anyone know plans for a piston launcher?

[rocketsonly]

Hey, does anyone have pictures or plans for a piston launcher? Do piston launchers also work for larger rockets (3in +)?

 

[solrules]

Originally posted by rocketsonly
Do piston launchers also work for larger rockets (3in +)?

Not very much. They work well for small rockets with a low mass. The ignition gas that you trap is not enough to do anything for large models. For record breaker and light models, however, you can get a sagnificant increase in acceleration.

Plans are in The Handbook of Model Rocketry by Gary Steine (sorry if I murdered the name) I believe.

 

[Jacques]

Try this link:

https://www.wizvax.net/jvincent/RandD/fhp1/fhp1.html

Good luck!

 

[wyldbill]

Originally posted by rocketsonly
Do piston launchers also work for larger rockets (3in +)?

Originally posted by solrules
Not very much. They work well for small rockets with a low mass. The ignition gas that you trap is not enough to do anything for large models.

Oh I dunno, I've seen a bowling ball lofted off a piston launcher (recently...)

-bill

 

[solrules]

Originally posted by wyldbill
Oh I dunno, I've seen a bowling ball lofted off a piston launcher (recently...)

-bill

sure. But have they statisticly proven that it increases altitude? I would imaging the angle of attack for the rocket would make a much greater influence than the ignition gasses.

 

[wyldbill]

The question was:

Originally posted by rocketsonly
Do piston launchers also work for larger rockets (3in +)?

Just informing folks that the do indeed. As far as efficiency goes, there's no lugs, so less drag (and most BB lofters' configuration doesn't lend to tower lauching) so I'd say yeah, there's a good chance of better altitude. And the thing snapped off the pad. Quantifiable evidence? No, but qualitatively I'd say there's a very good chance the performance improved. (The flyer's flown the config several times in the effort to perfect it, and I find it hard to believe he's continuing the effort if he hasn't seen some positive results, but that's speculation on my part)
Is there quantitative proof that the performance degrades?

 

[solrules]

Originally posted by wyldbill
The question was: Just informing folks that the do indeed. As far as efficiency goes, there's no lugs, so less drag (and most BB lofters' configuration doesn't lend to tower lauching) so I'd say yeah, there's a good chance of better altitude. And the thing snapped off the pad. Quantifiable evidence? No, but qualitatively I'd say there's a very good chance the performance improved. (The flyer's flown the config several times in the effort to perfect it, and I find it hard to believe he's continuing the effort if he hasn't seen some positive results, but that's speculation on my part)
Is there quantitative proof that the performance degrades?

If anything, the performance would be better, in a perfect situation. It's just that with the time/money put into R&D of this launcher, you could put that much more time into the R&D of the lofter, use better materials, better epoxy, etc. AFAIK, many competition bowling bowl lofters use types of tower launcers. That much drag is pretty important (lugs/rail buttons also add to the asymetry of the rocket).

 

[Micromeister]

Heres a pic of some metal head 13 and 18mm pistons.