allrocketspsl Posted February 19, 2012 Posted February 19, 2012 I saw two methods of making nozzeless rockets.One granulates the bp one leaves it in meal form adding 3 percent oil to keep dust down.Whats the diff in performance before I start ramming a bunch of 3lb motors?
dan999ification Posted February 19, 2012 Posted February 19, 2012 the oil will obviously slow the fuel down to some degree which may be of benefit if you find the powder too hot as is, i think the oil also helps the grain stay in tact while its burning may be wrong on that though, both will help keep the dust down for sure. granulated powder even without dextrin can be hard to consolidate enough with ramming, maybe more so on larger motors. dan.
dangerousamateur Posted February 19, 2012 Posted February 19, 2012 Pure meal is a PITA to work with I prefer granulated fuel. slow the fuel down to some degree which may be of benefit if you find the powder too hot as isI don't have experience with that, but can BP be too hot for nozzleless...?
FlaMtnBkr Posted February 19, 2012 Posted February 19, 2012 I have had a couple 1" motors CATO that were nozzleless. Not sure if it was because it was too hot but that is what I attributed to at the time. Pretty amazing how loud a BP motor blowing up can be.
nater Posted February 19, 2012 Posted February 19, 2012 I had trouble with 75:15:10 fuel screen-mixed with airfloat coal, granulated with oil in a nozzleless configuration. With my tooling and no nozzle, the thrust was just too low to be useful. When I rammed it with a nozzle, it worked fine. I'm not sure if it was the low quality coal or the oil that slowed the fuel down too much to use without a nozzle. I did like working with the oiled fuel enough that I am going to try using it with different coal and / or milling to get them flying how I want. The grains were soft and consolidated easy with a mallet, no dust, and I swear the oil made the grain less sticky so it popped off the spindle easier. As Ned always says "so many 'speriments."
dagabu Posted February 19, 2012 Posted February 19, 2012 I saw two methods of making nozzeless rockets.One granulates the bp one leaves it in meal form adding 3 percent oil to keep dust down.Whats the diff in performance before I start ramming a bunch of 3lb motors? I oiled my fuel last year using only 1% oil and it caused a drastic drop in thrust that I used what I had left (with some Ti mixed in) for pumped stars. Water granulate for fastest fuel. -dag
dagabu Posted February 19, 2012 Posted February 19, 2012 I have had a couple 1" motors CATO that were nozzleless. Not sure if it was because it was too hot but that is what I attributed to at the time. Pretty amazing how loud a BP motor blowing up can be. That is some fast fuel there FMB, I cant even blow up cheap tubes with my hot whistle! -dag
drthrust Posted February 19, 2012 Posted February 19, 2012 I saw two methods of making nozzeless rockets.One granulates the bp one leaves it in meal form adding 3 percent oil to keep dust down.Whats the diff in performance before I start ramming a bunch of 3lb motors? hi , i make mine, by adding 3 percent oil mixed with cellulose thinners, mix with willow bp in bowl and rice through a kitchen sieve, leave to dry for a few days, to aid with consistency in production a bought myself a burette to keep the solvent content the same every time ( its easy to add to much)re: ramming 3lb motors, its a press job! or cato city, i have a four page tread on it nozzeless motors
allrocketspsl Posted February 20, 2012 Author Posted February 20, 2012 Pure meal is a PITA to work with I prefer granulated fuel. I don't have experience with that, but can BP be too hot for nozzleless...? same here mate I have only made two both had slow bp
Recommended Posts