Hybrids 2024

Onebadhawk
Advertise with us
Wildman Rocketry
The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
DRAGON64

DRAGON64

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Jan 17, 2009
Messages
5,209
Reaction score
2,752
Location
Toney, AL
Keeping hybrid propulsion topics active is what we do...

Previous Threads:

Hybrids 2015
Hybrids 2016
Hybrids 2017
Hybrids 2018
Hybrids 2019
Hybrids 2020
Hybrids 2021
Hybrids 2022
Hybrids 2023

Here we begin another year on the topic of hybrid propulsion and all activities associated with the topic...why? Especially with interest nearly non-existent? Because 2024 marks the 15th anniversary of the NAR & TRA winning the lawsuit against the ATF, where-by removing APCP from the explosives list. This is the proverbial line in the sand, marking the time which we begin to see the decline of hobby based hybrids. Why you say? Because, of the 4 or 5 manufacturers that supplied our hobby, there is one left. One who still believes, and is trying to support us, and provide new hybrids for the small market. I am referring to Contrail Rockets.

It would seem that hybrids may still be thriving in the research world too, rather than the commercial hobby industry. So, if you are indeed researching hybrids and or tri-brids, please post up the research in the proper research forum. But be sure to share your videos and flights here in the Hybrids forum. So, without further ado:

Another flying season gone-by, and a new one is just ramping up... what are your goals for flying hybrids during the 2022 flying season? Anything and everything hybrid related is welcome!

* Motors
* Vehicles
* Ground Support (GSE)
* Research motors discussion (within the limits of a non-research forum)
* Electronics
*Altimeters; Vent sensors; GPS etc etc
* Commercial/Professional advancement hybrid discussion
* College development (i.e. TUDelft etc etc)
* Events/Launch coverage
* New flyer questions
 
I have been in-active for most of 2023 with anything rocketry related. A friend and hybrid enthusiast @maddmaxx11 and I got together a couple times to test some 3D printed 29mm motors on my newly revamped GSE, and that is about it. I did attend a local launch to help my friend fly the first hybrid launched in Alabama in nearly 15-years, but winds prevailed and no joy.

Since that launch, my life has taken an unexpected turn, as I was diagnosed with stage 3 esophageal cancer, and have been at MD Anderson in Houston, TX ever since going through chemo/radiation treatment. This life changing event has given me a reason to reflect on just what I hope to achieve in the realm of hybrid rocketry:

With the full wireless upgrade done on my GSE, there is now nothing left to do but load up on nitrous, and get back to testing. Last year I bought a number of research motors and loads from @ContrailRockets and my friend @maddmaxx11 and I need to test some of these unique 54mm loads from @ContrailRockets

I also have a couple rockets already completed to fly in the new season of 2024. Unfortunately, I will not be ready to fly at the end of the local clubs flying season, as I will be having surgery in the next 3-months to remove the cancer which I am curranty under treatment for.
 
DRAGON64 said:
I have been in-active for most of 2023 with anything rocketry related. A friend and hybrid enthusiast @maddmaxx11 and I got together a couple times to test some 3D printed 29mm motors on my newly revamped GSE, and that is about it. I did attend a local launch to help my friend fly the first hybrid launched in Alabama in nearly 15-years, but winds prevailed and no joy.

Since that launch, my life has taken an unexpected turn, as I was diagnosed with stage 3 esophageal cancer, and have been at MD Anderson in Houston, TX ever since going through chemo/radiation treatment. This life changing event has given me a reason to reflect on just what I hope to achieve in the realm of hybrid rocketry:

With the full wireless upgrade done on my GSE, there is now nothing left to do but load up on nitrous, and get back to testing. Last year I bought a number of research motors and loads from @ContrailRockets and my friend @maddmaxx11 and I need to test some of these unique 54mm loads from @ContrailRockets

I also have a couple rockets already completed to fly in the new season of 2024. Unfortunately, I will not be ready to fly at the end of the local clubs flying season, as I will be having surgery in the next 3-months to remove the cancer which I am curranty under treatment for.
Click to expand...
Prayers are with you.
Here is a sneak peek at some new solenoid valves that will be on the Contrail Rockets website.
DRAGON64 said:
I have been in-active for most of 2023 with anything rocketry related. A friend and hybrid enthusiast @maddmaxx11 and I got together a couple times to test some 3D printed 29mm motors on my newly revamped GSE, and that is about it. I did attend a local launch to help my friend fly the first hybrid launched in Alabama in nearly 15-years, but winds prevailed and no joy.

Since that launch, my life has taken an unexpected turn, as I was diagnosed with stage 3 esophageal cancer, and have been at MD Anderson in Houston, TX ever since going through chemo/radiation treatment. This life changing event has given me a reason to reflect on just what I hope to achieve in the realm of hybrid rocketry:

With the full wireless upgrade done on my GSE, there is now nothing left to do but load up on nitrous, and get back to testing. Last year I bought a number of research motors and loads from @ContrailRockets and my friend @maddmaxx11 and I need to test some of these unique 54mm loads from @ContrailRockets

I also have a couple rockets already completed to fly in the new season of 2024. Unfortunately, I will not be ready to fly at the end of the local clubs flying season, as I will be having surgery in the next 3-months to remove the cancer which I am curranty under treatment
Click to expand...
 
Contrail Rockets
New line of high flow and low cost
Nitrous Oxide Solenoid Valves.
2 inch NPT
1 inch NPT
3/4 inch NPT
1/2 inch NPT
3/8 inch NPT
1/4 inch NPT
All are Nitrous Oxide compatible and rated at 30 Bar and operate at 12 volts with a continuous duty cycle.
 
Last edited:
cfb_rolley said:
Very nice - I'm assuming you meant 300 bar pressure rating not 30 though? any idea when these will be available and if there will be an option to buy them as part of a fill/dump manifold?
Click to expand...
We are trying to keep the cost down by selling raw valves.
We can look at manifold systems as well.
 
ContrailRockets said:
View attachment 622424
Contrail Rockets
New line of high flow and low cost
Nitrous Oxide Solenoid Valves.
2 inch NPT
1 inch NPT
3/4 inch NPT
1/2 inch NPT
3/8 inch NPT
1/4 inch NPT
All are Nitrous Oxide compatible and rated at 30 Bar and operate at 12 volts with a continuous duty cycle.
Click to expand...
You should put a link to your website in your signature.....
 
Very good prices for orifice size. What connecting hose ID for inlet and exit would you suggest?
For example the 1/2" NPT one.
Would it also be possible to have the orifice diameter on the graphs.
 
OzHybrid said:
Very good prices for orifice size. What connecting hose ID for inlet and exit would you suggest?
For example the 1/2" NPT one.
Would it also be possible to have the orifice diameter on the graphs.
Click to expand...
The graph shows the orifice size so the 1/2 inch NPT also has a 1/2 inch orifice. A 8AN braided stainless steel line has a 1/2 inch ID. The only valve with a different orifice size from the pipe size is the 1/8 inch orifice with 1/4 inch NPT.

The website graph shows orifice not pipe size.

So the 2 inch valve has an orifice area of 3.14 square inches.
Tom
 
Last edited:
ContrailRockets said:
The graph shows the orifice size so the 1/2 inch NPT also has a 1/2 inch orifice. A 8AN braided stainless steel line has a 1/2 inch ID. The only valve with a different orifice size from the pipe size is the 1/8 inch orifice with 1/4 inch NPT.

The website graph shows orifice not pipe size.

So the 2 inch valve has an orifice area of 3.14 square inches.
Tom
Click to expand...
can you do cheap shipping to Australia? Not worried about how long it takes, just cost.... 3/8 bore.
And the divisions on the graph for orifice area are in 11 ths.... :). I checked 3 times.....
 
Last edited:
DRAGON64 said:
Since that launch, my life has taken an unexpected turn, as I was diagnosed with stage 3 esophageal cancer, and have been at MD Anderson in Houston, TX ever since going through chemo/radiation treatment. This life changing event has given me a reason to reflect on just what I hope to achieve in the realm of hybrid rocketry:
I will be having surgery in the next 3-months to remove the cancer which I am curranty under treatment for.
Click to expand...
Hope it's a successful surgery.
 
OzHybrid said:
You don't need any bigger than the inside diameter of the fill hose.....However, you can use bigger......
Click to expand...
We assume that the 1/8 fill and 1/8 purge or 3/8 fill and 1/8 purge will be the most common manifold systems requested.
OzHybrid said:
can you do cheap shipping to Australia? Not worried about how long it takes, just cost.... 3/8 bore.
And the divisions on the graph for orifice area are in 11 ths.... :). I checked 3 times.....
Click to expand...
The 3/8 inch orifice has an area of about .11 square inches. I double checked Peter’s math. A 1/2 inch OD fill line has a 3/8 ID so unless you’re going to have multiple injectors acting as fill lines the 3/8 orifice valve should work. That being said if you have six 50 pound aluminum tanks with the high flow valve and a motor with six 1/2 inch fill lines coming from six 1/2 inch injectors that have six four stage ziggurats inside the flight tank you may be looking at a King Kong 1 inch fill valve. Its orifice area is.785 square inches and the six fill lines area is .66 square inches.

As for the Big Honking Valve with an orifice area of 3.14+ square inches that is for something even bigger.
 
ContrailRockets said:
We assume that the 1/8 fill and 1/8 purge or 3/8 fill and 1/8 purge will be the most common manifold systems requested.

The 3/8 inch orifice has an area of about .11 square inches. I double checked Peter’s math. A 1/2 inch OD fill line has a 3/8 ID so unless you’re going to have multiple injectors acting as fill lines the 3/8 orifice valve should work. That being said if you have six 50 pound aluminum tanks with the high flow valve and a motor with six 1/2 inch fill lines coming from six 1/2 inch injectors that have six four stage ziggurats inside the flight tank you may be looking at a King Kong 1 inch fill valve. Its orifice area is.785 square inches and the six fill lines area is .66 square inches.

As for the Big Honking Valve with an orifice area of 3.14+ square inches that is for something even bigger.
Click to expand...
@maddmaxx11

The fill hose is supplied by the manufacturer and generally goes through the main injector. That limits the diameter of the fill hose. Therefore for that motor, there is no REQUIREMENT to have a valve with an orifice larger than the fill hose bore. Additionally, some valves may REQUIRE a pressure differential to operate fully. The pressure differential required for these valves to operate has not been specified.
The new valves look like they are pilot driven valves which generally require a slightly higher pressure differential. I would expect the differential required would be around 1 bar, 15psi. One of the things to be aware of for pilot driven valves is the turn off time. It can be significant. Maybe 1 sec in the wrong circumstances. That all said, they're a great price for a large bore valve and I'm buying one.....


The Contrail 54mm has a 1/4 OD fill hose ID 0.170" Or if you are actually using the high-pressure tube it's 0.150" bore. The 1/8", 0.125" orifice valve will fill it in a reasonable time, and would be adequate. But the 1/4" orifice should be slightly faster if it doesn't require a pressure differential, and might be a better match to the slightly larger bore( not by much) The 3/8" should work but is unnecessary unless you intend to fly larger motors. It would be a good choice for a reasonable speed fill in up to an N size motor. Above that, you are in a zone where if you're playing there, you should already know the answer to what fill hose size you need.
If you go to the west coast hybrids site using the Wayback Machine there are some typical fill times for their replacement orifices.

Replacement Solenoids & Bits

Oxygen Solenoid 39.00
Small .046 orifice dump only 79.00
Medium .078 Fill & Dump up to a K motor 99.00
Large .093 Fill M motors in under two minutes 129.00
XLarge .120 Fill M motors in under a minute 159.00

So in short, you can use a valve larger than the bore of the fill tube if the valve type does not require a pressure differential to operate, but they become more expensive.
The 1/8" vent line mentioned by you, is the OD of the line used, not the bore of the tube or the size of the restrictor orifice. The actual vent restrictor has a much smaller orifice size to limit the amount vented and maintain the tank pressure. There is no actual size specified in the Contrail 54mm manual.

For my RattWorks M900 the vent orifice is something like 0.5mm dia. So it's tiny. ( I'm in the UK at present and might be slightly wrong on the vent restrictor size, but not very wrong...:) )

I note ,Tom, that you're talking about a manifold system including vent tube as part of that. I assume you close off fill and vent at the end of fill to allow the pressure to build back up. I've not done that before. Is that the idea?
 
Last edited:
Hybrids are fascinating but seem to be becoming less and less common at launches,
 
cwbullet said:
Hybrids are fascinating but seem to be becoming less and less common at launches,
Click to expand...
I think the biggest factor is the lack of club-owned/maintained GSE. During the ATF fiasco it was common for either a club or a member of a club to have hybrid GSE to lend out to members in the same way they have club-owned solid GSE now, but once APCP was readily available again people just stopped using hybrids. Hybrid GSE is without a doubt the biggest bottleneck to getting started, it's expensive to buy a ready made system and difficult to successfully design and build your own (plus R&D costs may exceed that of just buying the ready made system). On my end I've seen a lot more interest in hybrid flights from people I've spoken with, but when you not only have to buy the motor and nitrous oxide but also a launch controller that may run close to $1000, it's a difficult leap to make if you aren't 100% sure you're going to be flying a lot of hybrids. Seems Tom is making progress on the cost side of things with his new valves, so hopefully the cost-of-entry will drop to a point more people can get into hybrids.
 
Are there any tried-and-true GSE designs out there? I would love to eventually build my own.
 
Don't know of any open source hybrid GSE (at least not well documented GSE), but could probably do something along the lines of what Half-Cat does for their liquids. As for off-the-shelf, Wilson FX has a wireless launch controller specifically for hybrids for like $750 ish last I checked. I've been working intermittently on a relay control board that can just be plugged into an Arduino and an XBee radio for the last couple years.
 
drewnickel said:
Don't know of any open source hybrid GSE (at least not well documented GSE), but could probably do something along the lines of what Half-Cat does for their liquids. As for off-the-shelf, Wilson FX has a wireless launch controller specifically for hybrids for like $750 ish last I checked. I've been working intermittently on a relay control board that can just be plugged into an Arduino and an XBee radio for the last couple years.
Click to expand...
I’ll vouch for the Wilson F/X setup. I bought one about a year or so ago and I’d recommend the wireless version without question. If you can spare the extra $250 I would also suggest to get the pelican case version. It totally protects the switches from incidental damage and moisture once closed and latched.

One other cost to consider when getting started would be your nitrous tanks. Much cheaper to buy several smaller tanks and transfer the product so you don’t get constant rental charges for the big bottle.
 
OzHybrid said:
@maddmaxx11

The fill hose is supplied by the manufacturer and generally goes through the main injector. That limits the diameter of the fill hose. Therefore for that motor, there is no REQUIREMENT to have a valve with an orifice larger than the fill hose bore. Additionally, some valves may REQUIRE a pressure differential to operate fully. The pressure differential required for these valves to operate has not been specified.
The new valves look like they are pilot driven valves which generally require a slightly higher pressure differential. I would expect the differential required would be around 1 bar, 15psi. One of the things to be aware of for pilot driven valves is the turn off time. It can be significant. Maybe 1 sec in the wrong circumstances. That all said, they're a great price for a large bore valve and I'm buying one.....


The Contrail 54mm has a 1/4 OD fill hose ID 0.170" Or if you are actually using the high-pressure tube it's 0.150" bore. The 1/8", 0.125" orifice valve will fill it in a reasonable time, and would be adequate. But the 1/4" orifice should be slightly faster if it doesn't require a pressure differential, and might be a better match to the slightly larger bore( not by much) The 3/8" should work but is unnecessary unless you intend to fly larger motors. It would be a good choice for a reasonable speed fill in up to an N size motor. Above that, you are in a zone where if you're playing there, you should already know the answer to what fill hose size you need.
If you go to the west coast hybrids site using the Wayback Machine there are some typical fill times for their replacement orifices.

Replacement Solenoids & Bits

Oxygen Solenoid 39.00
Small .046 orifice dump only 79.00
Medium .078 Fill & Dump up to a K motor 99.00
Large .093 Fill M motors in under two minutes 129.00
XLarge .120 Fill M motors in under a minute 159.00

So in short, you can use a valve larger than the bore of the fill tube if the valve type does not require a pressure differential to operate, but they become more expensive.
The 1/8" vent line mentioned by you, is the OD of the line used, not the bore of the tube or the size of the restrictor orifice. The actual vent restrictor has a much smaller orifice size to limit the amount vented and maintain the tank pressure. There is no actual size specified in the Contrail 54mm manual.

For my RattWorks M900 the vent orifice is something like 0.5mm dia. So it's tiny. ( I'm in the UK at present and might be slightly wrong on the vent restrictor size, but not very wrong...:) )

I note ,Tom, that you're talking about a manifold system including vent tube as part of that. I assume you close off fill and vent at the end of fill to allow the pressure to build back up. I've not done that before. Is that the idea?
Click to expand...
On my L-3 I used a 1/8 solenoid on the vent line allowing both the fill and vent to be opened simultaneously. When the fill was closed so was the vent which also exits through the combustion chamber. In addition I had a small expansion chamber after the fill solenoid. This chamber was pressurized with gas only. Since Contrail Rockets mayors have limited utilage this chamber allowed for pressure increases due to Nitrous oxide expansion as the temperature increases sitting in an on pad hold condition.
Wilson FX has a wireless GSE that can communicate the supply cylinder pressure, the flight vehicle pressure and also the loaded weight of Nitrous Oxide. It’s overkill for most flyers but at Spaceport or FAR-Out under competition they can give your rocket and your team an extra opportunity to increase your rocket’s performance or dial in total thrust when competing for a specific altitude.

The vent fitting on the Contrail Rockets website has a .028 inch hole.

You are correct about the pilot operated valve during initial filling you have a massive pressure differential and if you had to purge you would have again a massive pressure differential. Where you could have an issue is if you filled and placed a rocket in a hold pattern allowing the flight tank and supply cylinder to both arrive at the same temperature. If at that time you waited to add additional nitrous oxide the valve may not open without a pressure differential. Having the old purge valve on the on pad hold would eliminate that potential problem or a short purge to create a differential. Another option is having a bottle heater on your supply cylinder. All of these scenarios would typically only seen in extremely large projects.
 
Troy3003 said:
I’ll vouch for the Wilson F/X setup. I bought one about a year or so ago and I’d recommend the wireless version without question. If you can spare the extra $250 I would also suggest to get the pelican case version. It totally protects the switches from incidental damage and moisture once closed and latched.

One other cost to consider when getting started would be your nitrous tanks. Much cheaper to buy several smaller tanks and transfer the product so you don’t get constant rental charges for the big bottle.
Click to expand...
I have 4 new 20 pound aluminum cylinders full of Nitrous Oxide with Standard CGA-660 valves and dip tubes. They are presently in Arizona. PM me if interested.
 
ContrailRockets said:
On my L-3 I used a 1/8 solenoid on the vent line allowing both the fill and vent to be opened simultaneously. When the fill was closed so was the vent which also exits through the combustion chamber. In addition I had a small expansion chamber after the fill solenoid. This chamber was pressurized with gas only. Since Contrail Rockets mayors have limited utilage this chamber allowed for pressure increases due to Nitrous oxide expansion as the temperature increases sitting in an on pad hold condition.
Wilson FX has a wireless GSE that can communicate the supply cylinder pressure, the flight vehicle pressure and also the loaded weight of Nitrous Oxide. It’s overkill for most flyers but at Spaceport or FAR-Out under competition they can give your rocket and your team an extra opportunity to increase your rocket’s performance or dial in total thrust when competing for a specific altitude.

The vent fitting on the Contrail Rockets website has a .028 inch hole.

You are correct about the pilot operated valve during initial filling you have a massive pressure differential and if you had to purge you would have again a massive pressure differential. Where you could have an issue is if you filled and placed a rocket in a hold pattern allowing the flight tank and supply cylinder to both arrive at the same temperature. If at that time you waited to add additional nitrous oxide the valve may not open without a pressure differential. Having the old purge valve on the on pad hold would eliminate that potential problem or a short purge to create a differential. Another option is having a bottle heater on your supply cylinder. All of these scenarios would typically only seen in extremely large projects.
Click to expand...
The other scenario with the piloted valves that I've seen with water, is that they won't turn off unless there is a pressure differential.
It would be good to supply some practical operational information for them to make sure no-one discovers that for themselves the hard way using nitrous
Even with their limitations, these are large bore high pressure valves at very good prices. Thanks for stocking them.
 

Similar threads

DRAGON64
Hybrids 2023
4 5 6
Replies
178
Views
10K
G_T
G
DRAGON64
Hybrids 2022
4 5 6
Replies
158
Views
13K
DRAGON64
DRAGON64
DRAGON64
Hybrids 2021
5 6 7
Replies
193
Views
18K
DRAGON64
DRAGON64
Tractionengines
MTMA (NAR # 606) info and 2024 schedule. Aurora, OH
Replies
8
Views
315
Tractionengines
Tractionengines
GuyNoir
Northern Illinois Rocketry Conference 2024 (NIRCON 2024)
Replies
0
Views
197
GuyNoir
GuyNoir

Latest posts

Back
Top