Re: Propellant Breakthroughs?

Actually simple, but agressive.

The safety code is your only friend. But the TRA offset distances are 3x what they need to be. It puts users into the modal impact area. Bad.

It's also not true.

Bingo. I've seen several knock-off casigs that lacked this simple detail. It's also a stress point so that if the casing does overpressurize, the ends will blow instead of the casing splitting open. Although I must admit I've never seen either happen.

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!

Having had my first L2 certification attempt end slightly early (prior to takeoff) due to the rapid disassembly of my Dr. Rocket 38/720 casing, I have to say that my experience agrees with Jerry. The casing split down the side, and *opened nearly flat*.

In my opinion, the safety of the casings is guaranteed by the fact that they are made of 6061-T6 aluminum, and not by any particular design feature machined into them. Aluminum stretches and tears, it doesn't fracture. Thus, from my spectacular cato, the piece that ended up furthest from the launch pad (one of the grains, which self-extinguished due to the sudden pressure drop) was less than about

One of the two metal pieces (no shrapnel!) ended up remaining within the mangled tail end of my rocket, and the other was lying on the ground right next to it. The casing was in one big piece, the forward closure still installed (and undamaged!), and the aft closure had fallen off due to the casing rupture, and bounced off the blast plate to land to one side of the base of the pad.

This was several years prior to the Ellis J350s with the spongy grains. Aerotech and Dr. Rocket were both on-site for that particular launch event (it was a ROCStock about 4 years ago), and the tentative conclusion they reached was "voids in the propellant". They replaced both the casing and the reload on the spot (with a spiffy brand spanking new "Millenium" 38/720 casing, to boot). Of course, I was left to repair the rocket myself.

- Rick "The man from Mars is through with cars" Dickinson

You been reading my old rants on ROL and Compuserve?

Lots of ideas. Nothing that works... If I could sell great ideas that will never, ever work for 99 cents a boxful, I'd be a millionaire. :-(

Aqueous oxidizer solution hybrids...tribrid "oxygen gas generator" hybrids...sponge hybrids...mechanically interleaved solid oxidizer/solid fuel...not a damn one of 'em works at a practical level.

The only great idea I ever had that actually worked was Al/MnO2, and that's barely even usable in skyrockets.

Hi everyone.

I have lurked here for a long time and saw this thread. I saw something that might be thought of here in the subject of a different kind of fuel.

The source for my idea was a humor/science fiction site on the www. They spoke of a rocket that was powered by Nitrous oxide as the oxidizer and the fuel was blocks of coal laid around the inside of the rocket like brick.

Now I don't have a clue as to how one would figure out a way to make this into a fuel grain as to what kind of binder one would use and if there would be enough energy released from the coal when it was exposed to flame and nitrous oxide. But if it could be turned into a fuel then the BATF would have to start regulating 100 plus train car trains carrying rocket fuel across our country to power plants that would have to be regulated for burning rocket fuel.

All hybrids in use are a variation of that now.