[AR] Fwd: SugPro Digest, Vol 66, Issue 2
- From: Bruce Beck <bbeck7@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 10:51:24 -0600
---------- Forwarded message ----------arocket@freelists.orgFrom: Bruce Beck
<bbeck7@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 7:09 AM
Subject: Fwd: SugPro Digest, Vol 66, Issue 2
To: jim yehle <jry@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, David Spencer <daspencer@xxxxxxxxx>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <sugpro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 6:46 AM
Subject: SugPro Digest, Vol 66, Issue 2
To: sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Send SugPro mailing list submissions to
sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/listinfo/sugpro
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
sugpro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
You can reach the person managing the list at
sugpro-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of SugPro digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Mixing/melting/vibrating while casting (Rick Maschek)
2. Re: Eutectic Nitrate Oxidizer Formulations (Serge)
3. Re: Eutectic Nitrate Oxidizer Formulations (Peter Johansson)
4. Re: Eutectic Nitrate Oxidizer Formulations (David Bowman)
5. Re: Eutectic Nitrate Oxidizer Formulations (donperry1@xxxxxxxxx)
6. Re: Eutectic Nitrate Oxidizer Formulations (Richard Nakka)
7. Re: Eutectic Nitrate Oxidizer Formulations (Kelly Jones)
8. Re: Eutectic Nitrate Oxidizer Formulations (Peter Johansson)
9. Re: Eutectic Nitrate Oxidizer Formulations
(Jolley, Scott T. (KSC-ESC-850)[SGT - ESC])
10. Re: Eutectic Nitrate Oxidizer Formulations (Serge)
11. Fin alignment (Ayson Baxter)
12. Re: Fin alignment (Paul Campbell)
13. Re: Eutectic Nitrate Oxidizer Formulations (Serge)
14. Re: Fin alignment (donperry1@xxxxxxxxx)
15. Re: Fin alignment (Jimmy Yawn)
16. Re: Fin alignment (donperry1@xxxxxxxxx)
17. Re: Fin alignment (Ayson Baxter)
18. Re: Fin alignment (Paul Kelly)
19. Re: Fin alignment (donperry1@xxxxxxxxx)
20. Fin Alignment (Edward Wranosky)
21. Melted method (donperry1@xxxxxxxxx)
22. Re: Melted method (John Farmer)
23. Re: Melted method (Peter Johansson)
24. Archived my pages (dRb)
25. Re: Melted method (Ayson Baxter)
26. Re: Melted method (Scott Jolley)
27. Two-Phase Flow (Jeppe Locht, Mainstage Co.)
28. Re: Two-Phase Flow (Kenneth Irving)
29. Re: Two-Phase Flow (Jeppe Locht, Mainstage Co.)
30. Re: Two-Phase Flow (richard.rocketry)
31. Re: Two-Phase Flow (Kenneth Irving)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 15:22:35 -0700
From: Rick Maschek <rickmaschek@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Mixing/melting/vibrating while casting
Message-ID: <SNT116-W2476248DA9B501EEB05110A6D70@xxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Jeppe, I get my highest densities (97-98%) when I tumble the KNO3 &
Sorbitol together for one hour, then put all of the 'mixed particles' into
the skillet or whatever I do the melting in and set the heat at ~170 F and
just let the propellant heat up (the propellant in contact with the bottom
melts first and I suspect as the heat/melt rises, the air between the
particles is able to escape up through the unmelted porous propellant.
When all the propellant is melted, might take 30 minutes of more depending
on the amount, I will increase the temperature to ~250 F while doing very
little stirring to avoid getting any additional air mixed in. Sometimes I
turn on the vibrating table, sometimes I do not when I do the stirring.
When the temperature reaches 250 F and the viscosity sufficiently lowered
enough for pouring, I turn on the vibration as I pour the propellant into
the casting tube and continue vibration for approximately 2-5 minutes.
During this time I adjust for what looks!
to be the best frequency for the size grain I'm casting. What I am
looking for are any large (>1mm) bubbles to come up to the surface of the
churning propellant. Often they will appear and get carried back down so I
will pop them if I can with a needle when I see them. If I don't do this I
will end up with trapped air bubbles near the top or just under the top
surface that fail to break. Then after about an hour (and again the length
of time varies for the amount of propellant) I apply 25 psi of pressure for
twenty-four hours. This compresses the still warm flexible propellant into
the shape of the grain during the cooling/shrinkage phase. Tiny air bubbles
still present would get compressed and would also compress any 'large' air
bubbles that enter during the mixing and pouring that aren't eliminated
during the vibration. I still do the vibration even though I think the slow
melt without mixing is causing the biggest increase in density through air
elimination. Several t!
imes I've had propellant look almost like a semi translucent plastic t
hat signals to me the propellant is perfectly mixed and almost totally void
of any air bubbles. The only other possible way I can think of to increase
the density would be to apply a vacuum. I don't think these methods are
necessary for the person simply wanting to fire a rocket up into the air
unless every cubic centimeter of space in a rocket is critical. That being
said, I normally don't do all of these things when making grains for my
'average rocket' where 90-95% is fine. I don't know if this helps you or
not, Rick Message: 37
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 23:57:06 +0100
From: "Jeppe Locht, Mainstage Co." <locht@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "'Sugar propellant rocket makers'" <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Mixing/melting/vibrating while casting
Message-ID: <009c01cc9757$3f8e96c0$beabc440$@dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
To follow up on this post almost 3 years later (!)
We have finally gotten around to getting a frequency converter for our
vibration table. Until now we have vibrated during casting with a frequency
where - with Rick Maschek's words (below) - "propellant will start
flowing/churning in the casting tube like a milkshake mixer mixing
milkshakes". And I agree with him that this is suboptimal.
But what should we look for when we adjust for the best frequency? What
should the hot propellant slurry look like in the mold? Boiling like when
you vibrate concrete? Or with a standing wave somewhere on the surface? What
do you guys use that works? Is there a Youtube video out there of this?
best
Jeppe Locht
/Danish Space Challenge
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/private/sugpro/attachments/20111101/ce258053/attachment-0001.html
>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 22:12:58 +0200
From: "Serge" <z432618@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Sugar propellant rocket makers" <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Eutectic Nitrate Oxidizer Formulations
Message-ID: <BE85DB89748C4BF39EFF2C35F095395D@LocalHost>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Hi Scott,
Thank you for publishing your interesting data. I research this field since
2002 and it is one of my primary interests. I will fire a series of
different Eutectic propellants on test stand soon, so it will be useful to
compare your test stand data with my results.
Some comments. You don't need to melt nitrate mixture before addition of
sorbitol. Just mix all components together and heat them at 180-190C until
they dissolve. It is described on my page:
http://serge77.rocketworkshop.net/sorb_sol/sorb_sol.htm
Personally I consider it rather dangerously to heat homogeneous propellant
melt at that high temperature, especially after I saw ignition of small
molten batch, done by Marcus Bindhammer:
http://www.sugarshot.org/downloads/Eutectic%20Sugar%20Propellant%20Research,%20Part%20IV.pdf
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcFp9dcoEL8
So I believe it is more useful to use increased nitrates' solubility only
for reduction of propellant melt viscosity at much lower temperatures, in
120-140C range. For example, molten propellants KNO3-NaNO3-sorbitol-sucrose
35-30-15-20 (at 120?C) and 35-30-5-30 (at 140?C) are much more fluid, than
standard KNSB, they can be easily poured in paper tube 17 mm ID directly
from the wide pan. Another interesting combination -
KNO3-NaNO3-sucrose-water 35-30-35-1, it is very runny at 140?C.
Stay safe and keep us posted!
Serge Pipko
http://serge77.rocketworkshop.net/index.htm
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 16:19:48 -0400
From: Peter Johansson <rockets4kids@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Sugar propellant rocket makers <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Eutectic Nitrate Oxidizer Formulations
Message-ID:
<CABhX8x5g2mV3FyW+mAp6hPcZ4sHWVe8ygfGOy0E9HNog+NoOFg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Serge <z432618@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Personally I consider it rather dangerously to heat homogeneous propellant
> melt at that high temperature, especially after I saw ignition of small
> molten batch, done by Marcus Bindhammer:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcFp9dcoEL8
I am having trouble watching this video. I am curious to see if this
was the result of spot heating that could be avoided with a
double-boiler setup.
-p.
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 16:35:01 -0400
From: "David Bowman" <WMDBowman@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Sugar propellant rocket makers" <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Eutectic Nitrate Oxidizer Formulations
Message-ID: <9BFD01BC4C9949289ED2F011B6958392@amddave>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
The source of ignition is from what appears to be a sparkler burning above
the propellant container.
Regards
Dave Bowman
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Johansson" <rockets4kids@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "Sugar propellant rocket makers" <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 4:19 PM
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Eutectic Nitrate Oxidizer Formulations
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Serge <z432618@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Personally I consider it rather dangerously to heat homogeneous
>> propellant
>> melt at that high temperature, especially after I saw ignition of small
>> molten batch, done by Marcus Bindhammer:
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcFp9dcoEL8
>
> I am having trouble watching this video. I am curious to see if this
> was the result of spot heating that could be avoided with a
> double-boiler setup.
>
> -p.
> _______________________________________________
> SugPro mailing list
> SugPro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://rocketeers.com/mailman/listinfo/sugpro
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 20:48:33 +0000
From: donperry1@xxxxxxxxx
To: "Sugar propellant rocket makers" <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Eutectic Nitrate Oxidizer Formulations
Message-ID:
<659757904-1320266913-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1581257397-@b2.c2.bise6.blackberry
>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Yeah, same thing I see. Maybe wrong link?
Sent from my BlackBerry? device from Digicel
-----Original Message-----
From: "David Bowman" <WMDBowman@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: sugpro-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 16:35:01
To: Sugar propellant rocket makers<sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: Sugar propellant rocket makers <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Eutectic Nitrate Oxidizer Formulations
The source of ignition is from what appears to be a sparkler burning above
the propellant container.
Regards
Dave Bowman
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Johansson" <rockets4kids@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "Sugar propellant rocket makers" <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 4:19 PM
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Eutectic Nitrate Oxidizer Formulations
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Serge <z432618@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Personally I consider it rather dangerously to heat homogeneous
>> propellant
>> melt at that high temperature, especially after I saw ignition of small
>> molten batch, done by Marcus Bindhammer:
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcFp9dcoEL8
>
> I am having trouble watching this video. I am curious to see if this
> was the result of spot heating that could be avoided with a
> double-boiler setup.
>
> -p.
> _______________________________________________
> SugPro mailing list
> SugPro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://rocketeers.com/mailman/listinfo/sugpro
_______________________________________________
SugPro mailing list
SugPro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/listinfo/sugpro
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 15:54:08 -0500
From: Richard Nakka <richard.rocketry@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Sugar propellant rocket makers <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Eutectic Nitrate Oxidizer Formulations
Message-ID:
<CAGOYYXjPhKLsxs+8S6pJxrL99f2-CH_UGXEVbmFemq+p06JOog@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 3:35 PM, David Bowman <WMDBowman@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The source of ignition is from what appears to be a sparkler burning
> above the propellant container.
>
That is correct. The objective was to "accidentally" ignite the molten
mixture to observe how rapidly it combusts.
Richard
> Regards
> Dave Bowman
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Johansson" <
> rockets4kids@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: "Sugar propellant rocket makers" <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 4:19 PM
> Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Eutectic Nitrate Oxidizer Formulations
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Serge <z432618@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> Personally I consider it rather dangerously to heat homogeneous
>>> propellant
>>> melt at that high temperature, especially after I saw ignition of small
>>> molten batch, done by Marcus Bindhammer:
>>>
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?**v=pcFp9dcoEL8<
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcFp9dcoEL8>
>>>
>>
>> I am having trouble watching this video. I am curious to see if this
>> was the result of spot heating that could be avoided with a
>> double-boiler setup.
>>
>> -p.
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> SugPro mailing list
>> SugPro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://rocketeers.com/mailman/**listinfo/sugpro<
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/listinfo/sugpro>
>>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> SugPro mailing list
> SugPro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://rocketeers.com/mailman/**listinfo/sugpro<
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/listinfo/sugpro>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/private/sugpro/attachments/20111102/b9660193/attachment-0001.html
>
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 15:52:47 -0700
From: Kelly Jones <kellyjones1@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Sugar propellant rocket makers <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Eutectic Nitrate Oxidizer Formulations
Message-ID:
<CAFrwbNGP-dTmkv77QNhyNzNcsMe_7_H9cyj0=VCiDwMdZeTAbQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 1:35 PM, David Bowman <WMDBowman@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The source of ignition is from what appears to be a sparkler burning
> above the propellant container.
>
Well now, that's just stupid. Kids, wait until after the grain is poured
before you light up the sparklers!
:) :) :)
Kelly
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/private/sugpro/attachments/20111102/2d81f168/attachment-0001.html
>
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 19:28:55 -0400
From: Peter Johansson <rockets4kids@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Sugar propellant rocket makers <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Eutectic Nitrate Oxidizer Formulations
Message-ID:
<CABhX8x5mBGOOn=MBzfy-5VYkod6KVUMoB_KnPb4YbNmAn5KVcA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 4:54 PM, Richard Nakka
<richard.rocketry@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> That is correct. The objective was to "accidentally" ignite the molten
> mixture to observe how rapidly it combusts.
I can understand the importance of knowing what will happen when a
large quantity of propellant ignites during melting, but do you
(plural) really think that bumping the temperature up from typical
candy melt temperatures to that required for the eutectic mix will
substantially improve the likelihood of accidental ignition? I ask
with respect to the tests I recall from your site where propellant was
heated to rather remarkable temperatures without ignition.
-p.
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 07:01:37 -0500
From: "Jolley, Scott T. (KSC-ESC-850)[SGT - ESC]"
<scott.t.jolley@xxxxxxxx>
To: Sugar propellant rocket makers <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Eutectic Nitrate Oxidizer Formulations
Message-ID:
<8BEF080F1509BE41AA7006B1B8389B82628F029E50@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Serge,
As you have been working with these eutectic mixtures for quite a while
now, I would appreciate knowing if some of your observations match mine.
I notice that there are still a few grams of undissolved nitrates in the
propellant after heating at 180C for up to an hour. Do you also observe
this?
I also notice that as I continue heating this formulation the color slowly
darkens and a brown "foam" forms on the top of the solution. Do you see
this?
The density of my final, crystallized propellant comes in at around 1.82
g/cc. Do you also observe this value in your 35/30/35 mixtures?
I, too, have had good success working at ~ 180C in preparing these eutectic
formulations. In my limited work I have prepared a couple of batches at
the eutectic melting point of 220C. I do not see any indication that any
significant increase in oxidation or decomposition is occurring at 220C vs
180C. I simply find that it is just not so "hot" when working at 180C. Do
you know why the simple addition of just one gram of water allows you to
get a eutectic mixture using sucrose to be fluid at 140C? Sucrose melts
above 180C. I am surprised that the water would stay around long enough to
have any use.
It will be very interesting to see what the performance of a
eutectic/sucrose motor will be like.
____________________________________
Scott T. Jolley, Ph.D.
Scientist V - Team QNA
ESC-5; M7-355
Kennedy Space Center, FL? 32899
Tel: 321-867-7568
Fax: 321-867-1670
scott.t.jolley@xxxxxxxx
NOTICE. The information contained in this communication may be sensitive,
proprietary, legally privileged and/or subject to U.S. export control laws,
is intended only for the use of the recipient named above. You agree to
comply strictly with all U.S. export laws and assume sole responsibility
for obtaining licenses to export or re-export as may be required. If the
reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this
communication, or any of its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this communication in error, please re-send this communication to
the sender and delete the original message and any copy of it.
-----Original Message-----
From: sugpro-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:sugpro-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Serge
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 4:13 PM
To: Sugar propellant rocket makers
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Eutectic Nitrate Oxidizer Formulations
Hi Scott,
Thank you for publishing your interesting data. I research this field since
2002 and it is one of my primary interests. I will fire a series of
different Eutectic propellants on test stand soon, so it will be useful to
compare your test stand data with my results.
Some comments. You don't need to melt nitrate mixture before addition of
sorbitol. Just mix all components together and heat them at 180-190C until
they dissolve. It is described on my page:
http://serge77.rocketworkshop.net/sorb_sol/sorb_sol.htm
Personally I consider it rather dangerously to heat homogeneous propellant
melt at that high temperature, especially after I saw ignition of small
molten batch, done by Marcus Bindhammer:
http://www.sugarshot.org/downloads/Eutectic%20Sugar%20Propellant%20Research,%20Part%20IV.pdf
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcFp9dcoEL8
So I believe it is more useful to use increased nitrates' solubility only
for reduction of propellant melt viscosity at much lower temperatures, in
120-140C range. For example, molten propellants KNO3-NaNO3-sorbitol-sucrose
35-30-15-20 (at 120?C) and 35-30-5-30 (at 140?C) are much more fluid, than
standard KNSB, they can be easily poured in paper tube 17 mm ID directly
from the wide pan. Another interesting combination -
KNO3-NaNO3-sucrose-water 35-30-35-1, it is very runny at 140?C.
Stay safe and keep us posted!
Serge Pipko
http://serge77.rocketworkshop.net/index.htm
_______________________________________________
SugPro mailing list
SugPro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/listinfo/sugpro
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 15:01:51 +0200
From: Serge <z432618@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Sugar propellant rocket makers <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Eutectic Nitrate Oxidizer Formulations
Message-ID: <454821320325311@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Scott,
> I notice that there are still a few grams of undissolved nitrates in the
propellant after heating at 180C for up to an hour. ?Do you also observe
this?
No. When I measured solubility of nitrates in sorbitol, I very slowly
increase temperature until complete dissolution.
Maybe the reason is that there are large crystals in your nitrates. I have
noticed that if I don't mill nitrates then it took a long time to dissolve
the last small portion of relatively large crystals. So, unfortunately,
milling is needed here too.
> I also notice that as I continue heating this formulation the color
slowly darkens and a brown "foam" forms on the top of the solution. ?Do you
see this?
No. But I never heat melted propellant for long time after complete
dissolution. Only one time I have heated small portion to 220C, but there
was no brown color or foam, solution become just yellow.
> The density of my final, crystallized propellant comes in at around 1.82
g/cc. ?Do you also observe this value in your 35/30/35 mixtures?
I will check my notes at home this evening.
> Do you know why the simple addition of just one gram of water allows you
to get a eutectic mixture using sucrose to be fluid at 140C? ?Sucrose melts
above 180C.
Maybe I should clarify that "KNO3-NaNO3-sucrose-water 35-30-35-1 is very
runny at 140?C" does not mean, that all solids are completely dissolved.
The most part of nitrates are in solid state, but sugar+water+dissolved
nitrates make a large amount of liquid, so solids loading is much less,
then for example in KNSB, and this lead to very low viscosity of molten
propellant.
>?I am surprised that the water would stay around long enough to have any
use.
My experiments by preparation of KNO3-Sorbitol propellant by evaporation of
water solution
http://serge77.rocketworkshop.net/sorb_evap/sorb_evap.htm
show, that for evaporation of last 1% of water you need a long time,
heating to 160C and stirring.
> It will be very interesting to see what the performance of a
eutectic/sucrose motor will be like.
I have tested two nozzleless motors with KNO3-NaNO3-sucrose-FeOOH-water
35-30-35-1-1. Burn rate of this propellant at ambient pressure is 2.5 mm/s.
http://serge77.rocketworkshop.net/nozzleless2/nozzleless2.htm
Short motor was fired successfully, but showed low performance, as was
expected. A long motor experienced burn-through.
Serge Pipko
http://serge77.rocketworkshop.net/index.htm
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 10:05:06 -0500
From: Ayson Baxter <donperry1@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Sugar propellant rocket makers <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [SUGPRO] Fin alignment
Message-ID:
<CAAsxx=33QOjUrUYcwQ-FqMj6WSq5pTqD364nhe44p=4EEkf=fA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
A friend of mine asked for some instructions as to how I align my fins (90
deg.)
My way of doing it involves printing the bottom view of the rocket from
openrocket, placing the tube on that, make markings with a marker, then use
a string to get it straight.
I'm pretty sure there are easier or more creative way of doing this.
I'd love to know how you guys do it.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/private/sugpro/attachments/20111103/193de11c/attachment-0001.html
>
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 14:23:26 -0500
From: "Paul Campbell" <pcampbell1963@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "'Sugar propellant rocket makers'" <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Fin alignment
Message-ID: <B38B78AC20F94A50AF47AEFE1F45B506@prcampbell>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Ayson,
I use a process similar to yours but I use squares instead of string. Scott
Fintel does this too. Here's a picture of the technique when he built his
Defiance rocket.
http://www.thefintels.com/aer/defiance25.jpg
There are a lot of jigs out there for this kind of thing too. Some cheap,
some not so cheap.
-Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: sugpro-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:sugpro-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Ayson Baxter
Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2011 10:05 AM
To: Sugar propellant rocket makers
Subject: [SUGPRO] Fin alignment
A friend of mine asked for some instructions as to how I align my fins (90
deg.) My way of doing it involves printing the bottom view of the rocket
from openrocket, placing the tube on that, make markings with a marker, then
use a string to get it straight.
I'm pretty sure there are easier or more creative way of doing this.
I'd love to know how you guys do it.
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 22:05:00 +0200
From: "Serge" <z432618@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Sugar propellant rocket makers" <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Eutectic Nitrate Oxidizer Formulations
Message-ID: <C694129E04F143BB9248792C4D8FC902@LocalHost>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Jolley, Scott T. wrote:
> The density of my final, crystallized propellant comes in at around 1.82
> g/cc. Do you also observe this value in your 35/30/35 mixtures?
For example, one BATES grain had dimensions 35 mm OD, 9 mm ID, 60 mm L. Mass
was 106 g, dencity 1.97.
It was fired in test motor at Kn initial 220, Kn maximal 278, burn time 3.2
s, burn rate 4.1 mm/s.
Serge Pipko
http://serge77.rocketworkshop.net/index.htm
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 20:10:26 +0000
From: donperry1@xxxxxxxxx
To: "Sugar propellant rocket makers" <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Fin alignment
Message-ID:
<326787211-1320351037-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-335255792-@b2.c2.bise6.blackberry
>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Cool
Sent from my BlackBerry? device from Digicel
-----Original Message-----
From: "Paul Campbell" <pcampbell1963@xxxxxxxxx>
Sender: sugpro-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 14:23:26
To: 'Sugar propellant rocket makers'<sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: Sugar propellant rocket makers <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Fin alignment
Ayson,
I use a process similar to yours but I use squares instead of string. Scott
Fintel does this too. Here's a picture of the technique when he built his
Defiance rocket.
http://www.thefintels.com/aer/defiance25.jpg
There are a lot of jigs out there for this kind of thing too. Some cheap,
some not so cheap.
-Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: sugpro-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:sugpro-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Ayson Baxter
Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2011 10:05 AM
To: Sugar propellant rocket makers
Subject: [SUGPRO] Fin alignment
A friend of mine asked for some instructions as to how I align my fins (90
deg.) My way of doing it involves printing the bottom view of the rocket
from openrocket, placing the tube on that, make markings with a marker, then
use a string to get it straight.
I'm pretty sure there are easier or more creative way of doing this.
I'd love to know how you guys do it.
_______________________________________________
SugPro mailing list
SugPro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/listinfo/sugpro
------------------------------
Message: 15
Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2011 21:55:53 -0400
From: Jimmy Yawn <jyawn@xxxxxxxx>
To: Sugar propellant rocket makers <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Fin alignment
Message-ID: <4EB497A9.8080203@xxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
I often use angle-iron, (or angle-aluminum) to align fins.
Example at:
http://www.jamesyawn.net/modelrocket/fins/index.html
(scroll down about halfway)
In this example, the angle iron happened to be exactly wide enough to go
1/4th of the way around the body tube, making it easy to get the fins
spaced precisely as well as aligned.
I've used this method with larger rockets to mark where the fins should
go. Problem is that my larger rockets need through-the-wall fin
attachment, so a slot needs to be cut and it needs to be cut straight.
I cut slots with my table saw by cranking the blade all the way down
below the table, clamping the body tube to the rip fence, and
positioning it carefully. Turn on the saw and crank the blade up to cut
the slot.
It's slow, but precise.
Jimmy Yawn
jyawn@xxxxxxxx
>
------------------------------
Message: 16
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 02:03:13 +0000
From: donperry1@xxxxxxxxx
To: "Sugar propellant rocket makers" <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Fin alignment
Message-ID:
<547940287-1320372193-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1891426370-@b2.c2.bise6.blackberry
>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Thanks so much for your answers. I'm on the road so ill read when I get in
;)
Sent from my BlackBerry? device from Digicel
-----Original Message-----
From: Jimmy Yawn <jyawn@xxxxxxxx>
Sender: sugpro-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2011 21:55:53
To: Sugar propellant rocket makers<sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: Sugar propellant rocket makers <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Fin alignment
I often use angle-iron, (or angle-aluminum) to align fins.
Example at:
http://www.jamesyawn.net/modelrocket/fins/index.html
(scroll down about halfway)
In this example, the angle iron happened to be exactly wide enough to go
1/4th of the way around the body tube, making it easy to get the fins
spaced precisely as well as aligned.
I've used this method with larger rockets to mark where the fins should
go. Problem is that my larger rockets need through-the-wall fin
attachment, so a slot needs to be cut and it needs to be cut straight.
I cut slots with my table saw by cranking the blade all the way down
below the table, clamping the body tube to the rip fence, and
positioning it carefully. Turn on the saw and crank the blade up to cut
the slot.
It's slow, but precise.
Jimmy Yawn
jyawn@xxxxxxxx
>
_______________________________________________
SugPro mailing list
SugPro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/listinfo/sugpro
------------------------------
Message: 17
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 21:16:32 -0500
From: Ayson Baxter <donperry1@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Sugar propellant rocket makers <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Fin alignment
Message-ID:
<CAAsxx=26QJmv=GzBEdopa7opo61n6RfZ3=hYmvvLHZQ4T9QK+w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Jimmy, the angle iron is BETTER than the method i'm using now. I can see it
working even with larger tubes.
On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 8:55 PM, Jimmy Yawn <jyawn@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I often use angle-iron, (or angle-aluminum) to align fins.
> Example at:
>
> http://www.jamesyawn.net/**modelrocket/fins/index.html<
http://www.jamesyawn.net/modelrocket/fins/index.html>
>
> (scroll down about halfway)
>
> In this example, the angle iron happened to be exactly wide enough to go
> 1/4th of the way around the body tube, making it easy to get the fins
> spaced precisely as well as aligned.
>
> I've used this method with larger rockets to mark where the fins should
> go. Problem is that my larger rockets need through-the-wall fin
> attachment, so a slot needs to be cut and it needs to be cut straight.
>
> I cut slots with my table saw by cranking the blade all the way down below
> the table, clamping the body tube to the rip fence, and positioning it
> carefully. Turn on the saw and crank the blade up to cut the slot.
> It's slow, but precise.
> Jimmy Yawn
> jyawn@xxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>>
> ______________________________**_________________
> SugPro mailing list
> SugPro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://rocketeers.com/mailman/**listinfo/sugpro<
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/listinfo/sugpro>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/private/sugpro/attachments/20111103/5d93cde8/attachment-0001.html
>
------------------------------
Message: 18
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 10:41:59 +0800
From: "Paul Kelly" <tech@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "'Sugar propellant rocket makers'" <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Fin alignment
Message-ID: <00d601cc9a9b$53a2fa60$fae8ef20$@com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
I laser cut a pair of FAGs (fin alignment guides). Easy if you just happen
to have a laser cutter.. :-)
PK
From: sugpro-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:sugpro-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Ayson Baxter
Sent: Friday, 4 November 2011 10:17 AM
To: Sugar propellant rocket makers
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Fin alignment
Jimmy, the angle iron is BETTER than the method i'm using now. I can see it
working even with larger tubes.
On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 8:55 PM, Jimmy Yawn <jyawn@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
I often use angle-iron, (or angle-aluminum) to align fins.
Example at:
http://www.jamesyawn.net/modelrocket/fins/index.html
(scroll down about halfway)
In this example, the angle iron happened to be exactly wide enough to go
1/4th of the way around the body tube, making it easy to get the fins
spaced precisely as well as aligned.
I've used this method with larger rockets to mark where the fins should
go. Problem is that my larger rockets need through-the-wall fin
attachment, so a slot needs to be cut and it needs to be cut straight.
I cut slots with my table saw by cranking the blade all the way down below
the table, clamping the body tube to the rip fence, and positioning it
carefully. Turn on the saw and crank the blade up to cut the slot.
It's slow, but precise.
Jimmy Yawn
jyawn@xxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
SugPro mailing list
SugPro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/listinfo/sugpro
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/private/sugpro/attachments/20111104/d280f852/attachment-0001.html
>
------------------------------
Message: 19
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 02:50:52 +0000
From: donperry1@xxxxxxxxx
To: "Sugar propellant rocket makers" <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Fin alignment
Message-ID:
<1653598625-1320375052-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-565412444-@b2.c2.bise6.blackberry
>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Lol :D
Sent from my BlackBerry? device from Digicel
-----Original Message-----
From: "Paul Kelly" <tech@xxxxxxxxx>
Sender: sugpro-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 10:41:59
To: 'Sugar propellant rocket makers'<sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: Sugar propellant rocket makers <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Fin alignment
_______________________________________________
SugPro mailing list
SugPro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/listinfo/sugpro
------------------------------
Message: 20
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 21:56:30 -0600
From: Edward Wranosky <edwardcw@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Sugar propellant rocket makers <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [SUGPRO] Fin Alignment
Message-ID: <4EB3626E.1090309@xxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
I take two pieces of foam-core board (you can find it at craft stores,
etc) and I use a compass to draw a circle the same size as the tube I'm
putting the fins on. Then using the tube circle I draw a very large
circle with the compass. If I'm putting the tubes to a 2" tube I draw
an 8-10" diameter circle. I bisect the circle into sixths (for 3 fins)
and then draw a straight edge and connect opposite points I bisected. I
take razor knife and then cut out the tube circle and then cut out the
fins. You cut one set of slots the depth of the fins, and the other
maybe 1-1 1/2". You slide the fins into the slots and then slide the
tube into it and use rubber bands to hold the fins tight to the tube. I
then tack them with CA in two spots on all sides of the fins. I take
the guides off and check for alignment and then make my fillets.
Edward
------------------------------
Message: 21
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 19:55:00 +0000
From: donperry1@xxxxxxxxx
To: "Sugar propellant rocket makers" <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [SUGPRO] Melted method
Message-ID:
<1833522706-1320522900-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-964972886-@b2.c2.bise6.blackberry
>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Hey guys. Just another quick question
I've been trying the melted method recently mainly because its quicker and
castable as opposed to re crystallized method. I'm seeing one undesirable
effect: the test strand is sputtering lots of heavy particles. With the
recrystallized method this is not evident. I'm assuming some of the fuel is
not being burnt. What am I doing wrong ? Is this the normal behavior? If
so, how does isp compare between the two?
Sent from my BlackBerry? device from Digicel
------------------------------
Message: 22
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 15:15:29 -0500
From: John Farmer <rocketsciencefed@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <donperry1@xxxxxxxxx>, "'Sugar propellant rocket makers'"
<sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Melted method
Message-ID: <001f01cc9bf7$ab11ce40$01356ac0$@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Don,
Mine doesn't sputter, but I grind and thoroughly mix the KNO3 and Sorbitol
with a food processor prior to melting and casting... I also vacuum after
melting (before casting) to get rid of any moisture or entrapped air.
Good Luck and let me know if you figure out what's causing it.
John F.
TRA 10721
-----Original Message-----
From: sugpro-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:sugpro-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of donperry1@xxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 14:55
To: Sugar propellant rocket makers
Subject: [SUGPRO] Melted method
Hey guys. Just another quick question
I've been trying the melted method recently mainly because its quicker and
castable as opposed to re crystallized method. I'm seeing one undesirable
effect: the test strand is sputtering lots of heavy particles. With the
recrystallized method this is not evident. I'm assuming some of the fuel is
not being burnt. What am I doing wrong ? Is this the normal behavior? If
so, how does isp compare between the two?
Sent from my BlackBerryR device from Digicel
_______________________________________________
SugPro mailing list
SugPro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/listinfo/sugpro
------------------------------
Message: 23
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 17:25:52 -0400
From: Peter Johansson <rockets4kids@xxxxxxxxx>
To: donperry1@xxxxxxxxx, Sugar propellant rocket makers
<sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Melted method
Message-ID:
<CABhX8x416OJ4vNJNYtm9KdFQqe5avK+rpRn9=ebYkJ3o8pXJUw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 3:55 PM, <donperry1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I've been trying the melted method recently mainly because its quicker
and castable as opposed to re crystallized method. I'm seeing one
undesirable effect: the test strand is sputtering lots of heavy particles.
With the recrystallized method this is not evident. I'm assuming some of
the fuel is not being burnt. ?What am I doing wrong ? Is this the normal
behavior? If so, how does isp compare between the two?
Did you grind your oxidizer? If so, how fine? What type of sugar
were you using? Did you notice any caramelization? Are you sure you
got your O/F ratio correct?
-p.
------------------------------
Message: 24
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 15:04:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: "dRb" <dmarc-noreply-outsider@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Redacted sender
"da_browns2002@xxxxxxxxx" for DMARC)
To: "sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [SUGPRO] Archived my pages
Message-ID:
<1320530667.13277.YahooMailNeo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Hi All,
FYI:
To make room for other hobbies I've deleted most of? my sorbitol 24mm grain
webpages and images from my limited storage ISP.
I did back them up on my hard-drive? should I re-start this hobby.??
As a place marker,? I kept the main page (with mostly dead project links)
at:
http://www.integrity.com/homes/brodwcjj/Drysophila-Sorbitol.html
I did keep a few of my project sub-pages alive including the work I did for
SS2S? pdt-5a?? and pdt-5b
http://www.integrity.com/homes/brodwcjj/PDT-5a.html
http://www.integrity.com/homes/brodwcjj/PDT-5c.html
?( Those two pages are more as live backup as the PDFs reside on the SS2S
servers.)
I also keep the TiO2? opacifier microscopy study page alive as I feel TiO2
has a lot of potential in the right rocket applications, and the data on
light opacity and reflectivity might be a helpful starting point.
http://www.integrity.com/homes/brodwcjj/TiO2-experiment.html
Cheers to all,
Dustin
------------------------------
Message: 25
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 20:45:18 -0500
From: Ayson Baxter <donperry1@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Sugar propellant rocket makers <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Melted method
Message-ID:
<CAAsxx=2Dh6-wrS2Qh4iYRhLpSa5n0ofYfPyU8LzBXivOEN+94A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BA1MZwAt2bM
Above is the promised link to my video of the sputter .
> On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 6:30 PM, <donperry1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks
>> Sent from my BlackBerry? device from Digicel
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: John Farmer <rocketsciencefed@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 18:21:46
>> To: <donperry1@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Subject: RE: [SUGPRO] Melted method
>>
>> No test strands, but here's a static burn
>>
>> John F.
>> TRA 10721
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: donperry1@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:donperry1@xxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 15:23
>> To: John Farmer
>> Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Melted method
>>
>> Hey john, (or anyone else) do u have a video of a test strand? Ill be
>> uploading mine as soon as I can to show what I'm talking. (KnDx)
>>
>> Thnx for replying John
>> ------Original Message------
>> From: John Farmer
>> To: Ayson Baxter
>> To: 'Sugar propellant rocket makers'
>> Subject: RE: [SUGPRO] Melted method
>> Sent: Nov 5, 2011 3:15 PM
>>
>> Don,
>>
>> Mine doesn't sputter, but I grind and thoroughly mix the KNO3 and
Sorbitol
>> with a food processor prior to melting and casting... I also vacuum after
>> melting (before casting) to get rid of any moisture or entrapped air.
>>
>> Good Luck and let me know if you figure out what's causing it.
>>
>> John F.
>> TRA 10721
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: sugpro-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:sugpro-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
]
>> On Behalf Of donperry1@xxxxxxxxx
>> Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 14:55
>> To: Sugar propellant rocket makers
>> Subject: [SUGPRO] Melted method
>>
>> Hey guys. Just another quick question
>>
>> I've been trying the melted method recently mainly because its quicker
and
>> castable as opposed to re crystallized method. I'm seeing one undesirable
>> effect: the test strand is sputtering lots of heavy particles. With the
>> recrystallized method this is not evident. I'm assuming some of the fuel
is
>> not being burnt. ?What am I doing wrong ? Is this the normal behavior? If
>> so, how does isp compare between the two?
>> Sent from my BlackBerryR device from Digicel
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> SugPro mailing list
>> SugPro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://rocketeers.com/mailman/listinfo/sugpro
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my BlackBerryR device from Digicel
>>
>
------------------------------
Message: 26
Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2011 14:22:21 -0500
From: "Scott Jolley" <yellojs@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <donperry1@xxxxxxxxx>, "Sugar propellant rocket makers"
<sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Melted method
Message-ID: <AC6530EB30514BA18CC9E41F82719EA8@Fangorn>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252";
reply-type=original
There are two general types of "melted method" procedures you can follow.
The most widely used involves melting the sugar and then adding the oxidizer
to the melted sugar. Sometimes surfactant is used in order to make the
final formulation more pourable. The recrystallized method usually involves
the use of sucrose or dextrose (or corn syrup) as the sugar. If you are
using sorbitol or similar sugar alcohol you will see quite a difference in
how "burn strands" burn out in open air. Xylitol and erythritol sugars do
not burn well with respect to burn strands. Sorbitol should burn ok if you
have a good 65/35 ratio. You will see best results if you use KNO3 that has
been ground finer than the normal crystalline salt straight from the bag.
Another type of "melted" procedure is the "eutectic mixed oxidizer"
approach. Burn strands with this type of propellant tend to burn much the
same as the above procedure but can exhibit more of the sputtering, etc.
that I think you are referring to.
Which method are you attempting to use?
--------------------------------------------------
From: <donperry1@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 2:55 PM
To: "Sugar propellant rocket makers" <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [SUGPRO] Melted method
> Hey guys. Just another quick question
>
> I've been trying the melted method recently mainly because its quicker and
> castable as opposed to re crystallized method. I'm seeing one undesirable
> effect: the test strand is sputtering lots of heavy particles. With the
> recrystallized method this is not evident. I'm assuming some of the fuel
> is not being burnt. What am I doing wrong ? Is this the normal behavior?
> If so, how does isp compare between the two?
> Sent from my BlackBerry? device from Digicel
>
> _______________________________________________
> SugPro mailing list
> SugPro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://rocketeers.com/mailman/listinfo/sugpro
>
------------------------------
Message: 27
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 21:49:21 +0100
From: "Jeppe Locht, Mainstage Co." <locht@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "'Sugar propellant rocket makers'" <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [SUGPRO] Two-Phase Flow
Message-ID: <000801cc9d8e$ba202f10$2e608d30$@dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi all
Has this antique NASA program:
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19680000374_1968000374.
pdf
<http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19680000374_1968000374.pdf>
ever been tested/looked at by anyone in the candy community?
It sounds enticing:
Axisymmetric Two-Phase Perfect Gas Performance Program
The problem:
To develop an axisymmetric method which calculates the performance of
propellant systems having both gaseous and condensed exhaust products.
The solution:
A computer program which calculates the inviscid axisymmetric nozzle
expansion of propellant systems having both gaseous and condensed exhaust
products.
With the percentage of solid combustion products in the exhaust it might be
relevant (I assume that "condensed" includes solids). But it was written in
Fortran and released in 1968... On the other hand PEP is still going strong.
best
j.
www.facebook.com/danishspacechallenge
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/private/sugpro/attachments/20111107/98b9035d/attachment-0001.html
>
------------------------------
Message: 28
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 18:57:40 -0200
From: Kenneth Irving <kenneth.irving@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Sugar propellant rocket makers <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Two-Phase Flow
Message-ID:
<CAN2sGmHAKuDXF6uMhAydb5Hu3NVyiu9d_0+AKtCv6-E68DXzGQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Hi Jeppe: is the fortran source code available? It should be very easy
to compile under Linux
best regards
Kenneth
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 6:49 PM, Jeppe Locht, Mainstage Co.
<locht@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi all
>
>
>
> Has this antique NASA program:
>
>
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19680000374_1968000374.pdf
>
> ever been tested/looked at by anyone in the candy community?
>
>
>
> It sounds enticing:
>
> Axisymmetric Two-Phase Perfect Gas Performance Program
>
> The problem:
>
> To develop an axisymmetric method which calculates the performance of
> propellant systems having both gaseous and condensed exhaust products.
>
> The solution:
>
> A computer program which calculates the inviscid axisymmetric nozzle
> expansion of propellant systems having both gaseous and condensed exhaust
> products.
>
>
>
> With the percentage of solid combustion products in the exhaust it might
be
> relevant (I assume that "condensed" includes solids). But it was written
in
> Fortran and released in 1968... On the other hand PEP is still going
strong.
>
>
>
> best
>
> j.
>
>
>
> www.facebook.com/danishspacechallenge
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> SugPro mailing list
> SugPro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://rocketeers.com/mailman/listinfo/sugpro
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 29
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 22:50:05 +0100
From: "Jeppe Locht, Mainstage Co." <locht@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "'Sugar propellant rocket makers'" <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Two-Phase Flow
Message-ID: <001801cc9d97$364b2a60$a2e17f20$@dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi
I have no idea. I only saw the abstract I link to.
best
j.
> -----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
> Fra: sugpro-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:sugpro-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] P? vegne af Kenneth Irving
> Sendt: 7. november 2011 21:58
> Til: Sugar propellant rocket makers
> Emne: Re: [SUGPRO] Two-Phase Flow
>
> Hi Jeppe: is the fortran source code available? It should be very easy
> to compile under Linux
> best regards
> Kenneth
>
> On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 6:49 PM, Jeppe Locht, Mainstage Co.
> <locht@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hi all
> >
> >
> >
> > Has this antique NASA program:
> >
> >
> http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19680000374_196800
> 0374.pdf
> >
> > ever been tested/looked at by anyone in the candy community?
> >
> >
> >
> > It sounds enticing:
> >
> > Axisymmetric Two-Phase Perfect Gas Performance Program
> >
> > The problem:
> >
> > To develop an axisymmetric method which calculates the performance of
> > propellant systems having both gaseous and condensed exhaust
> products.
> >
> > The solution:
> >
> > A computer program which calculates the inviscid axisymmetric nozzle
> > expansion of propellant systems having both gaseous and condensed
> exhaust
> > products.
> >
> >
> >
> > With the percentage of solid combustion products in the exhaust it
> might be
> > relevant (I assume that "condensed" includes solids). But it was
> written in
> > Fortran and released in 1968... On the other hand PEP is still going
> strong.
> >
> >
> >
> > best
> >
> > j.
> >
> >
> >
> > www.facebook.com/danishspacechallenge
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > SugPro mailing list
> > SugPro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://rocketeers.com/mailman/listinfo/sugpro
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> SugPro mailing list
> SugPro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://rocketeers.com/mailman/listinfo/sugpro
------------------------------
Message: 30
Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2011 20:35:23 -0600
From: "richard.rocketry" <richard.rocketry@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Sugar propellant rocket makers <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Two-Phase Flow
Message-ID: <4EB8956B.50708@xxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/private/sugpro/attachments/20111107/e34885d4/attachment-0001.html
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: moz-screenshot-2.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3194 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/private/sugpro/attachments/20111107/e34885d4/attachment-0003.jpg
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: moz-screenshot-1.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3991 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/private/sugpro/attachments/20111107/e34885d4/attachment-0004.jpg
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: moz-screenshot.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 77817 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/private/sugpro/attachments/20111107/e34885d4/attachment-0005.jpg
>
------------------------------
Message: 31
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 11:52:19 -0200
From: Kenneth Irving <kenneth.irving@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Sugar propellant rocket makers <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SUGPRO] Two-Phase Flow
Message-ID:
<CAN2sGmGhOyGBAHEj3Mx21TKxxfHR694obJDFqWz6hG4=K7_S8g@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Richard: if you still have the code I would like to give it a try. Fortran
usually is quite easy to compile. If it can be compiled, then maybe it's
worth trying to figure out what input it needs. Maybe not... anyway it's
always interesting to do some code archeology :-)
best regards
Kenneth
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 12:35 AM, richard.rocketry <
richard.rocketry@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> **
> I came across this program some years back. I found the source code and
> attempted to compile it, without success. The code is so ancient that
> certain functions are not supported by modern compilers. I have the source
> code if anyone wants to give it a try. I don't expect that it would be
> useful anyway, even if compiled, as there is no documentation (that I am
> aware of) and its anyone's guess as to what many of the input parameters
> are. I"ve attached a screen shot of some sample code.
>
> One gem that I came across in the code was the expression for two-phase
> ratio of specific heats (k, or gamma), which is the same expression that
> I"ve derived and use in my calculations and software such as SRM.xls. :-)
>
>
> is the same as:
>
> http://www.nakka-rocketry.net/techs2.html
>
> Sample code:
>
>
>
> cheers
> Richard
>
>
> Jeppe Locht, Mainstage Co. wrote:
>
> Hi all****
>
> ** **
>
> Has this antique NASA program:****
>
>
>
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19680000374_1968000374.pdf
> ****
>
> ever been tested/looked at by anyone in the candy community? ****
>
> ** **
>
> It sounds enticing:****
>
> Axisymmetric Two-Phase Perfect Gas Performance Program ****
>
> The problem: ****
>
> To develop an axisymmetric method which calculates the performance of
> propellant systems having both gaseous and condensed exhaust products. ***
> *
>
> The solution: ****
>
> A computer program which calculates the inviscid axisymmetric nozzle
> expansion of propellant systems having both gaseous and condensed exhaust
> products. ****
>
> ** **
>
> With the percentage of solid combustion products in the exhaust it might
> be relevant (I assume that "condensed" includes solids). But it was
written
> in Fortran and released in 1968... On the other hand PEP is still going
> strong.****
>
> ** **
>
> best****
>
> j.****
>
> ** **
>
> www.facebook.com/danishspacechallenge ****
>
> ** **
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> SugPro mailing listSugPro@rocketeers.comhttp://
rocketeers.com/mailman/listinfo/sugpro
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> SugPro mailing list
> SugPro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://rocketeers.com/mailman/listinfo/sugpro
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/private/sugpro/attachments/20111108/db68275a/attachment.html
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: moz-screenshot.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 77817 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/private/sugpro/attachments/20111108/db68275a/attachment.jpg
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: moz-screenshot-2.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3194 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/private/sugpro/attachments/20111108/db68275a/attachment-0001.jpg
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: moz-screenshot-1.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3991 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/private/sugpro/attachments/20111108/db68275a/attachment-0002.jpg
>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
SugPro mailing list
SugPro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://rocketeers.com/mailman/listinfo/sugpro
End of SugPro Digest, Vol 66, Issue 2
*************************************
Other related posts:
- » [AR] Fwd: SugPro Digest, Vol 66, Issue 2 - Bruce Beck
