Saucers? Ground tests? Cheapy test rockets for winds at altitude?
Yes it would.. you need to glue them to the stick. :grin:(Would it be wrong to just tape them to a stick and send them up bottle rocket style?)
Just got a pack of E12-8 motors via mail order with the infamous 08-18-11 date code. Don't have any rockets I'd like to blow up. Options?
Well.. since there seems to be more catos from this date code rather than being "prone" to cato simply from being in this batch, I wouldn't worry too much.
You could build and fly a naked rocket for fun... give the motors to someone who isn't as fearful... or soak them in water to destroy them..
Personally I would just wait a few months until the height of summer. Seems the BP motor catos are more "prone" in the colder temps.
Jerome
Even though the mail order source emailed that they'll take them back and provide a refund, I'm going to test fire them. I just happen to have a 24mm motor test stand (actually just a motor "holder") I made from scrap wood that anchors to the ground with tent stakes which I recently used just for the purpose of testing an AT F24 RMS motor that had been loaded for ten months. Motor burned fine, o-rings looked like-new after firing.Ground test them, and film them at a high fps rate...
Even though the mail order source emailed that they'll take them back and provide a refund, I'm going to test fire them. I just happen to have a 24mm motor test stand (actually just a motor "holder") I made from scrap wood that anchors to the ground with tent stakes which I recently used just for the purpose of testing an AT F24 RMS motor that had been loaded for ten months. Motor burned fine, o-rings looked like-new after firing.
I'll use that same rig to test all three the E12-8s and HD video record them. I don't own a video camera than can do high fps.
Testing them will take them out of circulation and provide a few more failure rate data points. Now, watch, all three will work just fine. I'll let everyone know what happens.
I also plan to measure the precise OD of each motor at various stations along their length and macro-photograph the nozzles and end plugs. Since I have two maker group meetings in the near future, I'm going to ask if anyone knows of anyone who can provide free X-Ray and/or ultrasound analysis of the motors for the mention of their firm's name, looking for ramming density variations, nozzle or fuel grain wall separation, grain cracks, etc.I'd build a couple boilerplate rockets out of scrap parts to fly 'em in, and if they go blooey, fill out a MESS form, send 'em in to Estes and they'll probably send you a couple of replacement kits.
Burning them off in a 'test stand' (unless it's a real test stand from which you can get some actual information) is just like throwing the money out the window.
Long long ago in my teen years we lit off some motors in 'static firings' simply by burying them nose down in the dirt. Similarly a waste of money.
Cluster all three, and name the rocket Deer Hunter.
I haven't had any problem with F15's, flew 8 of them last weekend. I'm waiting to see what a few years in the distribution chain does to them.And I have a bunch of the 29mm E16 and F15 motors and there have been zero problems with those.
OMG! I had a buddy of mine convince me the F-100's were the harbingers of Death, so for a short little pyro show in the desert-I made headings for about of dozen of these bottle rockets. Bamboo garden sticks-but they were electrically fired. I was so pissed every one actually flew fine! Best one was a whistle and strobe combo. yeah-everybody clapped and cheered, but they woulda been better in a rocket! Wish I still had 'em....ummm...yeah...I did that after I blew up a just built FSI Black Brant ll on a FSI F100 Explodi-jet I only had 1 successful flight of a F100 and that was out of 3 and it happened to be the "bottle rocket" I made from the last one. I made it up special for a 4th of July. After the rest of the neighborhood had burned off somewhere around $1000 of fireworks it was the "Grand Finale". I inserted the stick into an old bumperjack and told the crowd to stand back, it could blow upon ignition, go up 10 feet and blow, or go about 3000 feet. To my suprize it actually went up It was a F100-8. After a bit people were saying it was a dud, I just smiled and counted, "5 one thousand...6 one thousand...7 one thousand, 8 one thousand!!!" I had built up the fore end to hold more...stuff. I had a broken Roman Candle so I put the little balls into it as well as the powder. It looked magnificent when it went off waaaaay up there. Might be the only launch I ever had where people cheered
Oh, yeah, I wanted to add this was 20 years ago, Statute of Limitations on the Misdemeanor was up a long time ago
OMG! I had a buddy of mine convince me the F-100's were the harbingers of Death, so for a short little pyro show in the desert-I made headings for about of dozen of these bottle rockets. Bamboo garden sticks-but they were electrically fired. I was so pissed every one actually flew fine! Best one was a whistle and strobe combo. yeah-everybody clapped and cheered, but they woulda been better in a rocket! Wish I still had 'em.
Nah, I like the investigatory process. I've never read an explanation of why this batch has such a high failure rate and I'd like to see if off-center ramming was the likely cause. I'll be talking to folks from Team Estes at a NAR regional launch this weekend and I'll see if they want these back for analysis or if I should just go ahead and static test them in their presence. Maybe I'll be able to get Estes to exchange them for $20 worth of Estes rocket kit or replacement motors, but if I can't, the $20 I paid for them will be worth it to quell my failure-mode curiosity if I safely ground test these.I would just build a junk rocket, fly the motors and report any catoes and be done with it.
My preferred junk rocket design is somewhat short and stubby; something that allows a burped chunk of propellant to exit the rocket quickly without doing much damage. Estes Fat Boy or Big Daddy. I also use my old SPEV as a junk motor rocket for suspect B and C motors (it's a normal proportioned rocket, but has a short, wide parachute compartment).
Nah, I like the investigatory process. I've never read an explanation of why this batch has such a high failure rate and I'd like to see if off-center ramming was the likely cause. I'll be talking to folks from Team Estes at a NAR regional launch this weekend and I'll see if they want these back for analysis or if I should just go ahead and static test them in their presence. Maybe I'll be able to get Estes to exchange them for $20 worth of Estes rocket kit or replacement motors, but if I can't, the $20 I paid for them will be worth it to quell my failure-mode curiosity if I safely ground test these.
Took a good look at the 08-18-11 motors today, nozzles normal, other end not so much:
None of my other D12s, E9s, or E12s have that issue. The thinning of the rightmost casing in its upper left quadrant is not a perspective illusion and the middle one is also thinner in same quadrant, but it's less obvious in the photo. Looks like either casing misalignment during ramming, out-of-spec (off-center bore) casings, or an offset ram (toward the upper left) which caused the off-center casing bore or ? Off-center ramming would cause undercompaction of one side of the grain and a higher burning rate in that quadrant.
Edit: The lower right quadrant of the clay end plug that was undercompacted was the part that fell away during handling prior to packaging.
Yes, I'm familiar with how parallel wound paper casings are made and a deformed new casing is unlikely. As I said, the deformation of the casing can also be from an off-center ram position in relation to a perfect motor case. Somehow, the rams and casings got out of alignment. I think that's the most likely cause of what we see. I'm going to do an out-of-round measurement since the two worst looking casings appear slightly oval at the forward end, something that doesn't show up in the photo. I'll see if I'm imagining that due to an illusion caused by the partial clay plug and if the oval deformation does in fact exist, I'll see how far down the casing the malformation goes.This is not correct. Casings are wound like a roll of toilet paper. it is impossible for one side to be thinner than the other, but it is possible to see one side appear to be thicker because it 'relaxed' and appears thicker. There can also be part of the end 'smooshed' a bit inward and that can make that side look thinner. you can tell that you are looking at a 'smooshing' effect by observing the spiral lines of the paper layers. you will see that the thin side layers have been smooshed down and inward. This is only an effect on the end of the casing and has nothig to do with the nozzle end or the propellant right above the nozzle. The problem area is in the propellant right above the nozzle area and you cannot see which ones are bad visually.
Now, watch, all three will work just fine.
Enter your email address to join: