insutama Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 Just wondering what makes for a better rocket engine KNO3 / Powdered Sugar or black powder ? pros ? cons ?
dagabu Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 Just wondering what makes for a better rocket engine KNO3 / Powdered Sugar or black powder ? pros ? cons ? There are so many variables that it's completely impossible to answer the question in an apples to apples way, they both have some really nice effects and both have challenges. IMHO, I prefer BP, it is incredibly simple to make, no ball mill is required for a scratch mix and it can be pounded with a plastic/leather mallet on site and launched seconds later while sugar fuels take some thought and planning. Some will post about the impulse difference between sugar and BP but the reality is that both propellants have the ability to have decent impulses if the process is taken all the way to the best performing comp one can make. I suggest you try both, sugar is EZPZ to make if you dont cook it and BP is simple as well.
insutama Posted January 28, 2015 Author Posted January 28, 2015 I was planning on defiantly trying both i just put together a small bp rocket engine i guess ill see how that works it will be my first one from bp.I pounded a benanite plug in the bottom then i slowly compressed little bit of bp then added more and compressed and repeated till the tube was almost full then i caped it with a other benanite plug then i drilled by hand a 1/8'th hole 75% threw the engine does this sound like i did it properly ?
dagabu Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 BP is incredibly stable with the kind of pressures we can create with a plastic/leather hammer. The small increments are a very wise idea, getting some tooling is an even better idea. If this is your first time working with BP and rockets, email me, I have some free tooling for N00bs that will help get you started making 1/2" rockets. This video shows this exact tooling as used to make a 1/2" motor with a pinch of Ti at the end powering a monocopter. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtNZ57B1Q8U 3
insutama Posted January 28, 2015 Author Posted January 28, 2015 (edited) wow thats awsome i want to make one of them kinda hard to tell but did it take off into the sky ? if so how did it fly like that ? Edited January 28, 2015 by insutama
dagabu Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 Yes, they do! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5S1GqExdxO4 1
insutama Posted January 28, 2015 Author Posted January 28, 2015 wow this is probally one of the coolest things i have seen in fireworks i need to know how to do this hahaha 1
Differential Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 Decent rocket candy is definitely quicker to make. I would use a 70:30 ratio of KNO3 to sucrose for an end burner. Dissolve the KNO3 and sugar in hot water, and heat (not over flame!) until the water is gone. This mixes the compounds on a molecular level. When done, you should have a stiff, off-white paste that can be compressed while still hot. Compress it well, air pockets will lead to very uneven burning. Black powder will give you more thrust, but requires more time to make even if it is unmilled.
insutama Posted January 28, 2015 Author Posted January 28, 2015 well the result for my first engine were not so good all the powder seemed to go off at once and didnt really go anywere damn
Differential Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 (edited) I was planning on defiantly trying both i just put together a small bp rocket engine i guess ill see how that works it will be my first one from bp.I pounded a benanite plug in the bottom then i slowly compressed little bit of bp then added more and compressed and repeated till the tube was almost full then i caped it with a other benanite plug then i drilled by hand a 1/8'th hole 75% threw the engine does this sound like i did it properly ?Did you use an end-burning mix for a core-burning rocket?Could have been your fuel was burning too hot, or the nozzle was too small. Edited January 28, 2015 by Differential
insutama Posted January 28, 2015 Author Posted January 28, 2015 i used a small 3/8" inside diameter and maybe a 1/4" thick nossle with a 1/8" hole. I used goex FFFF black powder for fuel
dagabu Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 wow this is probally one of the coolest things i have seen in fireworks i need to know how to do this hahaha No problem, here is the tutorial: TUTORIAL 1
dagabu Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 Decent rocket candy is definitely quicker to make. I would use a 70:30 ratio of KNO3 to sucrose for an end burner. Dissolve the KNO3 and sugar in hot water, and heat (not over flame!) until the water is gone. This mixes the compounds on a molecular level. When done, you should have a stiff, off-white paste that can be compressed while still hot. Compress it well, air pockets will lead to very uneven burning. Black powder will give you more thrust, but requires more time to make even if it is unmilled. A scratch mix of BP should only take a minute to mix the three ingredients and then ram the comp into the tube. Dusty? Yes. The best method? No. But definitely faster.
Differential Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 I would agree, if the ingredients are already powdered. I was thinking of the time it takes to pre-grind, since I lack the foresight to store ready to mix powders. But I get much better results from semi-quick Rcandy than scratch BP.
dagabu Posted January 29, 2015 Posted January 29, 2015 Using a bullet blade grinder, it would take mere seconds to grind up the KNO3, air float charcoal already comes powdered and sulfur, even if clumped can be rendered to powder just by crushing it. Many ways to skin a cat Diff, best to not speak in absolutes and give room for other experiences. Either way, the time it takes to make either is minimal if the prep is done ahead of time and proper steps taken to protect yourself in the case of fire. Really, dont take shortcuts when handling BP or R-candy.
Josh1986 Posted August 8, 2017 Posted August 8, 2017 Dagabu I am just getting in the hobby and I seen you had some stuff you said that u would get rid of for rockets if you still have the stuff can you please email me at chiekajosh@gmail.com our if any one has stuff for cheap could you please let me know. Like I said I just got in to the hobby and basically need every thing thank you all and have a great day 1
MadMat Posted August 8, 2017 Posted August 8, 2017 (edited) I prefer rcandy, but that's because I have had nothing but problems with BP rockets. I have gotten very few to fly; they are either bombs on a stick or upside down fountains that don't take off. After doing extensive research, I may have found solutions to my problems such as, waxing the tubes ect. But why go through all that, when my sugar rockets have flown fine from the first one I ever made? So, I am biased towards rcandy. Edited August 8, 2017 by MadMat
Baldor Posted August 8, 2017 Posted August 8, 2017 I'm of the opposite opinion, MadMat. I tried candy and its a mess to make for me. I must prepare all the fuel and load the rockets in a row, and must use an skillet or similar. With BP, i just measure the ingredients, put in the ball mill (For rockets, you could get good results screen mixing, i read) and forget for a few hours. I make enough BP for a dozen of rockets or so in one batch. Next, when I'm in the mod, I wet it a little and pass it trough an screen, basically to avoid dust. Since very little water have been used, you can use it right now, but I let it dry. I then store it. Loading a rocket once you have the BP it's just a little work, and I didn't burn my fingers with hot candy. Maybe it's more total work than with RCandy, but you can pace it however you want, and you learn the basics for the next step, some basic charcoal based stars. I only had problems with my first BP rockets, since I tried 75-15-10 BP, pine, ballmilled, core burners. All CATOs. Then I switched to 60-30-10 and all rockets flew without a problem.
insutama Posted August 9, 2017 Author Posted August 9, 2017 Do you guys use nozzles with your bp core burners
Mumbles Posted August 9, 2017 Posted August 9, 2017 That all depends on what fuel you're going to use. If you're using milled hot BP, then don't use a nozzle. If you're using something like 6:3:1 or 7:2:1, then do use a nozzle.
OldMarine Posted August 11, 2017 Posted August 11, 2017 I tried a couple of ¾" sugar rockets this past weekend and was very underwhelmed. No tail, No roar and no power. It flew but so does a buzzard. I'll stick with BP thank you very much.
JMan Posted August 16, 2017 Posted August 16, 2017 For anyone haveing problems with their rcandy and just want to see it work, take an old used Estes rocket and repack it, core it how ever deep you want (i core all of it except 1/2 an inch as the bulk head) and it works better than Estes
Oinikis Posted August 17, 2017 Posted August 17, 2017 (edited) I have had success with both fuels, and each one of them have their different purposes. If you want to make some simple rockets for use with fireworks, especially if you are a newbie, in my opinion BP is the way to go. It is simpler, safer, and leaves a nice heart-warming tail. You just ram it, put a stick on it and fly. Sure there might be some kinks but they aren't hard to work out and there are plenty of information online. Also, it makes it easy for passfire ignition (no top bukhead). As for efficiency, why bother when you can just add more powder? you don't need high quaity stuff in most cases. In conclusion, if you want to lift a shell, just go with BP, it leaves a nice tail, is simple, safer than rcandy, easy to ignite, and is NOT as hydroscopic Rcandy on the other hand is arguably more powerful, which is actually only a benefit with model rockets. Also, Rcandy is more difficult to make properly, requires more equipment, and is more dangerous to make, plus, it is extremely hydroscopic, meaning you have to launch fast or take care in protecting it. Also, rcandy CATO sends burning pieces of fuel. Only real advatages comes when you want to make some high power rockets with a more complicated grain, like BATES, and use it on something like a model rocket, rocket sled, etc. this fuel is more for performance, and doesn't have any nice sound or effect. On the other hand, rcandy enables you to make quite a few simple nozleless bottle rockets in a short amount of time, because you just put it in a tube and core it, however, hydroscopic nature of rcandy really turns it off for me. Personally I use rcandy, because I make model rockets. I cast BATES grain, and use a full metal reusable rocket motor and use it to lift a reusable rocket which has a camera, controllable fins which are run by servos and controlled by an arduino with a MPU6050 inertial measurment unit, which makes the rocket extremely stable, and fly straight ant vertical. The thing has a parachute recovery system, actuated by the arduino. the thing weighs in at 800 grams, uses about 75 grams of fuel and reaches height of over 200 meters. Not your ordinary firework rocket, eh? However, if I were to make some eye candy, something nice, I'd go with BP, due to tail and simpleness. Actually, my favourite flying firework is a flying spinners, which are BP powered, like the one Dagabu showed earlier in the thread, however I use a bit different technology. The spinning, the spread of the magnificent tail are the most beatifull thing. Stay safe Edited August 17, 2017 by Oinikis
Recommended Posts