I build liquid rockets, but whenever there is a liquid rocket out at the Friends of Amateur Rocketry, chances are I'll be there helping, filming, getting in the way, or generally hovering.
Sugar + ammonium nitrate fertilizer, a home recipe for a fast missile, like the Palestinian missiles that defeated the failed and scrap Iron Dome system.
Very cool, but the video doesn’t show most of the rocket boosting nor recovery, which rocket launch vids normally show. Did it go horizontal? The fins looked too small to me, but propulsion worked fantastically!
I'm always a stickler on combustion stability, and that beast did not disappoint 1/128th of one single bit. That plume was rock solid stable. Not an easy task with kerosene. What grade did you use? Now I want to see some crazy person to launch a solid fueled- rocket with a double or triple base propellant, or a composite-modified double base.
Oxidizer is always nitrous oxide, but the fuel can be any flammable liquid. We typically use E85 or E98, often with an additive like boric acid or calcium chloride, but sometimes use hydrocarbons like diesel or WD40 for fun.
By managing how two elements fire , not quite 'out of phase' (ANTIPHASING), it's my hope I'll be able to 'self attenuate (within the engine) this cumbersome acoustic energy by re-transforming that energy back into raising the thermal potential of the working fluid (air). The goal of harnessing detonation technology is to reap the thermodynamic cornucopia realized from attaining extremely high temperatures within microsecond domains. What is revealing, is that detonation technology allows us the opportunity to transform high temperature fuel/air mass flows into a :time management problem. In this context, the higher the mass flow temperature at any given point within the engine is determined by the confining medium (metallurgy). What all this means, is, that a constant volume detonation has a constant yield., therefore, by managing the frequency of operation we have a very fine means of modulating power output. My goal is to validate the doubling cubing relationship of: 'as the frequency of operation doubles... the power out is cubed' This is understandable because the engine is operating at constant volume in each detonation and it's power output is determined by the number of detonations within any given time domain. As mentioned in earlier posts on this page, the acoustic output of these machines has prevented me from doing much research up until a few months ago. I'll be recreating an experiment I performed at Bracket Field in April of 93' which got me evicted. I was sharing the hanger with the local police department and I was goaded into firing it amongst unsuspecting off-duty cops. I only ran it at 300 pulses/sec ,however, it sounded like the'warthog' gattling gun. Well. after all these guys dressed up in nice civies got up off the tarmac my friend was told " get that muthafucker out of here tonight!" Most single mode operation can get up to 140db in the kilohertz range.
@@DerekHonkawaexcellent, this is such an amazing feat and I absolutely love how much it kills flat earth! I’m thankful for the hard work, time and dedication Kip and the crew put into this! Y’all will reach space for sure!
I didn't realise that sugar rocket fuel could be so potent. I mean it only has a ISP of 110seconds to 130seconds maximum (thats with KNO3 as an oxidiser, not sure what this motor uses)
We usually run around 125 with KNSB. The highest I've gotten was 134 but at 1200 psi. Anything can seem 'potent' when you over pressurize the containment.
This system actually used our electronic regulators, which use ball valves. The diaphragm sound was the check valves we use to stop propellants entering our pressurant tank and the check valve we use for pressurant fill.
This is ultra awesome! A student-built LOX/Propane engine. Also that thin walled-chamber took the hole like a boss and kept going, wow. And pulling this off within a day is crazy good. You guys rock \m/ Mind one thing though, please (Although I think you fixed that already in the second test): Stay calm and focused throughout the hotfire sequence and afterwards until you bring the system into a safe state, so you are ready and prepared if shit goes sideways (For sure it's hard because of the pure awesomeness of the test :D) Cheers and congratz!
Something I've been advocating for to liquid teams I work with, during development of your liquid or hybrid motor, the recovery team needs to build out the actual top part of the rocket that will be used for the recovery and flight test it on an inexpensive solid motor...the full scale real deal. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-jWspWbTCXbM.html Launching a subscale or ground testing is better than no testing but during the project motor development there is plenty of time for the recovery team (responsible for 50% of the flight) to build out and flight test the actual avionics, nosecone, and chutes to be used. Similar to what NASA did for Apollo with Little Joe II . This UCLA team came to me about launching the liquid bi-prop the next month and at my suggestion, built this lower section and fins that we flew 10 days later on the solid motor. Their later liquid launch was successful with perfect recovery and have the altitude record for the FAR Dollar per Foot Challenge.
It looked like it just blew out the nozzle. The grain was extinguished quickly, and the Berkeley Team made sure to prepare for a proper RMA with Aerotech as soon as it happened, rather than monkey around with the grain too much. Case is safe.
