a limiting factor, nor is the heat gameplay loop interactive or fun at all.  Just some of the flaws of the battlespace framework.  So I dont see how this heat system will help dropships.  The castrum has 1200 cooling and 1109 in weapon heat, and despite being one of the most well armed dropships that exist it still has enough tonnage left to add 16000 more heat dissipation without issue. 

If the metal droplet let the castrum have triple HS, for example, instead of doubles, the castrum would save 200 tons, and the cooling system would go from 236 tons in heat sinks to 36 tons.  200 tons of weight saving is a .2% mass difference, on something with 8.8k unused tons as it is.  HS are such a tiny unnecessary part of dropships that I dont know if these special rules are worth the trouble any possible rules for damage or G maneuvers would add sadly, which is true of a lot of the aerospace systems.

 

Register