AIAA 2000-3871

Page 1 of 22

TRW Pintle Engine Heritage and Performance Characteristics

Gordon A. Dressler* and J. Martin Bauer**
TRW Inc., Redondo Beach, CA 90278

Abstract engines because their injectors can be easily

The pintle injector rocket engine is adjusted and optimized by changing only two
fundamentally different from other rocket simple parts.
engines, which nearly universally employ a The TRW pintle engine has a
series of separate propellant injection orifices demonstrated heritage of being low cost,
distributed across the diameter of the headend highly reliable and safe to operate. The
of the combustion chamber. The pintle’s origins of the pintle injector were early
central, singular injection geometry results in laboratory experimental apparatus, used by
a combustion chamber flowfield that varies JPL in the mid-1950’s, to study propellant
greatly from that of conventional rocket mixing and combustion reaction times of
engines. These differences result in certain hypergolic liquid propellants. The pintle
operational characteristics of great benefit to injector was reduced to practice and
rocket engine design, performance, stability, developed by TRW starting in 1960; however,
and test flexibility. it was not until 1972 that the pintle injector
The mid-1950’s origin of the pintle design patent was publicly released. Over the
injector concept and the subsequent early last 40 years, TRW has developed over 60
development work and applications in rocket different pintle engine designs at least to the
engines are reviewed. The pintle engine’s key point of hot fire characterization testing.
design and operational features are compared Bipropellant pintle engines have encompassed
to conventional rocket engines. Pintle injector a wide range of thrust: 5 lbf on a Brilliant
design refinements and associated recent Pebbles thruster, 100 lbf on liquid apogee
applications are discussed. The presentation engines for spacecraft, 1,000–10,000 lbf on
includes photographs and summaries of many the Apollo lunar module descent engine,
different rocket engines that TRW has 250,000 lbf on a “Big Dumb Booster” engine,
developed and successfully flown, each of and 650,000 lbf on a development LOX/LH2
which used the pintle injector. engine currently being readied for testing at
NASA Stennis Space Center. Over 130
Introduction bipropellant engines using a pintle injector
The pintle injector is distinguished by its have flown successfully. Flight programs
relying on TRW bipropellant engines have
unique geometry and injection characteristics
included Apollo LEMDE, Delta launch
compared to the impinging or coaxial
vehicle, MMBPS, ISPS, ANIK E-1/E-2 and
distributed-element injectors typically used on
Intelsat-K, ERIS KKV stage, FMTI, and
liquid bipropellant rocket engines. The pintle
NASA Chandra. There has never been a flight
injector design can deliver high combustion
failure of a TRW bipropellant engine.
efficiency (typically 96–99%) and enables
implementing some unique operating features, Significantly, there has never been an
such as deep throttling and injector face instance of combustion instability in a pintle
shutoff. Its design simplicity makes it ideally engine during any ground or flight operations,
suited for use on low cost engines. despite scaling over a range of 50,000:1 in
Significantly lower development and thrust and 250:1 in chamber pressure and
qualification costs are realized with pintle operation with 25 different propellant

* Propulsion Systems Center Chief Engineer, Member of AIAA

** Senior Engineering Manager
Copyright  2000 by TRW Inc. Published by American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., with permission.
 AIAA 2000-3871
Page 2 of 22

combinations. The pintle injector has

demonstrated direct injection of near-normal
boiling point LOX/LH2 propellants with high
performance and proven dynamic combustion
stability. “Bomb” stability testing has been
performed on six different pintle engines with
four different propellant combinations,
including the physically large 250,000 lbf
engine.
With its unique capabilities, the pintle
injector has been used in very demanding
applications, such as an 8,200 lbf engine that
could throttle over a 19:1 thrust range and
perform 8 millisecond pulses. Also, with its
ready adaptability to shut off propellants at the
injector face, the pintle injector is ideally Figure 1. Pintle Injector Concept (Continuous Gap,
suited to operation with gelled propellants and Fixed Thrust or Thottling Designs)
has enabled the first successful flight of a gel
propellant tactical missile. Most recently, the The other propellant (here shown as
pintle engine design has been investigated as a oxidizer) enters the injector body via a
means of easily reducing the cost of large separate centrally-located passage and flows
engines for launch vehicles by as much as axially through a central pintle sleeve toward
75% beyond that achieved on recent the injector, where it is turned to uniform
programs, such as EELV. radial flow by the pintle tip's internal
contoured surface. This propellant is metered
The history of development and flight
into the combustion chamber by passing
applications of the pintle engine over the last
through: (a) a continuous gap formed between
forty years will be summarized. The features
the cylindrical sleeve and pintle tip, or (b)
and performance characteristics of the TRW
slots or holes of certain geometry machined
pintle injector and associated engine designs
into the end of the sleeve which may be
will be described. Features of the pintle
integral with the tip, or (c) a combination of
injector will be compared to those of other
the above two designs. Thus, the pintle
injectors commonly used in rocket engines.
injector can meter the central propellant as a
continuous radial sheet, a series of radially
Pintle Injector Design Concept
flowing “spokes”, or combination of both.
The basic concept of the bipropellant Figure 2 shows the injection geometry of the
pintle injector is shown in Figure 1. slotted, or “toothed” pintle injector with
One propellant (here shown as fuel) is fed attached tip.
through outer injector flow passages into a Experience has shown that the pintle
circumferential annulus—formed between the injector can be designed to give high
injector body "snout" and the central injector performance with either fuel or oxidizer being
element—which meters the flow into the the centrally-metered propellant. Generally,
combustion chamber. This propellant exits fuel is chosen as the central propellant in
the injector as an axially flowing annular sheet radiation-cooled engines because the radial
that arrives at the impingement point with a injection momentum can be designed to
circumferentially uniform velocity profile. persist to the wall, thus enabling a convenient
 AIAA 2000-3871
Page 3 of 22

Figure 2. Pintle Injector Concept (Slotted Injection, (a) Outer Flow Only
Fixed Thrust Design)

means of “tuning” the injector to provide fuel

film cooling of the combustion chamber.
Ultimately, the decision to meter either fuel or
oxidizer as the central propellant depends on
many design trade-offs. TRW has successfully
flown both ox-centered and fuel-centered
pintle engines.
The 90°, axial-radial impingement of the
two propellant streams combined with the
specific geometry of the resulting atomization
and mixing "fan" is fundamental to the pintle
injector providing both high combustion
(b) Inner Flow Only
efficiency and inherent combustion stability.
Figure 3 is a series of photographs of
water flow tests on a single pintle injector,
looking back toward the injector element and
headend dome. Figure 3(a) shows
characteristic flow for the outer, annular
injection; Figure 3(b) shows a wider-angle
view of the inner passage flow being injected
as a radial sheet; and Figure 3(c) shows the
spray fan resulting from the combined
injected, but non-reacting, flows.
The single central injector sleeve, shown
in Figure 1, is easily designed to be movable.
This provides a convenient and reliable means
of throttling the injector to maintain nearly
constant injection velocities across a wide
range of injected propellant flowrates. TRW
has used this feature to great advantage, as
discussed below, to produce deep (>10:1) (c) Combined Flows
throttling engines that maintain high Figure 3. Photographs of Injector Water Flows
 AIAA 2000-3871
Page 4 of 22

combustion efficiency and insensitivity to

chug instability across their operating range.
Where injectors employ a movable sleeve,
a separate on-axis support rod (or tube) and
cruciform guide vanes are used to support the
pintle tip independent of the sleeve. It is seen
that movement of the single sleeve can
simultaneously meter both the fuel and the
oxidizer at their immediate points of injection.
Furthermore, with proper design the sleeve
can be made to fully shutoff both propellants
at the injector face (hence, “face shutoff”), Figure 4. Combustion Chamber Flowfield Resulting
thereby eliminating all dribble volume from from Pintle Injection of Propellants
the injector. In fact, TRW has implemented
“face shutoff only” injectors where this
There is: (1) an upper torroidal zone that
movable sleeve was the only “valving”
is predominantly outer propellant-rich and acts
locking off propellant supply pressures up to
to cool the headend via evaporation of
approximately 3000 psia.
entrained and impinging droplets of liquid
The distance from the outer propellant’s propellant, and (2) a lower torroidal zone that
annular entrance point into the combustion is predominately central propellant-rich and
chamber to the point of contact with the recirculates back on-axis toward the pintle,
injected central propellant stream is referred to thereby acting as a deflector and mixer for any
as the injector's "skip distance". This unburned droplets that would otherwise tend
parameter, together with others such as the to travel directly from the injector to the
pintle’s insertion depth into the chamber, it’s nozzle throat.
diameter relative to the chamber diameter and
injection stream thicknesses, velocities and Pintle Injector Development History
relative momentums, must be considered in
The pintle injector for rocket applications
proper design of pintle injectors.
has its origins in simple but elegant laboratory
Careful design of the pintle injector apparatus and experiments first employed at
ensures (a) good atomization and mixing of the Caltech Jet Propulsion Laboratory, starting
the two propellant streams for high about 1957, to characterize reaction rates of
combustion efficiency, (b) proper fuel film candidate rocket propellants (Ref. 1). This
cooling at the chamber wall, and (c) work was performed initially by Jerry
evaporative cooling of the exposed headend Elverum under the supervision of Art Grant,
dome for good thermal margin. with later theoretical analysis and engineering
The momentum of the injector’s resultant support from Dr. Pete Staudhammer and Jack
spray "fan" of mixing and combusting Rupe.
propellants pumps two major zones of As indicated in Figure 5(a), two concentric
recirculation within the combustion chamber, metal tubes were used to flow combinations of
as indicated in Figure 4. hypergolic propellants at known stream
velocities. In this manner, the start of
propellant mixing could be controlled and the
delay time to initiation of chemical reaction
could be derived from measurements of
 AIAA 2000-3871
Page 5 of 22

millisecond resolution, it proved impractical

with higher energy hypergolics (e.g.,
N2O4/MMH) due to their extremely short
reaction times. Reactions were observed to be
nearly instantaneous at the point of
impingement. This laboratory equipment,
however, showed a possible path to
developing a new type of injector with
demonstrated high mixing efficiency. Indeed,
later experiments at JPL featured the tipped
inner tube protruding beyond the exit plane of
the outermost tube in order to study
combustion phenomena without destroying
the outer tube . . . thus, the basic pintle
injector was born, Figure 5(c).
Staudhammer is credited with developing
the “toothed” injector concept. As related to
one of the authors (Ref. 1), he was looking for
a way to further improve upon the already
good mixing and decided that having “slots”
Figure 5. Evolution of JPL Laboratory Apparatus of one propellant penetrating into the other,
for Studying Reaction Rates and
Combustion Phenomena of Hypergolic
outermost propellant would accomplish this.
Propellants In an expedient manner, he had a technician
make multiple hacksaw cuts across the end of
downstream thermocouples, with known an available inner tube and, indeed,
distances and flow velocities. subsequent tests of this new end configuration
Early experimental data revealed that a showed a substantial improvement in mixing
large degree of uncertainty in timing the efficiency.
chemical reaction rates was due to the poor By about 1960, Grant, Elverum and
mixing between the annular flow streams, Staudhammer had moved to the newly-formed
especially with nearly matched flow velocities Space Technology Laboratories, Inc. (now
(~ zero shear mixing). This was exacerbated TRW, Inc.) to pursue applied development of
by wake effects from the inner tube’s wall monopropellant and bipropellant rocket
end and by the well-known “blow apart” engines. It was at STL that the pintle injector
characteristic of hypergolic propellants. The was finally developed into a design usable in
innovative solution to this problem, attributed rocket engines. TRW’s first IR&D reporting
to Elverum (Ref. 1), was to place a tip at the on the pintle injector is for CY 1961 (Ref. 2),
end of the innermost tube (attached to an from which Figure 6 has been extracted. This
internal cruciform support) that would force shows the variety of different pintle injector
this propellant stream to turn radial, thereby geometries that were then being evaluated.
insuring a definite point of intense mixing of Subsequently, the pintle injector design was
the two propellants. This design refinement is matured and fully developed by a number of
shown in Figure 5(b). TRW personnel (inc. Elverum, Staudhammer,
While this apparatus proved quite useful in Voorhees, Burge, Van Grouw, Bauer and
characterizing reaction rates of lower energy Hardgrove), adding such features as throttling,
hypergolics (e.g., RFNA/UDMH) to sub- rapid pulsing capability and face shutoff.
 AIAA 2000-3871
Page 6 of 22

Figure 6. Early Designs of Pintle Injector Configurations Evaluated at Space Technology Laboratories, Inc.
(now TRW, Inc.), extracted from Ref. 2.

The pintle injector design was quickly the pintle injector therefore creates a
adapted to throttling applications due to its combustion chamber flowfield that is
unique ability to retain performance and significantly different from that of
combustion stability across a wide range of conventional rocket engine injectors. This
operating conditions. Indeed, the first flight leads to operating characteristics favoring
use of a pintle injector rocket engine was the combustion stability and performance, which
10:1 throttling Lunar Module Descent Engine are summarized in Table 1.
used on the Apollo program (see “Early One extraordinary benefit of such
Applications” below). A US patent fundamental characteristics is that the pintle
(#3,699,772) for invention of the pintle injector has been proven to be scalable over a
injector was granted to Gerry Elverum, wide range of thrust level and different
assigned to TRW and made public in October propellant combinations without any need for
1972. stability augmentation, such as acoustic
cavities or baffles. There has never been an
Pintle Engine Design Fundamentals: A instance of acoustic instability observed in a
Comparison with Typical Rocket Designs TRW pintle injector rocket engine.
Typical injectors for rocket engines consist Another major benefit is that the pintle
of multiple, separate injection orifices injector has demonstrated the ability to
distributed more or less uniformly across the consistently deliver high performance
diameter of the engine’s headend. In (typically 96–99% of theoretical combustion
comparison, the pintle injector injects performance, c*) with proper design and
propellants only at a relatively small area hardware buildup.
located at the center of the headend. And In comparison with conventional rocket
whereas conventional injectors create engines operating at the same chamber
propellant mixing in a planar zone pressure and thrust level, pintle rocket engines
immediately adjacent to the headend, the are generally longer in physical length and
pintle injector creates a torroidal mixing zone higher in chamber contraction ratio (both
that is significantly removed from the being required to support the chamber’s major
chamber headend. As was shown in Figure 4, recirculation zones).
 AIAA 2000-3871
Page 7 of 22

Table 1. Comparison of Key Engine Operating Parameters for Typical

Liquid Rocket Engines versus TRW’s Pintle Rocket Engine

Chamber Flow Pattern in Chamber Flow Pattern in

Parameter Typical Liquid Rocket TRW Pintle Rocket

Propellant injection Distributed across injector face Only at central location

Fuel and oxidizer Multiple intersecting or shearing Single annular outer sheet of one
injection geometry propellant streams; intersecting propellant impinges on (a) multiple
streams are of like or unlike radial “spokes” of other propellant, or
propellants (b) thin radial fan of other propellant

Fuel and oxidizer In plane immediately adjacent to In torus significantly offset from injector
collision geometry injector face face

Droplet trajectories Approximately axial down chamber Initially at large angle to chamber axis

Chamber recirculation None Two major recirculation zones in

chamber

Droplet vaporization Proceed in planar fashion down Proceed along axially symmetric, but
and combustion chamber length highly non-planar, contours in chamber

Secondary droplet Comparatively small due to axial flow Comparatively large due to wall
breakup and homogeneous distribution impingement and recirculation zones

In passing through Little “relative wind” away from Large “relative wind” throughout
chamber, droplets see: injector face (pressure perturbations chamber (pressure perturbations thus
thus cause large change in energy cause only small change in energy
release rate) release rate)

Energy release zone Uniform and planar across chamber Radially-varying and canted down
geometry diameter (facilitates acoustically- and across chamber—together with
coupled combustion instability) stable zones having different gas
properties (O/F, MW, gamma and T)
— serve to prevent acoustic instabilities

Chamber for optimum Is relatively short and has relatively Is relatively long and has relatively
combustion performance small contraction ratio high contraction ratio

Wall film cooling Established by separate injection Established by pintle injector “tuning”,
ports eliminating need for separate ports

Injection metering Relatively small and contamination Relatively large and insensitive to
orifices sensitive contamination
 AIAA 2000-3871
Page 8 of 22

Pintle Engine Development and Production Table 2 summarizes TRW’s flight

History experience with pintle engines, including
Figure 7 (next page) summarizes the those with thrust levels down to the 100 lbf
development and production history of high class (i.e., Liquid Apogee Engine, LAE,
thrust (=2000 lbf) pintle engines programs that class).
have occurred at TRW over the last 40 years.

Table 2. Summary of TRW Pintle Injector Rocket Engines

Used on Flight Programs
Development
Thrust Pc Duty Funding Number Cooling Isp
Engine (lbf) Propellants (psia) Cycle Source Produced Method (Sec) Comments
LMDE 1000 to N2O4/A-50 100 • 3 starts NASA 84 Ablative 303 Perfect reliability record
9850 • 10:1 throttling as LEM descent engine,
• 1000 sec max saved Apollo 13 mission
single burn
duration
TR201 9900 N2O4/A-50 100 • 5 starts, 500 sec TRW 77 Ablative 303 Perfect reliability record
total as second stage Delta
• 10 to 350 sec engine 77/77
single burn
duration
ISPS 100 lbf HDA/USO 94 • 300 pulses LMSC 28 Radiation, 272 Flown successfully on
class • 1 to 570 sec. Columbium orbital Agena program
single burn 28/28
duration
MMBPS 88 N2O4/MMH 90 • 25,000 sec. total 21 Radiation, 305 Derived from TRW
burn time Columbium URSA 100R engine
• 130 starts
• 9000 sec. max
single burn time
DM/LAE 105 N2O4/ N2H4 100 • 25,000 sec. total Commercial 10 Radiation, 315 Six successful spacecraft
burn time G.E./TRW C-103 flight engines (Anik,
• 20 starts Intelsat)
• 6000 sec single
burn time
AC/LAE 120 N2O4/ N2H4 100 • 24,000 sec. total Commercial 6 Radiation, 322 4 Engines flown
burn time G.E./TRW C-103 successfully on NASA
• 100 starts Chandra S/C-1999
ERIS 910 N2O4/MMH 1600 • pulsing Army 12 Ablative 284 Flown successfully on
Divert (ε =16) two ERIS flights-4/flt
Thruster
FMTI 1050 Gels: 1750 • pulsing Army/ 6 Ablative 240 Program on-going;
IRFNA/ AMCOM (s.l.) 2 flight successes in 2
C-loaded launches
MMH
 AIAA 2000-3871
Page 9 of 22

1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Small Scale Development: 27 to 5,000 lbf
LEMDE Development and Production:
1,000 to 10,500 lbs Thrust (N 2O4/A-50, 98% C*)
TR201
Development and Production:
10,500 lbs Thrust (N 2O4/A-50)
250 Klbf Low Cost Engine Tested at 50,000 lbs
Thrust at CTS (N 2O4/UDMH, 96% C*)
250 Klbf Low Cost Engine AFRPL Facility Checkout
Tests at 250,000 lbs Thrust (N 2O4/UDMH, 92% C*)
250 Klbf Low Cost Engine Scaling Tests at 250,000 lbs
Thrust at AFRPL (N 2O4/UDMH, 93% C*)
250 Klbf Low Cost Engine Ablative Tests at 250,000
lbs Thrust at AFRPL (N 2O4/UDMH, 95% C*)
50 K Heat Sink and Ablative Engine Tests, and 35K Film-Cooled
Engine Tests at Holloman AFB (IRFNA/UDMH, 98% C*)
50 K Heat Sink Engine Tests at 50,000
lbs Thrust at CTS (LOX/RP-1, 93% C*)
2 K Engine Tests
(LOX/RP-1, 93% C* and LOX/C 3H8, 96% C*)
3 K Engine Tests at CTS (FLOX/ C 3H 8 ,
FLOX/LCH 4, FLOX/LCH 4 + LC 2H6, 99% C*) 16.4 K Engine Tests
at NASA/ LeRC (LOX/LH 2, 98% C*)
3 K Engine Tests at CTS (FLOX/ CH 4, 99% C*) 40 K Engine Tests at NASA/ LeRC
3 K Engine Tests at CTS (FLOX/LCH 4 + LC 2H6, 99% C*) (LOX/LH 2, 94% C*)
13 K Engine Test at NASA
Cold Flow Tests at CTS (H 20 + Kerosene and H 2O + Trichlorethylene }
(LOX/RP-1, 96% C*)
650 K Engine Design
and Fab (LOX/LH 2)
40 K Engine Tests at EMRTC
(LOX/RP-1) (98% C*)
650 K Engine Phase 1 Testing
at NASA SSC (LOX/LH 2)

Figure 7. Chronology of Development and Production of Large Thrust (= 2000 lbf)

Pintle Rocket Engine Technology at TRW
 AIAA 2000-3871
Page 10 of 22

Early Applications
The first experimental pintle rockets tested
at TRW Space Technology Laboratories were
the MIRA 500 (a 25 to 500 lbf variable thrust
engine), originating in December 1961, and
the MIRA 5000 (a 250 to 5000 lbf variable
thrust engine), originating in May 1962,
shown in Figures 8 and 9 respectively. These
IR&D units led to development of the backup
Surveyor Vernier Engine, a.k.a. the MIRA
150A (a 30 to 150 lbf variable thrust engine
built for JPL starting in 1963) and the famous
Apollo Lunar Excursion Module Descent
Engine (built for NASA/Grumman starting in
1963). These units are shown in Figures 10
and 11, respectively.

Figure 10. MIRA 150A Engine

Figure 8. Test Firing of Earliest TRW Pintle Injector

Engine, a Water-Cooled MIRA 500

Figure 9. Test Firing of Ablative-Cooled MIRA 5000 Figure 11. Apollo Lunar Excursion Module
Descent Engine
 AIAA 2000-3871
Page 11 of 22

The capability of a given pintle injector to In parallel with the LEMDE program,
perform deep throttling without large loss in TRW continued development of lower thrust
combustion efficiency was demonstrated and pintle engines, including by 1966 a product
documented at TRW as early as 1962. Figure family known as the URSA-series (Universal
12, extracted from STL’s 1962 IR&D Report Rocket for Space Applications) shown in
(Ref. 3), presents hot firing test data from the Figure 13. These were storable (N2O4/MMH
MIRA 5000 engine throttled up to 35:1. or N2O4/A-50) bipropellant engines offered at
Performance in excess of 93% theoretical c* fixed thrusts of 25, 100 or 200 lbf, with
was maintained over a 10:1 range with options for either ablative- or radiation-cooled
N2O4/A-50†, and performance efficiency in combustion chambers. These engines were
excess of 95% was maintained at the extremes capable of pulsing at 35 Hz, with pulse widths
of 35:1 throttling with IRFNA/UDMH. as small as .020 seconds, but also had design
Maximum performance values obtained were steady state firing life in excess of 10,000
in the range of 98–99% of theoretical c*. seconds (with radiation-cooled chambers).
Planned applications for these engines
included Gemini, Apollo, Dyna-Soar, Manned
Orbiting Laboratory, and the Multi-Mission
Bipropellant Propulsion System (MMBPS).

Figure 12. Early Demonstration of Deep Throttle

Capability of Pintle Injector

The first flight application of a TRW

pintle injector rocket engine was the throttling
Lunar Excursion Module Descent Engine
(LEMDE, sometimes shortened to LMDE).
Engine development started in 1963,
qualification was completed in 1967 (Ref. 4),
and production ran through 1972 (Ref. 5).
During the NASA contract for this engine,
3,857 tests were conducted, accumulating
233,000 seconds firing time. A total of 84
engines were produced. This engine
performed flawlessly during 10 flights,
landing 12 astronauts on the Moon and
enabling the space rescue of the Apollo 13
crew. Design characteristics included: (a)
continuously variable, on-demand vacuum
thrust between 1,050 and 10,500 lbf, (b)
N2O4/A-50† propellants at a mixture ratio of
1.60 ± 2% over 100–25% throttle, (c) design
operating life >1040 seconds, (d) weight of
393 lbm, and (e) envelope of 85 inches high Figure 13. TRW’s URSA Family of Pintle
by 60 inches diameter at the nozzle exit. Engines (from 1966 brochure)

†
A-50, “Aerozine 50”, is a 50%N2H4 + 50%UDMH blend
 AIAA 2000-3871
Page 12 of 22

Two other early, low thrust pintle engines Also, beginning about 1962, TRW
of historical note were the Lunar Hopper conducted numerous studies to apply pintle
Engine (a 12–180 lbf variable thrust, MON- injector technology to large booster engines
10/MMH engine developed in 1965 for with the goal of achieving minimum vehicle
NASA/MSFC in support of the Manned cost via absolute simplicity; these designs
Flying Vehicle program) and the Apollo were generically nicknamed “Big Dumb
Common Reaction Control System Engine, Boosters”.
a.k.a. C-1 (a 100 lbf fixed thrust, N2O4/MMH Perhaps the most ambitious of these TRW-
engine developed in 1965 for multipurpose led projects was the 1963 “Sea Dragon” study
attitude control on such programs as Apollo, for NASA MSFC that designed a sea-
Gemini and Saturn IVB). The C-1 was a long launched, pressure-fed TSTO vehicle to place
life (>2000 seconds), pulsing (up to 35 Hz), a 1.1 million pound payload into a circular
ablative engine that employed a coated Ta-W 300 nm orbit (Ref. 6). The vehicle was
throat insert. nominally 75 ft in diameter and 500 ft high.
Starting in 1974 and continuing through Its first stage was to employ a single 80
1988, a simplified, low cost derivative of the million lbf engine using LOX/RP-1 and the
LEMDE was used as the second stage of the second stage used a single 14 million lbf
Delta 2914 and 3914 launch vehicles. This LOX/LH2 engine. At a design chamber
9900 lbf fixed thrust ablative engine, pressure of 300 psia, the first stage engine had
designated the TR201 and shown in Figure 14, a throat diameter of 42 ft, a nozzle exit
had a 100% successful flight rate (including diameter of 94 ft and an overall height of 102
69 non-classified launches). ft. To say the least, these early efforts at
achieving a heavy lift launch vehicle were
based on quite expansive thinking.
By 1965, TRW was under contract to the
Air Force (under the Minimum Cost Design
Space Launch Vehicle Program) to show
scalability of the pintle injector for booster
engines having thrust levels in excess of one
million pounds thrust. This led to the
fabrication and hot fire testing of a pressure-
fed 250,000 lbf N2O4/UDMH pintle engine
(Ref. 7), a scaling jump of 25:1 from the
largest pintle engine then in existence
(LEMDE). A water flow test of this engine’s
injector is shown in Figure 15; note the far
field persistence of the “spokes” of the central,
radially-injected, propellant. In total, 44
separate 250K hot fire tests were conducted
(including steady-state tests of 66, 83 and 98
seconds duration), demonstrating dynamic
combustion stability via “bomb” testing and
evaluating performance and ablative chamber
durability. All firings were performed at
Figure 14. TRW’s TR201, Derived from LEMDE, was AFRPL, Edwards AFB, CA from Oct 1968 to
Used as the Delta Upper Stage with a 100% Jan 1970. A test firing is shown in Figure 16.
Flight Success Rate
 AIAA 2000-3871
Page 13 of 22

interceptors was possible. However, such

missiles required attitude control and lateral
(“divert”) rockets that could provide
exceptionally fast and repeatable pulses on
command. Certain applications also required
linear throttling capability in addition to
pulsing. By conveniently enabling shutoff of
propellants at their injection point into the
combustion chamber (using a movable
sleeve), the pintle injector provided greatly
improved pulse response by eliminating
injector “dribble volume” effects. A pintle
injector with the face shutoff feature is shown
Figure 15. Water Flow Test of Pintle Injector in Figure 17.
for Air Force 250,000 lbf Engine

Figure 17. Face Shutoff Pintle Injector in

Closed Position
Figure 16. Hot Fire Test of Pressure-Fed A very compact, 8,200 lbf N2O4/MMH
250,000 lbf Ablative Engine
engine employing this feature is shown in
In the period 1969 to 1971, TRW also Figure 18. This engine was developed starting
fabricated and conducted demonstration test in 1981 as a pitch and yaw thruster for the
firings on 35,000 and 50,000 lbf pressure-fed Army SENTRY missile program. Tight
pintle engines with the goal of using these packaging into the generally cylindrical shape
storable propellant rockets to power high of such missiles required that a “turned flow”
speed sleds at Holloman Air Force Base. nozzle be employed (here the flow was turned
about 110° off chamber axis). This particular
rocket application also required a slot nozzle
Design Refinements to produce jet interaction effects that increased
Beginning in the early 1980’s, a series of effective vehicle side thrust for operation
design refinements were applied to the pintle within the atmosphere. This pintle injector
injector to adapt it to a wide variety of engine, utilizing cavitating venturi control
developing, challenging applications. valves in a manner similar to LEMDE, could
First, improving sensor, guidance and throttle over a 19:1 thrust range with ±8%
missile technologies indicated that ballistic linearity and could deliver repeatable “on”
missile defense with “hit-to-kill” missile pulses as small as 8 milliseconds (to 90% s.s.
 AIAA 2000-3871
Page 14 of 22

Pc) at any thrust level. It operated at 2200

psia chamber pressure to achieve small size
and light weight (<13 lbm). Deliverable
combustion efficiency was 98% of theoretical
at full thrust, rolling off to 94% at 1/10 throttle
and to 71% at 1/19 throttle (Ref. 8).

Figure 19. KEW 10.2 Divert Thruster for

Early SDI Kinetic Kill Vehicle
to Lockheed Missiles and Space Company.
The 900 lbf, 90° turned-flow, lateral divert
engines used on this KV were pintle engines
wherein the injector shutoff element provided
the only control of propellant flow. The large
bipropellant valve normally required in such
engines was replaced by a small pilot valve
that used high pressure fuel (MMH) to actuate
the moveable injector sleeve. This feature—
the face shutoff only (FSO) injector—greatly
improves overall thruster response and
significantly reduces engine size and mass.
This injector sealed off liquid N2O4 and
liquid MMH feed pressures of approximately
Figure 18. SENTRY Jet Interaction Pitch 2300 psia during periods of thruster inactivity
and Yaw Thruster (19:1 linear over a mission time exceeding 6 minutes.
throttling and 8 msec pulsing) This technology innovation, together with
many others incorporated into the KV,
A similar compact, face shutoff pintle
enabled the first exoatmospheric kinetic kill of
engine—designed and ground demonstrated
a simulated (but actual size) reentry warhead
on one of the Air Force’s earliest Strategic
off Kwajaline atoll on 28 January 1991 on the
Defense Initiative Kinetic Energy Weapon
first flight of ERIS (Ref. 10).
programs (KEW 10.2)—is shown in Figure
19. This 90° turned-flow, N2O4/MMH More recently, FSO pintle injectors have
engine operated at 1700 psia chamber been used very successfully to meter and
pressure, delivering 300 lbf vacuum thrust control gelled propellants, which have a
with pulsing response to 12 milliseconds (Ref. normal consistency like that of smooth peanut
9). butter. Gelled propellants typically use either
aluminum powder or carbon powder to
A further refinement of the face shutoff
increase the energy density of the liquid fuel
injector was used on the Army Strategic
base (typically MMH) and they use additives
Defense Command’s Exoatmospheric
to rheologically match the oxidizer (typically
Reentry-vehicle Interceptor Subsystem
IRFNA base) to the fuel across a wide range
(ERIS), for which TRW provided the kill
of both temperature and flow/shear conditions.
vehicle propulsion subsystem under contract
 AIAA 2000-3871
Page 15 of 22

Gel propellants provide nearly the energy (Ref. 11). A cross-section sketch of the FSO
density of solid propellants and the injector from the GESP program is shown in
controllability of liquid propellants, but with Figure 20. The GESP engine operated at a
much safer storage, handling and operating combustion chamber pressure of 2500 psia,
characteristics. Unlike either solids or liquids, the highest of any pintle engine that has ever
gel propellants have been shown to be been tested. The FSO injector on this engine
insensitive munitions (IM) compliant. For sealed against supply pressures of
gelled propellants to be used on rockets approximately 3000 psia.
needing energy management, face shutoff is
mandatory to prevent dry-out of the base
liquid propellants during off times between
pulses, which would otherwise result in the
solids within the gels plugging the injector
passages.
FSO pintle injectors have been used on a
variety of programs, as summarized in Table
3. Of particular note, the McDonnell Douglas
Advanced Crew Escape Seat – Experimental
(ACES-X) program and it’s successor, the Gel
Escape System Propulsion (GESP) program,
refined the FSO pintle injector (with a
hydraulic servo valve acting as injector pilot
valve) to the point that 2 millisecond pulses
could be repeatedly delivered at >100 Hz on a
1700 lbf rocket engine using gelled oxidizer Figure 20. Face Shutoff-Only (FSO) Pintle
and aluminum-loaded gel fuel propellants Injector Concept Used on GESP

Table 3. Summary of Major Applications of TRW Face Shutoff Pintle Engines

Advanced SENTRY KEW 10.2 ACES-X/ GESP ERIS FMTI

Throttling Slurry Pitch & Yaw Divert Thruster Lateral Thruster
Engine (ATSE) Engine
Propellants CLF3/ NOTSGEL-A N2O4/MMH and N2O4/MMH gel IRFNA/ gel MMH N2O4/ MMH gel IRFNA/ gel MMH
gel IRFNA/ gel MMH (Al-loaded) (C-loaded)
(Al-loaded)
Full Thrust (lbf) 5000 (s.l.) 8200 (s.l.) 300 (vac) 1500/1700 (s.l.) 910 (vac) 1050 (s.l.)
Full Pc (psia) 1000 2200 1700 2500 1600 1750
Throttle Range 7:1 19:1 fixed thrust fixed thrust fixed thrust fixed thrust
Upstream servo-piloted, servo-piloted, solenoid-piloted, None None None
Valve hydraulically operated, hydraulically/MMH MMH operated,
linearly positioned, operated, linearly on-off,
cavitating venturi, positioned, cavitating linked biprop
linked biprop venturi, linked biprop
Pintle Injector continuously variable continuously on/off, FSO, on/off, FSO, on/off, pressure FSO, on/off, pressure
Type area, mechanically variable area, pressure opened, pressure opened, opened, spring opened, spring
linked to valve spring vs. pressure spring closed spring closed, servo closed, miniature closed, miniature
stroke, only fuel side balanced pilot valve, hyd oil 3-way solenoid pilot 3-way solenoid pilot
fully shutoff actuated valve, MMH act’d valve, hyd oil act’d
Demonstrated steady state only .008 – .600 sec .010 – 1.13 sec .002 – .800 sec .020 – 1.76 sec .115 – 1.66 sec
Pulse Widths
Comments used toothed element >150 firing tests 67 pulses and 9.4 also tested in flown, 100% flown, 100%
for ox injection (center sec firing time on mockup escape seat success (8/8) success (2/2)
propellant) one engine (4 engine firing)
 AIAA 2000-3871
Page 16 of 22

Another design challenge from the mid- performance booster engines. Attempts to use
1980’s and early 1990’s was that of obtaining direct injection of cryogenic hydrogen in other
miniaturization of rocket engines. As part of types of injectors had consistently resulted in
the Air Force Brilliant Pebbles program, TRW the onset of combustion instabilities
developed a very small 5 lbf N2O4/hydrazine (“screech”), so verification of the inherent
thruster using a pintle injector. This radiation- combustion stability of the pintle injector was
cooled engine weighed 0.3 lbm (135 grams) a key part of this effort.
and was successfully tested in August 1993, In late 1991 and early 1992, a 16,000 lbf
delivering >300 seconds Isp with a 150:1 LOX/LH2 test engine was successfully
nozzle expansion ratio. The pintle diameter operated at sea-level at LeRC with direct
was .066 inches and scanning electron injection of liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen
microscopy was needed to verify as-built propellants (Ref. 12). A total of 67 firings
dimensions on the .0030±.0003 inch radial were conducted. The engine demonstrated
metering orifices. Figure 21 is a SEM excellent performance, with 97% average
photograph of this pintle injector, the smallest combustion efficiency and total absence of
ever built. combustion instabilities, including dynamic
recovery on five runs having radial and
tangential “bomb” excitations. Although the
engine used a fixed-element injector, it was
operated at 60%, 80% and 100% thrust levels
by throttling facility propellant valves. Figure
22 shows a full thrust firing on this test
engine.

Figure 21. Pintle Injector on Brilliant Pebbles

5 lbf Engine

Another major design adaptation in this

time period was use of the pintle injector with
cryogenic liquid hydrogen fuel. Previously,
various pintle engines had been tested with
liquid oxygen or liquid fluorine-oxygen
(FLOX) as the oxidizer in combination with a
near-ambient temperature liquid fuel such as
methane, ethane, propane, RP-1 or hydrazine.
Beginning in 1991, TRW joined with
McDonnell Douglas and NASA Lewis (now Figure 22. Pintle Injector Operation with Direct
Glenn) Research Center to demonstrate that Injection of LOX and 45–50 R LH2
TRW’s pintle engine could use direct injection
of near-normal boiling point LH2 (~50 R or Subsequently, this same test engine
28 K) to simplify the design of high headend was adapted for and was successfully
 AIAA 2000-3871
Page 17 of 22

tested with LOX/LH2 at 40,000 lbf and with shown in Figure 24, delivers 322 seconds of
LOX/RP-1 at 13,000 and 40,000 lbf. vacuum Isp using a radiation-cooled
Significantly, this was accomplished by columbium chamber. A next-generation LAE
changeout of just three† injector parts, shown design, the TR312, which uses a rhenium
in Figure 23. combustion chamber has been demonstrated to
deliver 325 seconds Isp with N2O4/MMH and
330 seconds Isp with N2O4/hydrazine.

Figure 23. Pintle Tip, Oxidizer Orifice Ring and Fuel

Gap Ring from 16K LOX/LH2 Engine

This demonstrates a key feature of the

pintle injector: the low cost and ease by which
it can be adapted to a change in operating
conditions or propellants. Furthermore,
optimization of a given injector’s performance
is empirically obtained by simply varying the
geometries of the outer propellant’s annular
Figure 24. TR308 N2O4/Hydrazine Liquid Apogee
gap and the central propellant’s slot Engine Used to Place NASA Chandra
geometries (and/or continuous gap, if used), Spacecraft on Final Orbit in Aug 1999
two of the three parts shown in Figure 23.
The early FSO injector and gel propellant
development work of late 1980’s/early 1990’s
Recent Applications
led to the world’s first missile flights using
Within the last ten years the pintle injector gelled oxidizer and gelled fuel propellants.
has continued to be used across a diverse These were successfully performed on the
range of applications, with much of the Army/AMCOM Future Missile Technology
hardware heritage traceable to work described Integration (FMTI) program, with the first
above. flight in March 1999 (Ref. 13) and the second
In the field of space propulsion, the flight in May 2000. The 1050 lbf, 1750 psia
URSA-series of radiation cooled engines— chamber pressure engine, shown in Figure 25,
which led to the MMBPS and ISPS engines of is extremely lightweight (1.6 lbm, including
the 1970’s—provided the heritage for the 0.1 lbm solenoid valve). It is an ablative
N2O4/hydrazine (“dual mode”) TR306 liquid engine using a miniature solenoid valve to
apogee engines (LAEs) used on the Anik E- hydraulically control a FSO injector which
1/E-2 and Intelsat K spacecraft in 1991–1992 meters gelled IRFA and carbon-loaded gelled
and most recently the dual mode TR308 LAEs MMH propellants for pulse-width modulated
used to place the NASA Chandra spacecraft energy management during time-of-flight.
on final orbit in August 1999. The TR308,
†
On the 40K LOX/RP-1 engine, it was found that changing the
4 inch diameter pintle sleeve to 5 inch diameter permitted an
oxidizer injection slot geometry delivering higher performance
 AIAA 2000-3871
Page 18 of 22

Figure 25. FMTI Flight Engine (uses FSO pintle

injector to control gel propellants)

In the area of booster engines, TRW

has continued development of large LOX/LH2
pintle engines to the point that a 650,000 lbf Figure 26. The 650,000 lbf LOX/LH2 Low Cost Pintle
test engine is currently undergoing pre-hot fire Engine (LCPE) . . . the Largest Pintle
checkout testing at the NASA Stennis Space Engine Built to Date
Center E-1 test stand. This engine, shown in
Figure 26, represents a 16:1 scale-up from the Summary of Design Features
largest previous LOX/LH2 pintle engine and The pintle injector design has been proven
about a 3:1 scale-up from the largest previous to be amazingly flexible and adaptable across
pintle engine ever tested, the 250,000 lbf a wide range of conditions. The features and
N2O4/UDMH Air Force demo engine. As operating characteristics of pintle engines are
with the previous 16K and 40K LOX/LH2 summarized here.
pintle engines, the 650K engine will use direct High Performance. With proper design
injection of near-normal boiling point LH2. and manufacturing—in some cases assisted by
An extensive test series, including empirical “tuning’ of injection geometries—
performance mapping, ablative durability pintle injectors can typically deliver 96–99%
demonstration and combustion stability (i.e., of theoretical combustion performance (as
“bomb” tests) demonstration, has been measured by characteristic velocity, or c*).
planned for this engine. Testing will initially Figure 27 summarizes combustion efficiency
involve short (<10 second) pressure-fed for some of the major pintle engine programs
firings, with later pump-fed firings at TRW. Included in this figure are some
demonstrating full mission duty cycle quick, low cost demonstration engines where
operation (>200 seconds). Additional details budgets or schedules prevented optimization
on this engine’s development, features and test of injector parameters.
plans are given in Reference 14. For
comparison, this injector’s pintle diameter is
22 inches, by far the largest built to date.
 AIAA 2000-3871
Page 19 of 22

Figure 27. Summary of Combustion Efficiencies Measured on Major Pintle Engine Programs

Scalability. As also indicated in Figure Table 4. Summary of Dynamic Stability Tests Performed
on Various Pintle Injector Engines
27, the basic pintle injector design has been
demonstrated to be scalable over a range of Propellants Thrust Level Stability Test Type
50,000:1 in thrust. With the expected, (Klbf) [grains RDX]
imminent firing of the 650K LOX/LH2 engine LOX/LH2 16 5 pulse gun tests
on the SSC E-1 test stand, this range will be (2 radial, 2 tangential,
extended to 130,000:1. 1 combined) [20–60]
Inherent Combustion Stability. Three LOX/LH2 40 5 pulse gun tests (all
radial & tangential
major, non-exclusive theories have been combined) [40 + 40]
developed to explain the inherent combustion LOX/RP-1 13 5 pulse gun tests
stability of the pintle injector: (2 radial, 1 tangential,
1) lack of energy release availability at any 1 combined, 1 non-
antinode for all possible chamber acoustic directional) [20–80]
modes (classical theory of combustion LOX/RP-1 50 4 “bomb” tests;
instability; Rayleigh, et. al.), <15 msec damping
2) unvaporized, liquid droplets within the N2O4/A-50 1, 2.5, 3, 4, 31 non-directional
chamber’s recirculating flowfields always 5, 10 and RDX bomb tests with
10.5 pressure spikes
experience a relative wind of combustion (LEMDE) >150% Pc s.s.
gases (C. Johnson, SEA), (including ND bombs
3) the zones of highly varying sound speed located on face of
within the combustion chamber (due to pintle tip and at
varying O/F, T, MW and cp/cv) disperse nozzle throat) [5–40]
and dampen acoustic waves before onset N2O4/UDMH 250 13 pulse gun tests
of resonance (F. Stoddard, TRW). (7 radial and 6
tangential) and 8 non-
Table 4 summarizes “bomb” tests performed directional bomb
on various pintle engines, each of which tests [40–120]
demonstrated complete dynamic combustion N2O4/UDMH 50 2 non-directional
stability and critically damped recovery from (throttled bomb tests, <15 msec
the induced pressure transient. 250K engine) damping [20–30]
 AIAA 2000-3871
Page 20 of 22

Range of Propellants Tested. Pintle Throttling Ability. As discussed

injectors have successfully operated with 25 previously, single pintle injectors have
different combinations of propellants, which operated over throttle ranges as high as 35:1
are summarized in Table 5. while still retaining high combustion
Table 5. Propellant Combinations Tested efficiency. TRW’s most famous throttling
Using Pintle Injectors engine is the man-rated Apollo LEMDE,
which provided 10:1 throttling capability to
LOX/H2(l) LOX/RP-1
perform lunar landings. A summary of
LOX/C3H8 LOX/N2H4 throttling pintle engines is given in Table 6.
LOX/ETHANOL GOX/ETHANOL
Simplicity. A complete pintle injector can
be made with as few as five parts, excluding
FLOX/CH4(l) FLOX/CH4(g) the engine headend dome and fasteners. Only
FLOX/C3H8(l) FLOX/CH4+C2H6(l)
two simple parts need to be changed to
empirically and rapidly optimize the injector’s
N2O4-MON3/MMH N2O4-MON3/N2H4 performance. The simple design of pintle
N2O4/UDMH N2O4/A-50
injector parts and their operation at benign
temperatures (except for the pintle tip) assures
ClF3/N2H4 ClF3/NOTSGELA ease of manufacturing using non-exotic metal
F2(l)/N2H4 MON10/MMH
alloys and common machining and welding
methods. The inherent combustion stability
IRFNA/UDMH IRFNA/JP4 provided by the pintle injector eliminates the
IRFNA/NOTSGEL-A HDA/USO
need for any headend baffles or acoustic
cavities and this simplifies thrust chamber
Gelled IRFNA/ Gelled IRFNA/ construction, enhances reliability and reduces
Gelled MMH+60%Al Gelled MMH+60%C manufacturing cost.
Coal Dust/Air

Table 6. Summary of Major TRW Throttling Engines

MIRA MIRA Surveyor Lunar LM 8K Advanced Sentry OMV

500 5000 Vernier Hopper Descent Engine Throttling Engine VTE
Variable Variable Engine Engine Engine Slurry
Thrust Thrust (MIRA 150) Engine
Engine Engine (ATSE)

Throttling 20:1 35:1 5:1 15:1 10:1 15:1 7:1 19:1 10:1
Capability 500 to 5,200 to 150 to 180 to 10,000 to 8,250 to 5,000 to 8,200 to 130 to
25 lbf 150 lbf 30 lbf 12 lbf 1,000 lbf 553 lbf 700 lbf 430 lbf 13 lbf
Propellants N2O4/A-50 N2O4/A-50 MON-10/ MON-10/ N2O4/A-50 N2O4/A-50 CLF3/ N2O4/ N2O4/
N2O4/N2H4 N2O4/MMH MMH MMH NOTSGEL-A MMH MMH

Sponsor TRW TRW NASA/ NASA/ NASA/ USAF/ Navy/ US Army/ NASA/
IR&D IR&D JPL MSFC Grumman LTV NWC Bell MSFC

Program 1961-63 1962-63 1963-65 1965 1963-72 1967-68 1967-68 1981-84 1986-89
Duration
No. of Engines 1 1 16 1 84 2 1 4 2
 AIAA 2000-3871
Page 21 of 22

Design Adaptability. As discussed on the 650,000 lbf LOX/LH2 LCPE. This

previously, the pintle injector design enables technology offers the potential to dramatically
incorporating features such as deep throttling, reduce the cost of access to space “. . . for all
rapid pulsing, face shutoff with upstream mankind.”
valving, face shutoff only (FSO), direct
injection of near-normal boiling point LH2, References
and the demonstrated ability to use gelled 1. Personal conversation between Dr. Pete
propellants in pulsing applications. Staudhammer and Gordon Dressler at TRW, Inc.,
Low Cost. With its inherent stability and Redondo Beach, CA, March 2000
ease of optimization, the pintle injector 2. “Research of Low-Thrust Bipropellant Engines,”
minimizes risk and cost for development and B. Siegel, Independent Research Program Annual
qualification of new engine designs. Its ease Progress Report, Calendar Year 1961, #9990-6020-
of manufacture provides for significant RU-000, pp.VI-59 toVI-73, Space Technology
reductions in recurring costs, especially in Laboratories, Inc., Redondo Beach, CA
booster-class engines. 3. “Bipropellant Rocket Engine Research,” H.
Shieber, Independent Research Program Annual
Conclusion Progress Report, Calendar Year 1962, #9990-6363-
RU-000, pp.VI-8 toVI-11, Space Technology
In the field of rocket engines, the pintle Laboratories, Inc., Redondo Beach, CA
injector is unique in its configuration,
operating characteristics and performance 4. “The Descent Engine for the Lunar Module,” G.
features. It is a patented technology that has Elverum, P. Staudhammer, J. Miller, A. Hoffman,
and R. Rockow, AIAA 67-521, AIAA 3rd
provided the base for a diverse product line of Propulsion Joint Specialist Conference, 17-21 July
bipropellant rocket engines of one company, 1967
TRW (formerly Space Technology
Laboratories), for more than 40 years. 5. “The Lunar Module Descent Engine – A Historical
Perspective,” R. Gilroy and R. Sackheim, AIAA
There has never been a flight failure of a 89-2385, AIAA/SAE/ASME 25th Joint Propulsion
pintle injector engine. Moreover, there has Conference, 1989
never been an instance of combustion
instability in a pintle engine during any 6. “Study of Large Sea-Launch Space Vehicle,”
ground or flight operations, despite scaling Contract NAS8-2599, Space Technology
Laboratories, Inc./Aerojet General Corporation
over a range of 50,000:1 in thrust and 250:1 in Report #8659-6058-RU-000, Vol. 1 – Design,
chamber pressure and operation with 25 January 1963
different propellant combinations, including
LOX/LH2 and F2/hydrazine. 7. “Injector/Chamber Scaling Feasibility Program,”
G. Voorhess, Jr. and B. Morton, TRW Final
The pintle engine has been developed, Technical Report, AFRPL-TR-70-86, Vol. I and II,
ground demonstrated and successful flown July 1970
across a wide and challenging range of
applications, including programs of national 8. “High Performance Throttling and Pulsing Rocket
Engine,” J. Hardgrove and H. Krieg, Jr., AIAA 84-
importance such as Apollo and the recent
1254, AIAA/SAE/ASME 20th Joint Propulsion
NASA Chandra “Great Observatory” Conference, 11-13 June 1984
spacecraft. The pintle injector has enabled the
world’s first successful flight of a missile 9. “KEW Divert Propulsion Technology Verification
using gelled propellants. Even at the time of and Risk Reduction Program,” G. Dressler, G.
Giola and P. Tao, TRW Final Report on Contract
publication of this paper, pintle injector
F04611-85-C-0027, AFAL-TR-88-023, April 1988
technology is being extended into a new realm
 AIAA 2000-3871
Page 22 of 22

10. “Development and Flight Qualification of the

Propulsion and Reaction Control System for
ERIS,” D. Fritz, G. Dressler, N. Mayer and L.
Johnson, AIAA 92-3663, AIAA/SAE/ASME/
ASEE 28th Joint Propulsion Conference, 6-8 July
1992

11. “Gel Propulsion for the Forth Generation Escape

System,” D. Fritz and K. Gavitt, paper presented at
the 1993 SAFE Symposium, Las Vegas, NV, 8-10
November 1993

12. “Test Results from a Simple, Low-Cost, Pressure-

Fed Liquid Hydrogen/Liquid Oxygen Rocket
Combustor,” G. Dressler, F. Stoddard, K. Gavitt
and M. Klem, 1993 JANNAF Propulsion Meeting,
15-18 November 1993, CPIA Pub. 602, Vol. II,
pp 51-67

13. “Gelled Propellants for Tactical Missile

Applications,” K. Hodge, T. Crofoot and S.
Nelson, AIAA 99-2976, 35th
AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion
Conference, 20-23 June 1999

14. “TRW LCPE 650 Klbf LOX/LH2 Test Results,” K.

Gavitt and T. Mueller, AIAA 2000-3853, 36th
AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion
Conference, 16-19 July 2000
 AIAA 2000-3871
Addendum Page 1 of 1

Addendum

1. An excellent reference for the early development work at Caltech, cited in the first
three full paragraphs on Page 5 is:
“The Effect of Rapid Liquid-Phase Reactions on Injector Design and
Combustion in Rocket Motors,” Gerard W. Elverum, Jr. and Pete Staudhammer,
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Progress Report No. 30-4, 25 August 1959

2. Commenting on the early Caltech JPL work on characterizing reactions of hypergolic

reactions, Jerry Elverum provided the following comment to the paper’s authors:

“Early experimental data revealed that the speed of liquid-phase reactions at the
contact interface of hypergolic propellants generated an expanding confined
annular gas boundary which limited the effectiveness of premixing downstream
of the retracted inner tube. Subsequent experiments with stabilized impinging
streams definitely demonstrated for the first time that for highly hypergolic
propellants, this essentially instantaneous gas evolution at the contact interface
caused major separation of oxidizer and fuel in the resulting spray pattern. The
desire to use “pre-mixing” of hypergolic propellants in a simple concentric tube
configuration as a way of forcing intermixing was also shown to be severely
limited by the extreme rapidity of this interface reaction.”