No, the RD-170 was a multiple chamber engine. Not in the same category as the F-1 is is the most powerful single chamber rocket thruster. The reason the Soviets created the multiple chamber configuration is because they were never able to get the metallurgy correct to build a device on the scale of the F-1. - - However, they were able to create a very efficient single shaft for oxidizer/fuel gas generator on a full flow stage combustion. That didn't happen again till the Raptor.
@@qpwodkgh2010 The metallurgy wasn't the problem, it was combustion instability from the injector plate layout. This is more of a design and testing issue than material science issue. It wasn't a full-flow staged combustion cycle either. Full flow means all the fuel and all the oxidiser go through a pre-burner. The RD170 is a staged combustion cycle, but not full flow. Full flow is theoretically better, since it allows for lower turbine temperatures, for the same pumping power, since mass-flow is higher. It also means the inputs to the combustion chamber are hot and more likely to achieve complete combustion.
Words cannot convey how awesome this video is. I've been a fan of rockets for decades, yet I've NEVER seen the F-1 explained so thoroughly and animated so gorgeously. :-) Meanwhile Flat Earth folks say "rockets push off air" LOL.
Pretty good thumbnail, the video editing don't seem to be boring , look pretty good, who know , this might get 100k-400k views and also pretty understandable explanation
*_Former Boeing... we made the 1st stage of the Saturn Rocket..._* it was called the S-IC (pronounced S-one-C) was the first stage of the American Saturn V rocket. The S-IC stage was manufactured by the Boeing Company. Like the first stages of most rockets, most of its mass of more than 2,000 t (4,400,000 lb) at launch was propellant, in this case RP-1 rocket fuel and liquid oxygen (LOX) oxidizer...
I’m so lucky ive found your channel early on. I can tell your videos will be just as good as the giants like Real Engineering and Mustard, remember QUALITY over QUANTITY. Keep making great content, and don’t push out garbage, we can wait! Amazing video on rocket engines, can’t wait for your next video :)
I like your video, you got a lot for a short time, very underrated. however, there are some things that you could have improved on. You really should have mentioned the fact that the reason why we cant run the engine closed cycle is because we need a very fuel rich combustion mixture to keep the combustion cold enough to prevent the turbine from getting destroyed, and this type of combustion with rp-1 produces a very dirty soot particle filled gas which would clog the injectors in a closed cycle engine. Including this is also a good idea because it sets the stage for people to learn about other closed cycle rocket engine types. This is other criticism less significant, but you mentioned that the fuel evaporates in the pipes, which needs a little elaboration. I do not think that RP-1 engines have boiling fluids in the cooling channels. The pressure from the turbopumps is too high for it to boil. What most likely happens is it goes supercritical. If the engine is hydrogen fueled, it just expands a lot while supercritical, but it physically cannot evaporate. But this small error is understandable, since some big creators made this mistake and its not talked about very often. there are a couple other little things, but anyways, overall a good video I think it deserves more views. :)
I subbed, it’s crazy how you haven’t blown up yet I thought you had over a 100k subscribers but I’m sure you will be there soon with this content (Don’t want to be that guy, but I’m here before your famous)
Amazing explanation and graphics to relate basic principles to the specific components of the Saturn engine! This should be see in the basic curricula of Aerospace engineering schools.
While it is, in fact, amazing that we managed to make an engine that powerful back in the 60's... What's really interesting is that it only takes three of the Raptor 2 to match the thrust of the F-1, for less weight, giving the Raptor 2 about 50% more thrust to weight ratio. (And tests on the Raptor 3 have already come out even more powerful.) Not to mention the Raptor 2 has a sea-level specific impulse higher than the F-1's vacuum specific impulse! So it's not just lighter for the same amount of thrust, it's significantly more efficient. And as a result the Starship's booster already gets more than twice the thrust of a Saturn V running those five monster F-1 engines. Whew! (Raptor 2: Specific impulse, vacuum: 380 s; Specific impulse, sea-level: 327 s. F-1: Specific impulse, vacuum: 304 s; Specific impulse, sea-level: 263 s. All figures from Wikipedia on 6-10-24.)
Since rocket speed is usually measured in m/s (I think), I did some math (typed a number on my calculator) and 15700mph is equivalent to 7018,528 m/s, or Mach 25,5
0:57 - High pressure in the combustion chamber but not in the exhaust gas!!! And second, pressure is NOT more mass in the same volume. That would be density. Pressure is more like kinetic energy density.
2 things: - There is actually a rocket, called Electron, which uses battery and electric motor on its second stage instead of turbo pumps. - Your video is way to fast imho. Understanding and learning requires time, and own thoughts. You have to think about it, truly grasp it. This fast forward style content will make your viewers truly understand only 5-10% of the whole subject.
Nice presentation, but I think you're misstating the physics with the pushups and pull-ups thing. Not to nit pick, but it does give the wrong mechanism in that the third law is a negligible contributor to the motion in a pushup. It's important because with a pushup you rise because you are pushing on the earth. In a rocket, you aren't pushing on anything.
yeah.. earth's gravity is just too damn high. i think we go with shooting things out into space and figure out the g force science for allowing human and technical passengers to survive the trip. maybe shoot out the vessel the humans intend to ride on. then launch the humans in a small rocket to rendezvous with the vessel in orbit.
Your explanation of how rockets are propelled is not very good. 1. "Every action has an equal and opposite reaction" is not a good explanation since rocket engines do not need stuff to push against. 2. F=ma is just not true for a rocket since that assumes mass is constant. The actual equation that applies here is F=dp/dt. Your use of words that have precise meaning behind them is very sloppy.
Why the hell does your thumbnail have an arrow pointing to the ONLY THING IN THE THUMBNAIL? It's always a shame when a channel places more value on using clickbait techniques rather than making content that will stand on its own. Oh well, another channel blocked.
Dude. Slow down. Take a breath or two. Seriously good video, but difficult for this slow Aussie to absorb and process what you're saying. 🙂 You deserve more subs with this quality production.
Imagine explaining an entire rocket engine in 8:22 without breathing. Very time efficient 👍
I can’t believe this only has 500 views. I thought this was a big channel. Great video
Let's hope it will be one in the future
The F-1 is the most powerful single chamber engine, but it's not the most powerful rocket engine, that title goes to the RD-170
No, the RD-170 was a multiple chamber engine. Not in the same category as the F-1 is is the most powerful single chamber rocket thruster. The reason the Soviets created the multiple chamber configuration is because they were never able to get the metallurgy correct to build a device on the scale of the F-1.
- - However, they were able to create a very efficient single shaft for oxidizer/fuel gas generator on a full flow stage combustion. That didn't happen again till the Raptor.
@@qpwodkgh2010 The metallurgy wasn't the problem, it was combustion instability from the injector plate layout. This is more of a design and testing issue than material science issue.
It wasn't a full-flow staged combustion cycle either. Full flow means all the fuel and all the oxidiser go through a pre-burner. The RD170 is a staged combustion cycle, but not full flow. Full flow is theoretically better, since it allows for lower turbine temperatures, for the same pumping power, since mass-flow is higher. It also means the inputs to the combustion chamber are hot and more likely to achieve complete combustion.
@@qpwodkgh2010 learn to read
@@qpwodkgh2010 bro cant read
This exactly why i think that plumbing is the most useful knowledge/skill anyone could ever learn.
Great video, thanks!
Words cannot convey how awesome this video is. I've been a fan of rockets for decades, yet I've NEVER seen the F-1 explained so thoroughly and animated so gorgeously. :-) Meanwhile Flat Earth folks say "rockets push off air" LOL.
Pretty good thumbnail, the video editing don't seem to be boring , look pretty good, who know , this might get 100k-400k views
and also pretty understandable explanation
*_Former Boeing... we made the 1st stage of the Saturn Rocket..._* it was called the S-IC (pronounced S-one-C) was the first stage of the American Saturn V rocket. The S-IC stage was manufactured by the Boeing Company. Like the first stages of most rockets, most of its mass of more than 2,000 t (4,400,000 lb) at launch was propellant, in this case RP-1 rocket fuel and liquid oxygen (LOX) oxidizer...
I’m so lucky ive found your channel early on. I can tell your videos will be just as good as the giants like Real Engineering and Mustard, remember QUALITY over QUANTITY. Keep making great content, and don’t push out garbage, we can wait! Amazing video on rocket engines, can’t wait for your next video :)
I like your video, you got a lot for a short time, very underrated.
however, there are some things that you could have improved on. You really should have mentioned the fact that the reason why we cant run the engine closed cycle is because we need a very fuel rich combustion mixture to keep the combustion cold enough to prevent the turbine from getting destroyed, and this type of combustion with rp-1 produces a very dirty soot particle filled gas which would clog the injectors in a closed cycle engine. Including this is also a good idea because it sets the stage for people to learn about other closed cycle rocket engine types.
This is other criticism less significant, but you mentioned that the fuel evaporates in the pipes, which needs a little elaboration. I do not think that RP-1 engines have boiling fluids in the cooling channels. The pressure from the turbopumps is too high for it to boil. What most likely happens is it goes supercritical. If the engine is hydrogen fueled, it just expands a lot while supercritical, but it physically cannot evaporate. But this small error is understandable, since some big creators made this mistake and its not talked about very often.
there are a couple other little things, but anyways, overall a good video I think it deserves more views. :)
SpaceX's Raptor is a full-flow staged combustion cycle engine.
Thought this was a bigger channel from the video, this is such a great video. Keep it up! You’re going to get big
I subbed, it’s crazy how you haven’t blown up yet I thought you had over a 100k subscribers but I’m sure you will be there soon with this content
(Don’t want to be that guy, but I’m here before your famous)
Solid video! Really liked it
Amazing explanation and graphics to relate basic principles to the specific components of the Saturn engine! This should be see in the basic curricula of Aerospace engineering schools.
The F-1 engines also ran fuel rich to keep temperatures down.
Here before the rest of the world blows this video up! 👍👍
You're gonna go far!
Man this is such an accessible explanation of such a complex concept! Well done!
Great Video! Loved seeing each component’s location as you explained.
Awesome video, thank you
In the remote chance that anyone viewing this video has missed it, there is a good book on rocketry chemistry by John Drury Clark, "Ignition!"
Bro how do you only have 100 subs?
Such a great video!
Even with your speech speed, you do an excellent job of explaining the complex design processes!!👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Rocket engines can only get us far but to truly explore beyond our solar system in a human lifetime we need WARPDRIVES
best explanation of how a rocket engine works i have ever seen - beautiful content 👍👍
wow so good keep it up and u will blow up in no time fr
Great Video!!
Great explanation !! Thanks !!!
While it is, in fact, amazing that we managed to make an engine that powerful back in the 60's... What's really interesting is that it only takes three of the Raptor 2 to match the thrust of the F-1, for less weight, giving the Raptor 2 about 50% more thrust to weight ratio. (And tests on the Raptor 3 have already come out even more powerful.) Not to mention the Raptor 2 has a sea-level specific impulse higher than the F-1's vacuum specific impulse! So it's not just lighter for the same amount of thrust, it's significantly more efficient. And as a result the Starship's booster already gets more than twice the thrust of a Saturn V running those five monster F-1 engines. Whew!
(Raptor 2: Specific impulse, vacuum: 380 s; Specific impulse, sea-level: 327 s. F-1: Specific impulse, vacuum: 304 s; Specific impulse, sea-level: 263 s. All figures from Wikipedia on 6-10-24.)
10/10 tutorial, would follow again 👍
Great video! Hope to see more:) Liked and Sub'ed;)
Awesome video mate
Really well explained
Pretty good video my friend... I wish this video will get a great views😊😊😊
a great video very suprised to not see over a million views
Hey algorithm, do your thing already!
great video bro
I could just imagine Elon Musk commenting about that engine having too many fiddly bits 😂
thanks awesome content
3:30, Rocketlab night have something to say to you
Such an amzing vicso
Just like to say that I commented when this only had 8k views. In before the rush :)
Also, when he only had 343 subscribers
Pretty cool! Right?
nice video bro
Amazing video 👏
Me after whatching :
Now I'm a rocket scientist 😅
Nice vid
Since rocket speed is usually measured in m/s (I think), I did some math (typed a number on my calculator) and 15700mph is equivalent to 7018,528 m/s, or Mach 25,5
yes that's right, mach 20-25 was Saturn V's top speed range
0:57 - High pressure in the combustion chamber but not in the exhaust gas!!! And second, pressure is NOT more mass in the same volume. That would be density. Pressure is more like kinetic energy density.
5:20 do you mean helium and nitrogen? Oxygen do be reactive
yea mb, pressurizing with oxygen would be pretty dumb (and explosive)
0:39 focus on your pronunciation, it's much more useful.
2 things:
- There is actually a rocket, called Electron, which uses battery and electric motor on its second stage instead of turbo pumps.
- Your video is way to fast imho. Understanding and learning requires time, and own thoughts. You have to think about it, truly grasp it. This fast forward style content will make your viewers truly understand only 5-10% of the whole subject.
👋 hello
7:50 thats 6 f1 engines on screen not 5
oh mb
Nice presentation, but I think you're misstating the physics with the pushups and pull-ups thing. Not to nit pick, but it does give the wrong mechanism in that the third law is a negligible contributor to the motion in a pushup. It's important because with a pushup you rise because you are pushing on the earth. In a rocket, you aren't pushing on anything.
Yes your correct, I was just using a vague example
i heard they do not know how to make them any more.
Yea they don’t know how to make large engines like these anymore, plus it’s not really that cost efficient compared to smaller engines
@@kevkev-70they could, the lost knowledge is the one that the old workers accumulated over decades of working on a thing. The little details
yeah.. earth's gravity is just too damn high. i think we go with shooting things out into space and figure out the g force science for allowing human and technical passengers to survive the trip. maybe shoot out the vessel the humans intend to ride on. then launch the humans in a small rocket to rendezvous with the vessel in orbit.
Very nice video. We will watch your career, with great interest ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
0:54 - You say mass and then you write (lb/s) 🤦♂ The units lb/s are the units of mass rate.
5:12 - "shook at incredible pressures" ??? What is this? And boy, it would help if you worked on your pronunciation.
Your explanation of how rockets are propelled is not very good. 1. "Every action has an equal and opposite reaction" is not a good explanation since rocket engines do not need stuff to push against. 2. F=ma is just not true for a rocket since that assumes mass is constant. The actual equation that applies here is F=dp/dt.
Your use of words that have precise meaning behind them is very sloppy.
Forget to mention we can't build F1 Engines anymore because we lost the knowledge and the tricks to keep that big engine running
Yea I should’ve included that, thanks
Why would we want to rebuild the F-1 engine when the RD-270 is just better ?
@@unepintade Um we don't support Russia lol
@@uneasingcoma5652 ? It's Ukrainian
"we lost the knowledge", we lost the blueprints yeah, but we can make engines 5 times more powerful lmao
They can not go into space. What ever.
Yeah, because its all fake and they want to get our attention off from the real issues. /s
Why the hell does your thumbnail have an arrow pointing to the ONLY THING IN THE THUMBNAIL? It's always a shame when a channel places more value on using clickbait techniques rather than making content that will stand on its own. Oh well, another channel blocked.
Another lazy "content creator" putting needless arrows in their thumbnails to prey on the sense of urgency it creates.
Dude. Slow down. Take a breath or two. Seriously good video, but difficult for this slow Aussie to absorb and process what you're saying. 🙂 You deserve more subs with this quality production.