Ye Olde Rocket Forum

Go Back   Ye Olde Rocket Forum > Weather-Cocked > Mission Control
User Name
Password
Auctions Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts Search Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21  
Old 06-15-2020, 08:15 PM
tbzep's Avatar
tbzep tbzep is online now
Dazed and Confused
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: TN
Posts: 9,865
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ltvscout
I seem to recall what changed was the quality of the charcoal.

Yes, I remember it that way too, but just stated it in the post as a finished BP product.
I need to invent a cheap and easy way to extract carbon from CO and CO2 en masse. They say charcoal from certain trees and plants is better. I wonder if pure carbon would be even better. The enviro wackos would go bat crap crazy if they lost their sky-is-falling flagship!
__________________
I love sanding.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 06-15-2020, 08:30 PM
aeppel_cpm aeppel_cpm is online now
Ciderwright
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Burlington, WI
Posts: 577
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbzep
Yes, I remember it that way too, but just stated it in the post as a finished BP product.
I need to invent a cheap and easy way to extract carbon from CO and CO2 en masse. They say charcoal from certain trees and plants is better. I wonder if pure carbon would be even better. The enviro wackos would go bat crap crazy if they lost their sky-is-falling flagship!


That's one of the Holy Grails of the industry my day job is in - refinery R&D.
Doing anything useful with methane other than burning it is another.

It CAN be done - it's the cheap and easy part that's hard.

So far, the cheapest/easiest way is to plant a forest.
The next might be to seed the ocean with iron.
A less biological way is to turn it into carbonate - you end up with something like cement. Someone has made a commercial process for that. It ties up the carbon - but not in an especially useful way.

In my other job, you see vodka guys arguing about which source of activated carbon is better: coconut hulls, etc. The source wood seems to matter. I was just wondering how much like activated carbon gunpowder charcoal is.
__________________
Charles McGonegal
Ciderwright
AEppelTreow Winery & Distillery
Ad Astra Tabernamque!
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 06-15-2020, 09:16 PM
tbzep's Avatar
tbzep tbzep is online now
Dazed and Confused
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: TN
Posts: 9,865
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aeppel_cpm
That's one of the Holy Grails of the industry my day job is in - refinery R&D.
Doing anything useful with methane other than burning it is another.

It CAN be done - it's the cheap and easy part that's hard.

So far, the cheapest/easiest way is to plant a forest.
The next might be to seed the ocean with iron.
A less biological way is to turn it into carbonate - you end up with something like cement. Someone has made a commercial process for that. It ties up the carbon - but not in an especially useful way.

In my other job, you see vodka guys arguing about which source of activated carbon is better: coconut hulls, etc. The source wood seems to matter. I was just wondering how much like activated carbon gunpowder charcoal is.

And Jack Daniels uses sugar maple to make theirs.

As for uses of methane, lets hope that methane for efficient rocket fuel takes off, pun intended. I'm still waiting on Blue Origin to catch up with SpaceX on any of their projects, including their big fart motors.
__________________
I love sanding.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 06-15-2020, 10:22 PM
Tau Zero's Avatar
Tau Zero Tau Zero is offline
Incurable SEMROC Fan
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Twin Falls, Idaho, USA
Posts: 2,106
Wink Direct Carbon Extraction

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbzep
I wonder if pure carbon would be even better. The enviro wackos would go bat crap crazy if they lost their sky-is-falling flagship!
Now if you could extract carbon *directly* from the wackos in question... (Spock eyebrow)

...Sorry. Got lost in thought for a minute there.
__________________
Jay Goemmer
"Centuri Guy"/"Tau Zero"
YORF Member 28
Semroc SAM #0029
NAR 86131

"Your lightyears may vary."


“Centuri fret buzz in an updated form.”
Bill “Wallyum” Eichelberger re: Estes Flutter-By
03 Sept 2014
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 06-16-2020, 06:35 AM
GuyNoir's Avatar
GuyNoir GuyNoir is offline
NAR # 19250 - Life Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Woodstock, IL
Posts: 397
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aeppel_cpm
I dropped Bernard's data into JMP.


What program made these plots?
__________________
A dark night in a city that knows how to keep its secrets. But high above the quiet streets on the 12th floor of the Acme Building, one man is still trying to find the answers to life's persistent questions. Guy Noir, Private Eye.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 06-16-2020, 08:10 AM
tbzep's Avatar
tbzep tbzep is online now
Dazed and Confused
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: TN
Posts: 9,865
Default

If you'd like to see the variation from a test stand instead of an altimeter, all you have to do is look at page 2 of the NAR motor test for the C5. Unfortunately the C6 and other older tests aren't laid out in this format.

https://www.nar.org/SandT/pdf/Estes/ES_C5_2019.pdf

Burn times from 1.96s to 2.05s
Delay times from 3.04s to 3.46s
Max thrust from 19.79 to 21.32N

This is all from one batch, so I'm sure the variations would be greater if multiple batches were tested. One could easily see that there could be even greater variation over a 40 or 50 year span.
__________________
I love sanding.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 06-16-2020, 09:25 AM
aeppel_cpm aeppel_cpm is online now
Ciderwright
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Burlington, WI
Posts: 577
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNoir
What program made these plots?


JMP from SAS Institute.

www.jmp.com

Much easier to use than minitab.
__________________
Charles McGonegal
Ciderwright
AEppelTreow Winery & Distillery
Ad Astra Tabernamque!
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 06-16-2020, 09:30 AM
ghrocketman's Avatar
ghrocketman ghrocketman is online now
President, MAYHEM AGITATORS, Inc.
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 10,257
Default

It would be interesting to see a comparison of Black Powder impulse levels due to various charcoal wood sources.
That could give definitive proof, but doubt it could be actually done.

Where does one specify "I would like my black powder to be from Coconut hull charcoal, etc" ?
__________________
When in doubt, WHACK the GAS and DITCH the brake !!!
No DIRECT and MEASURABLE Harm=NO Foul advocate

If you are NOT FLYING LOW in the left lane, you need to GET THE #$&@ OUT of it !

Yes, there is such a thing as NORMAL
, if you have to ask, you probably aren't
!
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 06-26-2020, 12:28 AM
georgegassaway's Avatar
georgegassaway georgegassaway is offline
Contest, Sport, it's all good......
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Homewood, AL
Posts: 446
Default

The main effect of less effective charcoal, is that a given volume of BP has less n-sec. But that volume can be changed, or rather, increased, to make up for it. The result would tend to be a motor with a longer BP grain, that burns a littler bit longer, with a little bit less thrust, but could be dialed-in for the same N-sec.

BUT, that runs into a problem with the C6-7. IIRC there is not enough casing length to hold both a longer grain, and a true 7 second delay. So either the BP grain has to be a bit shorter, with less n-sec, or the delay grain has to be a bit shorter, meaning less than 7 seconds. What I am unsure of is whether it would be practical to make a "faster burning delay", so that a 7 second delay grain can fit into full power C6. But when I heard of this problem before, it was stated as though a "given" that the delay train's burn rate was not tweakable to burn faster (or most likely it could be, but for whatever reasons they don't want to do so).

In any case, this is also a strike against seeing the old A3-6T's again. Same problem of the casing not being able to hold both a longer propellant grain, and a full 6 second delay grain. Still no reason not to have A3-2T's for gliders again.

But other than those issues above in physically cramming a given N-sec and time delay into a casing for C6-7, and A3-6T (ignore bigger than 18mm for now), the other motors could make up for it with longer propellant grains. The one thing that could not achieve the same efficiency would be the fact that say a current B6-4 motor initial mass would be greater than a 50 year old B6-4. But if you test flew them..... and they both had the same N-sec, the modern longer-burning lower thrust B6-4 would probably fly higher for aerodynamic drag reasons, despite being a teeny bit heavier. This ignores issues with possible effects of moisture from storage over decades, and other real-word issues.

Also, BTW, my understanding of the Estes machines is that they are quite consistent once dialed-in. Run a few motors, test fire, find out what needs tweaking, tweak, test fire, and once within normal specs for a freshly made motor, let it crank out many thousands which will be very close to each other in performance (also, they test fire one out of every 100 made, IIRC, even once dialed in, to be sure they are still dialed in). And the motors that were out of spec are destroyed, never packaged to be sold.
__________________
Contest flying, Sport flying, it's all good.....
NAR# 18723 NAR.org
GeorgesRockets.com
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 06-26-2020, 12:53 AM
BEC's Avatar
BEC BEC is offline
Master Modeler
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Auburn, Washington
Posts: 2,812
Default

George,

Yes, that all squares with my understanding. I still have some older motors....I can see if the weights vary as you suggest.

And yes, that’s what Estes’ processes are supposed to be....which is why I’m really frustrated with A10-0Ts with date code H180219. They are either really week or they CATO, or so has been my experience so far. If the process was as you described (and as Ellis explained to us during the NARAM-60 Estes tour) then I certainly shouldn’t be having that experience.

Yes, I have been in touch with them over it. They don’t have any from any other batches in stock, or so I was told a few weeks ago.

BTW, the wide variation in results from the most recent B6-4s in my little test surprised me for the same reasons.....
__________________
Bernard Cawley
NAR 89040 L1 - Life Member
SAM 0061
AMA 42160
KG7AIE
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:32 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Ye Olde Rocket Shoppe © 1998-2020