I am sure it is simply because "flat" is cheaper. It is also,
I feel, far less likely to "zipper", as opposed to a round
rope-like cord (though such an event would be more than unlikely
in the small rockets we are speaking of).
Registered Linux user #328317 - SlackWare 10.1 (2.6.10)
I didn't even prove it mathematically, but a few years back I thought it
would be cool to use a cord instead, and I shockingly found I could NOT fit
the same length in the body tube I was used to using for flat. it did fit at
all , yikes !
But, some might say you don't need to use as much cord as you do web, but
that's another question.
Jerry, do you know ?
I find the length is more connected with component inertia. While there
are non-elastic advocates among us, I feel elastic with a nylon line
inhibitor at the 1/3-1/2 stretch length is "optimal.
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: email@example.com>
Flat cords can be folded or rolled with virtually no "holes". Round cord can
be packed, but will still have gaps.
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<<
Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf
www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. --
Benjamin Franklin Historical Review of Pennsylvania. 1759
Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.