Motor delay adjustment

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

JohnCoker

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
2,440
Reaction score
1,360
Robert Kieffer suggested some ways to improve the delay listings in ThrustCurve.org, but to do so we need to know exactly what the delay adjusting tools from AeroTech and CTI do. Here is our understanding; please post if anything is wrong.

CTI
  • 24, 29 & 38mm: the PRO-38 DAT allows for removing 3, 5, 7, and 9 seconds of delay
  • 54mm: the PRO-54 DAT allows for removing up to 10s
  • motors with the "-nA" suffix can be adjusted
  • for example "G80-14A" delays are "5,7,9,11,14"
  • achievable delays are listed on the CTI site, for example: http://pro38.com/products/pro24/motor.php
AeroTech
  • "S" is 6s
  • "M" is 10s
  • "L" is 14s
  • "XL" is 18s
  • the Delay Drilling Tool(s) can remove 2, 4, 6, or 8s
  • delays should not be reduced to under 6s for 29-54 DMS or 4s for 18-38 RMS
  • for example "L" is effectively "6,8,10,12,14"
Loki
 
Last edited:
For CTI - that same tool (PRO-38 DAT) is also used for the 24mm motors. And how it works you have correctly described.

There are two Aerotech tools, but while I have both I have never used either one so am not sure of their limits. One side is marked -2 -4 and one is marked -4 -8. There is also a washer that changes this by 2s 1s, as I recall.
 
Last edited:
we need to know exactly what the delay adjusting tools from AeroTech and CTI do.


AeroTech
I am not sure what you are asking.

All three Aerotech delay tools (RMS, Universal and 54mm) do the same thing - they take 2, 4, 6 or 8 seconds off your delay. As far as the tool goes, that's what they do.

Saying the tools can "adjust down to 0s" is confusing. Do you mean you can take 0 seconds off the delay (AKA, just leave the delay as-is) or do you mean you can set the tool to drill all the way through the delay grain? That would be a problem, as Tony notes above. Also, that would be impossible with the 14 and 10 second delay grains. The most you can take off with the tools is 8 seconds (keeping in mind you don't want to go below 4 seconds).

Maybe a more accurate way to consider these calculations is that 1/32" of drilling depth equals about 1 second of delay taken off. So, at the end of the day, what the tools do is drill anywhere from a 1/16" up to 1/4" deep hole in the delay grains in 1/16" increments. They are simple 1/4" drill bits, so you could easily mark off your own bit in 1/32" increments and get more granular results.

Is your question to confirm what the starting S,M, & L values are?

It is unclear what you are trying to model in Thrustcurve, so difficult to give you the data you are looking for.
 
For CTI - that same tool is also used for the 24mm motors. And how it works you have correctly described.

There are two Aerotech tools, but while I have both I have never used either one so am not sure of their limits. One side is marked -2 and one is marked -4 and there is also a washer that changes this by 1s, as I recall.

Just to be clear, there are three AT tools and I have all three of them (RMS, Universal, & 54mm). The ones I have are marked -8 seconds on one side and -4 seconds on the other and the washer can adjust that by 2 seconds. Thus, the tool can adjust your delay by 2, 4, 6 or 8 seconds.

Not sure if there is another tool that can adjust by 2 and 4 seconds with a 1 second washer, but I have not seen that tool if it exists.
 
OH....I'd better go look....as I may have misremembered. As I say, I've never had occasion to use either of the two I have (I don't fly anything bigger than 29mm so don't know about the 54mm one).

Be right back.....

Yep, they're marked -4 and -8 seconds. Will fix initial post.
 
you can't adjust them to below 4 seconds...doing so, might not leave enough delay element in place to keep the motor 'sealed' during the motors burn.
Is that true for CTI too or just AT?

It makes sense that you can't drill all the way through for a core burning motor, but I could imagine making a 0s delay by not drilling entirely through, just leaving the amount of delay that corresponds to the motor burn. (Although I guess that 4s is a safety margin at any rate.)
 
Is that true for CTI too or just AT?

It makes sense that you can't drill all the way through for a core burning motor, but I could imagine making a 0s delay by not drilling entirely through, just leaving the amount of delay that corresponds to the motor burn. (Although I guess that 4s is a safety margin at any rate.)
Exactly. Since everything burns faster under pressure, getting within 4/32in of the propellant burnout face is pretty close already. In theory a lower-pressure regressive burn with tougher delay propellant could probably get you in the 2-3s timeframe with creative counter-drilling; but in practice I don't know anyone who can reliably do so.
 
Just to be clear, there are three AT tools and I have all three of them (RMS, Universal, & 54mm). The ones I have are marked -8 seconds on one side and -4 seconds on the other and the washer can adjust that by 2 seconds. Thus, the tool can adjust your delay by 2, 4, 6 or 8 seconds.

Not sure if there is another tool that can adjust by 2 and 4 seconds with a 1 second washer, but I have not seen that tool if it exists.
Hmm. I had to trim an accelerometer mounting (triaxial accel -> 2 leg magnet with no through-hole) using shim washers from good ol' McMaster-Carr. I wonder if these could be a source for the needed 1/32" washer? I had a series of .001", .002", .004" and a few .005" shims to do what I needed - these, of course, would be wildly "over-granular"! Another random thought that just came to me, if you had a 1/4" ball-end cutting bit, you'd have a little less of a stress concentration at the thinnest point of the delay grain... Just to show you where that came from, my boss's wife bought me a coffee mug that said, "Hold on - Let me overthink this."

ETA: Cross-posted with @dhbarr
 
Hi gang, Robert Kieffer here. John has summarized things nicely, but let me provide a bit of additional context.

I raised this issue with John while implementing an auto-suggest feature for motor delays in an app I'm building. Briefly, the idea is that after a user selects a motor, they are shown a list of the "official" delays available for that motor. E.g. If the user selects the "Estes C6", they would see delay options of 0, 3, 5, and 7 seconds. This is straight-forward for BP motors from Estes, obviously, but gets a little tricky for adjustable delays like those from Aerotech and Cesaroni where the options depend on the tool and method used to drill the motor. Hence the question(s) here. (For those interested, here's the Github issue where John and I have been discussing this.)

@tfish wrote:
you can't adjust them to below 4 seconds

Both Aerotech and Cesaroni don't seem too concerned about this. I'm not saying it's not good advice but I can't find any verbiage about this on their websites, nor does there appear to be anything built into their tools to prevent this. E.g. You can use the Aerotech tool to remove up to 8 seconds from their "S" (6-sec) and "M" (10 sec) delay grains.

Similarly, Cesaroni's PRO-38 DAT tool allows for removing up to 9 seconds of delay from their 24mm-38mm motors, many of which ship with delays <= 12 seconds.

(Aside: Is this issue already taken into account in how delay grains are designed? If a delay grain breaks down under a certain length, doesn't that happen to all grains once they've burned down to that point?)

Do you know of an official source for this requirement?

@mtnmanak wrote:
It is unclear what you are trying to model in Thrustcurve, so difficult to give you the data you are looking for.

The goal here is to reflect the delays that are achievable with the official delay grains and delay drilling tools available. While it may not make sense to remove 8 seconds from an Aerotech "S" (6 sec) delay grain, there's nothing to prevent you from doing that. (Whether it's wise to do so isn't an issue the thrustcurve DB should be concerned with, IMHO. John may feel differently, however.)

the Delay Drilling Tool can adjust down to 0s

I will reluctantly point out that with core-burning motors you can actually have negative delay values. (The delay grain starts burning at motor ignition but delay times measured from motor burn out. BTW, someone should correct me if my understanding of how this works is incorrect.)

E.g. if you have a motor with a 4 second burn and a 6 second delay time, the delay grain actually burns for 10 seconds starting from motor ignition. If you shorten that grain by 8 seconds, you aren't actually drilling all the way through it. You're just setting it to burn through 2 seconds before motor burn out, resulting in an effective delay of -2 seconds.

... but I say "reluctantly" because the I don't know of any use cases where this worth considering. Hence, my suggestion is that delay times should always be >= 0 in the TC db.

@dhbarr wrote:
I always thought AT S was 6s?

I believe this is correct. I think John my have fumble-fingered that.
 
Last edited:
Hmm. I had to trim an accelerometer mounting (triaxial accel -> 2 leg magnet with no through-hole) using shim washers from good ol' McMaster-Carr. I wonder if these could be a source for the needed 1/32" washer? I had a series of .001", .002", .004" and a few .005" shims to do what I needed - these, of course, would be wildly "over-granular"! Another random thought that just came to me, if you had a 1/4" ball-end cutting bit, you'd have a little less of a stress concentration at the thinnest point of the delay grain... Just to show you where that came from, my boss's wife bought me a coffee mug that said, "Hold on - Let me overthink this."

ETA: Cross-posted with @dhbarr

Yes, I think an end mill would work well for this. Also, I don't think there is anything that says the hole needs to be 1/4" either. The important part is the depth. I can't see a reason why a 1/8" hole wouldn't work, for example. A narrower hole would reduce the likelihood of a premature burn-through, in theory.

Not sure if any of this discussion helps John in what he is trying to model, but it is something I will probably tryout one of these days when I have nothing better to do :)
 
Yes, I think an end mill would work well for this. Also, I don't think there is anything that says the hole needs to be 1/4" either. The important part is the depth. I can't see a reason why a 1/8" hole wouldn't work, for example. A narrower hole would reduce the likelihood of a premature burn-through, in theory.

Not sure if any of this discussion helps John in what he is trying to model, but it is something I will probably tryout one of these days when I have nothing better to do :)

(Apologies in advance...) Well, I look forward to finding out what you learn - apparently, you know the drill! duck.gif
And a welcome to new member @broofa! A software developer and rocketeer, a potent mix!
 
Yes, I think an end mill would work well for this. Also, I don't think there is anything that says the hole needs to be 1/4" either. The important part is the depth. I can't see a reason why a 1/8" hole wouldn't work, for example. A narrower hole would reduce the likelihood of a premature burn-through, in theory.

Not sure if any of this discussion helps John in what he is trying to model, but it is something I will probably tryout one of these days when I have nothing better to do :)
Well I can definitely say a 3/64 hole to make a g76-3 green definitely did not work 🙃
 
Hi gang, Robert Kieffer here. John has summarized things nicely, but let me provide a bit of additional context.

I raised this issue with John while implementing an auto-suggest feature for motor delays in an app I'm building. Briefly, the idea is that after a user selects a motor, they are shown a list of the "official" delays available for that motor. E.g. If the user selects the "Estes C6", they would see delay options of 0, 3, 5, and 7 seconds. This is straight-forward for BP motors from Estes, obviously, but gets a little tricky for adjustable delays like those from Aerotech and Cesaroni where the options depend on the tool and method used to drill the motor. Hence the question(s) here. (For those interested, here's the Github issue where John and I have been discussing this.)

tfish wrote:


Both Aerotech and Cesaroni don't seem too concerned about this. I'm not saying it's not good advice but I can't find any verbiage about this on their websites, nor does there appear to be anything built into their tools to prevent this. E.g. You can use the Aerotech tool to remove up to 8 seconds from their "S" (6-sec) and "M" (10 sec) delay grains.

Similarly, Cesaroni's PRO-38 DAT tool allows for removing up to 9 seconds of delay from their 24mm-38mm motors, many of which ship with delays <= 12 seconds.

(Aside: Is this issue already taken into account in how delay grains are designed? If a delay grain breaks down under a certain length, doesn't that happen to all grains once they've burned down to that point?)

Do you know of an official source for this requirement?

mtnmanak wrote:


The goal here is to reflect the delays that are achievable with the official delay grains and delay drilling tools available. While it may not make sense to remove 8 seconds from an Aerotech "S" (6 sec) delay grain, there's nothing to prevent you from doing that. (Whether it's wise to do so isn't an issue the thrustcurve DB should be concerned with, IMHO. John may feel differently, however.)



I will reluctantly point out that with core-burning motors you can actually have negative delay values. (The delay grain starts burning at motor ignition but delay times measured from motor burn out. BTW, someone should correct me if my understanding of how this works is incorrect.)

E.g. if you have a motor with a 4 second burn and a 6 second delay time, the delay grain actually burns for 10 seconds starting from motor ignition. If you shorten that grain by 8 seconds, you aren't actually drilling all the way through it. You're just setting it to burn through 2 seconds before motor burn out, resulting in an effective delay of -2 seconds.

... but I say "reluctantly" because the I don't know of any use cases where this worth considering. Hence, my suggestion is that delay times should always be >= 0 in the TC db.

dhbarr wrote:


I believe this is correct. I think John my have fumble-fingered that.
<3s with any standard tool and your ejection charge well is now spraying molten aluminum up into the airframe.
 
Hi gang, Robert Kieffer here. John has summarized things nicely, but let me provide a bit of additional context.

I raised this issue with John while implementing an auto-suggest feature for motor delays in an app I'm building. Briefly, the idea is that after a user selects a motor, they are shown a list of the "official" delays available for that motor. E.g. If the user selects the "Estes C6", they would see delay options of 0, 3, 5, and 7 seconds. This is straight-forward for BP motors from Estes, obviously, but gets a little tricky for adjustable delays like those from Aerotech and Cesaroni where the options depend on the tool and method used to drill the motor. Hence the question(s) here. (For those interested, here's the Github issue where John and I have been discussing this.)

tfish wrote:


Both Aerotech and Cesaroni don't seem too concerned about this. I'm not saying it's not good advice but I can't find any verbiage about this on their websites, nor does there appear to be anything built into their tools to prevent this. E.g. You can use the Aerotech tool to remove up to 8 seconds from their "S" (6-sec) and "M" (10 sec) delay grains.

Similarly, Cesaroni's PRO-38 DAT tool allows for removing up to 9 seconds of delay from their 24mm-38mm motors, many of which ship with delays <= 12 seconds.

(Aside: Is this issue already taken into account in how delay grains are designed? If a delay grain breaks down under a certain length, doesn't that happen to all grains once they've burned down to that point?)

Do you know of an official source for this requirement?

mtnmanak wrote:


The goal here is to reflect the delays that are achievable with the official delay grains and delay drilling tools available. While it may not make sense to remove 8 seconds from an Aerotech "S" (6 sec) delay grain, there's nothing to prevent you from doing that. (Whether it's wise to do so isn't an issue the thrustcurve DB should be concerned with, IMHO. John may feel differently, however.)



I will reluctantly point out that with core-burning motors you can actually have negative delay values. (The delay grain starts burning at motor ignition but delay times measured from motor burn out. BTW, someone should correct me if my understanding of how this works is incorrect.)

E.g. if you have a motor with a 4 second burn and a 6 second delay time, the delay grain actually burns for 10 seconds starting from motor ignition. If you shorten that grain by 8 seconds, you aren't actually drilling all the way through it. You're just setting it to burn through 2 seconds before motor burn out, resulting in an effective delay of -2 seconds.

... but I say "reluctantly" because the I don't know of any use cases where this worth considering. Hence, my suggestion is that delay times should always be >= 0 in the TC db.

dhbarr wrote:


I believe this is correct. I think John my have fumble-fingered that.
First post and you tell us you are building an app! That is great to hear, I am looking forward to the results. Based on your description, I do think you'd want to set some lower bound for drilled delays, if nothing else just to reduce confusion among users. As far as I know, 4 seconds is the shortest delay with fixed delay mid and high power motors, but you are correct in that there is nothing to prevent the user from drilling a shorter delay. About the only kind of rocket where a shorter delay might be applicable would be an odd-roc like a pyramid where motor burnout and apogee are pretty close together. But in that case nearly every one I've seen fly uses electronic deployment when a chute is required.

I really like the idea of an app helping with delay selection. For a lot of new flyers, choosing the right delay can be confusing depending on how they sim their rocket. As an RSO, an app that is quick and easy to use for something like that would be a huge benefit.


Tony
 
Both Aerotech and Cesaroni don't seem too concerned about this. I'm not saying it's not good advice but I can't find any verbiage about this on their websites, nor does there appear to be anything built into their tools to prevent this.
I can’t speak for CTI, but the AT instructions for 29-54mm DMS motors specifically say not to drill to a delay of less than 6 seconds. See instruction 1.2. http://www.aerotech-rocketry.com/up...2_29-54mm DMS Instructions 12-29-15 Small.pdf
 
Am I wrong in thinking that AT delays are all long now, to be shortened by the user?
All reloads and DMS motors are now listed with the longest delay and adjustable (10A to 14A) but the LMS and SU motors are still sold with 3 delay options that are non-adjustable (4,7,10 is normal)

AT, CTI and Loki adjustable delays have a minimum allowable delay. For AT it is 4 seconds. You can physically trim it shorter than 4sec but it will most likely cause motor failure and if it can be shown you used a delay shorter than 4sec, they coukd deny warranty replacement.

Also keep in mind that NFPA allows a wide variance in delay times of (from memory) +/- 2 seconds or 20% of total delay.
 
Yes, I think an end mill would work well for this. Also, I don't think there is anything that says the hole needs to be 1/4" either. The important part is the depth. I can't see a reason why a 1/8" hole wouldn't work, for example. A narrower hole would reduce the likelihood of a premature burn-through, in theory.

Not sure if any of this discussion helps John in what he is trying to model, but it is something I will probably tryout one of these days when I have nothing better to do :)

Correct, you can use an 1/8" bit with equivalent results.


Am I wrong in thinking that AT delays are all long now, to be shortened by the user?

I believe that is true, except for the hobbyline 18/24/29mm RMS cases which are selectable (and adjustable) delay.
 
Robert Kieffer suggested some ways to improve the delay listings in ThrustCurve.org, but to do so we need to know exactly what the delay adjusting tools from AeroTech and CTI do. Here is our understanding; please post if anything is wrong.

CTI
  • 24, 29 & 38mm: the PRO-38 DAT allows for removing 3, 5, 7, and 9 seconds of delay
  • 54mm: the PRO-54 DAT allows for removing up to 10s
  • motors with the "-nA" suffix can be adjusted
  • for example "G80-14A" delays are "5,7,9,11,14"
AeroTech
  • "L" is 14s
  • "M" is 10s
  • "S" is 6s
  • the Delay Drilling Tool(s) can remove 2, 4, 6, or 8s
  • delays cannot be reduced to less than 4s
  • for example "L" is effectively "6,8,10,12,14"
I use AT DMS motors a lot. I do not limit myself to the 2 second reduction ladder provided by the stock tool. I cut 3 brass shims that together equal 1 one second delay, so I can reduce any DMS motor in one second increments down to the minimum allowed. I got tired of having Rocksim tell me I needed an X second delay that I couldn't adjust to.
 
So it sounds like the only open question is the minimum official delay one can trim down to.
For AT, I've seen 4s and 6s quoted and there seems to be no official minimum for CTI.

Note that for ThrustCurve.org, this will just be used to fix the list of delays available; it won't really change any behavior of the site since the motor guide only simulates to apogee. (Like other sim programs, it lists the optimal delay time.)
The idea is that a list of achievable values will be more useful than something like "S,M,L" which is what's there now.

A regularized list of delay values is also more useful for programs which consume the data from ThrustCurve.org, since they don't need separate knowledge. And of course cleaning up data is always useful.
 
For CTI (and Loki) the Pro29/Pro38 DAT can take -3 -5 -7 -9 as options. So take the default certied delay, apply those options and you have your range of possibilities. The DAT for 24mm and 54mm should list the delay options for those motor sizes.

For CTI in 29mm and 38mm, are there certified motors with shorter than 13s default delay? I can't think of any. I wish I knew of a guy with a big searchable database of all the motors....
 
For CTI (and Loki) the Pro29/Pro38 DAT can take -3 -5 -7 -9 as options. So take the default certied delay, apply those options and you have your range of possibilities. The DAT for 24mm and 54mm should list the delay options for those motor sizes.
The DAT for 24mm is the 29/38mm tool with a different adapter.

For CTI in 29mm and 38mm, are there certified motors with shorter than 13s default delay?

Ironically the Mellow loads have relatively short delays. For example: 143G33-9A and 395I55-9A
 
I tried drilling an AT DMS down to 4 seconds once. The ejection charge fired while still under thrust. One of our more experienced members told me that going that low was tricky.
 
The delay question for AT (can you go to/below 4 seconds?) should be posted on the Aerotech Open thread. Gary is pretty good at answering questions there in a timely manner.
 
Also, how long is an AT "X" HPR delay? e.g. j460t-x, j800t-x, k1100t-x

Note also that there are some published -3's: AT e11-3j, f12-3j.

Further, CTI PRO29 DAT table shows 11A-9=2, and indeed we do find [ as CC & BEC mention above ] e.g. 73F30-6A, 41F36-11A, 84G88-11A, 268H140-11A

And finally there's 186H42-10A & 465I150-11A which ... show a 1s configuration, so I think I'll go have a bit of a lie down.

Turns out the 4s rule of thumb isn't as universal as I thought, and this thread has been hugely informative to me.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Back
Top