Statologger CF

kwrocket · May 26, 2017

Without sounding like a total noob, is there a correct "*** position for the Stratologger CF no reference in manual that I saw...second on a 7.5" diameter rocket the manual calls for (4) .50 static pressure sampling holes, that seems a bit excessive. My Perfectflight HiAlt only required (4) .250 holes on a 7.5" diameter ... Before I modify my bird, I want to make sure these concerns are correct....any experiences or suggestions?
THX
Ed

Earache · May 26, 2017

THe StratologgerCF doesn't have a required orientation. It will work in any orientation. If using it for firing ejection charges, it should be in the electronics bay with either 3 or 4 vent holes and no others. As for the hole-size formula, I haven't tested anything above a 4" diameter payload bay, but the PerfectFlite formula works well for the smaller sizes. You could try Adept Rocketry's formula if you like the results better https://www.adeptrocketry.com/ALT1Rds.htm.

kwrocket · May 26, 2017

thanks for the info....it's a big help

Spicer007 · May 27, 2017

Ed,

I fly with two 71/2" BlueTube av-bays with CF altimeters, on different rockets, a 14" long AB with (3) 1/4" static ports and an 18" AB with (3) 5/16" static ports. I don't believe (4) 1/2" static ports are needed. I've flown twelve flights on these rockets with good deployments.

tim cubbedge · May 27, 2017

Here is another good link for port sizing:

https://www.vernk.com/AltimeterPortSizing.htm

Buckeye · May 27, 2017

Earache said:
THe StratologgerCF doesn't have a required orientation. It will work in any orientation. If using it for firing ejection charges, it should be in the electronics bay with either 3 or 4 vent holes and no others. As for the hole-size formula, I haven't tested anything above a 4" diameter payload bay, but the PerfectFlite formula works well for the smaller sizes. You could try Adept Rocketry's formula if you like the results better https://www.adeptrocketry.com/ALT1Rds.htm.

Good info from Adapt, but this statement is a bit contradictory:

Keep hole sizes within +100% or -50% of the general guideline. Do not make the holes too small, and especially do not make them too large.

At least for apogee detection, the way the altimeter is programmed to determine apogee and when to fire the drogue charge may be more important than hole size details. Some add too much delay in my view. I think the Perfectflight MAWD (legacy product) was very good in this regard. I hope to have same success with the CF.

jeff2space · May 27, 2017

Buckeye said:
Good info from Adapt, but this statement is a bit contradictory:

Keep hole sizes within +100% or -50% of the general guideline. Do not make the holes too small, and especially do not make them too large.

If guideline is 1/8":
Don't go larger than 1/8+1/8=1/4".
Don't go smaller than 1/8-1/16=1/16".

Statologger CF

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

kwrocket

Member

Earache

Active Member

kwrocket

Member

Spicer007

Senior Member

tim cubbedge

Well-Known Member

Buckeye

Well-Known Member

jeff2space

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Latest posts

Statologger CF

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

Member

Active Member

Member

Senior Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Join the conversation!

Join today and get all the highlights of this community direct to your inbox. It's FREE!