PML Intellicone

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

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

ultrasonicTim

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
409
Reaction score
0
Anyone ever use a PML Intellicone before? Looking for Pro's and Con's of this approach. I am contemplating "rebuilding" my PML Explorer (2.56" diam body tube QT). It suffered a pretty nasty ballistic recovery from about 2000ft this past Sunday :(. If I can extract the motor mount and fins (I think this should be possible) from the remaining body tube, I will buy a new body tube and nose cone and get back into business. I have used a PerfectFlite microtimer in a 35mm film canister strapped to the shock cord when I fly the G61 ans G67 reloads. I thought the Intellicone might be a better solution. Thanks for any comments.

Tim
 
What is the purpose of the timer? I have never used one, but hear they are nice. Was thinking about using one to put a timer in a small rockets nose cone, for electronic deployment (EX motors).
 
The standard Aerotech delay for the G61 and G67 reloads are about 10 seconds long. About 3-4 seconds too long for a 2lb rocket on those motors. I use the timer to fire an ematch and deployment charge timed about 8 seconds from liftoff detection (uses integrated G-switch). The motor ejection charge is used as a backup. I thought I might also try to use the timer to do airstarts for other rockets when I'm ready to take that on - not quite there yet.

I also wondered if it would be reasonable to use an altimeter in the Intellicone to do dual deployment with a tether. I am concerned about having the altimeter inside the nose cone. I understand that ports for altimeters should normally be a few calibers away from the nosecone and tail for optimal performance.
 
Having a barometric based alt in the nose is not possible, only an acceleromic can be used. That means dual deploy is not possible (main charge must be fired using barometric pressure data, not acceleration), plus the tether is usually in the bottom of the rocket, not on the cone, but I am be wrong. It really depends on the setup. First of all, I wouldnt use the motor as backup, a lot of times it fires early or late. It might fire before the timer (and before apogee) and that is even a bigger problem. I would recommend that you either do just the timer, or just the motor. For a MPR, and even most HPR rockets, a 1-2 second "delay" from the motor ejection to apogee isnt a big problem. If I really needed apogee deployment (like when flying EX, plugged, motors) I would use a MAD (magnetic apogee detector) to deploy the chute. It gets perfect apogee every time, a timer is still guessing. The MAD can be purchased at aeroconsystems.com, $30 for a kit and $60 for a tested pre-built unit. The only way I have heard of it failing is if the rocket doesnt go horizantal at apogee. Most rockets dont comeo down in a flat spin, let alone a tail slide, they arch over and come in ballistic. The only failure I know of used a MAD in a booster of a 2 stage rocket. It tumbled and never turned over.

Be careful not to have to much metal near the MAD, it could trigger it.
 
Thanks for suggesting the MAD. I have read about them but I sort of forgot about it until you suggested it. It would seem to be safer if there is a motor problem when trying to use a timer. It would certainly be a bit more adaptable.

I was considering using the burrito method to hold the main which would be near the cone until the rocket gets closer to the ground. If it's a bad idea to use barometric deployment near the cone (which I suspected it would be), then I'm not sure if I will try the intellicone with dual deploy.

I only use the timer if I'm sure the motor delay will be quite late. If the motor delay is close then I always stick with just the motor delay or if the motor delay is going to be early then I only use the timer (I did this for the I218 motor in my Explorer).
 
Why don't you just drill the delay? It's not too hard, as long as you're careful. As to using the Intellicone, I am of no use there.
Reed
 
There was a little miss-information given by a young "veteran member."

Use an altimeter that uses acceleration for apogee and barometric for mains.

Just be sure NOT to use a baro-type for apogee.
Baro for the main deploy in a dual-deploy is fine.

After that...it's all up to how you pack the stuff into the cone....they are not that big.

If you manage to squeeze a tether in there....post pictures and brag!
 
Fred, that is correct, I wasnt thinking about the fact that the rocket will be traveling at low speed (and in a less uniform speed) after drogue deploy, and nose cone vents will be fine. Just be sure to go with a G wiz, or similar unit. I would say, early deployment is not that much worse then late. And with MPR and small HPR it isnt going to damage anything unless it is really late. I have some rockets that seem to hang in mid air with a late delay. One flew on a small I motor to under 750', and I was worried about deployment but on higher altitude flights it didnt come down very fast before deployment. It actually seemed to come down without spinning, or going nose first for about 3 seconds. While Fred was correct, I was wrong about the dual deploy, I believe a MAD would be a much safer device with a motor failure. If the motor fails and the rocket starts heading towards the crowd, the timer may go off to late. With the MAD, if the rocket were to have a CATO and go near the crowd, most likely the chute would come out. Also, if the rocket shreded the chute would probably be ejected and shredded as well, but it is better to have a rocket under thrust flayling around with the harness out, then a fully stable "dart" under power. This saftey has been used on large rockets. A RC deployment system is added as a back-up saftey system. It can eject the main parachute in the case of an alt failure, or if something goes wrong on the up part, it can eject the chute and let the motor whip the rocket around the same area. Instead of it plowing into a SUV filled with young children.

While there was no way to prevent it, I have a real life event that shows how dangerous a high velocity part of a rocket is (compared to a fully ejected rocket under thrust). A large rocket launched on 4 L850W's shredded at around 500', a couple seconds after liftoff. As the centering ring failed, the rocket shreded into a thousand pieces (thrust of motors in tube was just to much). 2 motors stayed with the debris (large and falling slow, easy to get out of the way of) while one fell out in the field. The forth motor, as it burned out, plowed through a back window and through the front and embeded itself in the ground, after going throw a truck. Almost anyone could have walked out of the way of the large, slow falling parts of the rocket, but I was one car away when the rour of an L850 caught me off guard, and then some screams, yelling and a crash... no body was hurt, but if there was someone in that car... They wouldnt even know what hit them...
 
Originally posted by Reed Goodwin
Why don't you just drill the delay? It's not too hard, as long as you're careful. As to using the Intellicone, I am of no use there.
Reed

Someone at my club suggested drilling as well and yet another thought drilling the delay the amount I would need for the G61 and G67 would not be a good idea so I've stayed away from that. The timer is pretty simple to use and it has worked great for 6 flights now. How much is too much when it comes to drilling?
 
Originally posted by freda
There was a little miss-information given by a young "veteran member."

Use an altimeter that uses acceleration for apogee and barometric for mains.

Just be sure NOT to use a baro-type for apogee.
Baro for the main deploy in a dual-deploy is fine.

After that...it's all up to how you pack the stuff into the cone....they are not that big.

If you manage to squeeze a tether in there....post pictures and brag!

The size of the space in that cone does seem pretty limiting. It might be OK for my little timer but I'm not sure about the various "suitable" altimeters. I was looking into the G-Wiz when building a more traditional e-bay for my Explorer but decided I couldn't fit that one in. I doubt it would fit in an Intellicone that size but I'll double check. Thanks!
 
Originally posted by ultrasonicTim
The standard Aerotech delay for the G61 and G67 reloads are about 10 seconds long. About 3-4 seconds too long for a 2lb rocket on those motors.

Isn't there an RDK kit for a shorted delay on those motors?
 
Originally posted by Loopy
Isn't there an RDK kit for a shorted delay on those motors?

Yes, I'm sure there is. But that means buying delays every time I want to fly those motors. I guess I thought over time, I would be ahead using a timer, and I can use the timer for other things.
 
Seems your cost estimates are a bit off if the electronics fail and the rocket prangs. The RDKs are three packs if I'm not mistaken, so you'd only be buying them every fourth launch.
 
Originally posted by Loopy
Seems your cost estimates are a bit off if the electronics fail and the rocket prangs. The RDKs are three packs if I'm not mistaken, so you'd only be buying them every fourth launch.

Thanks. You are correct in that I didn't realize they came in 3-packs.

I always use the medium delay motor charge as a backup in addition to the timer on the G reloads. The only instance I used timer only was when the motor delay was too short (I218R).
 
I've used an intellicone and quite like it.

I vent my electronics bay slightly differently though. As well as a hole in the nose straight through to the bay, I also have a hole from the bay to the main chute compartment. In this part of the BT I have another hole to the outside world more than 1 calibre from the nose.

I've not had a problem detecting apogee and the barometric readings seem to tie in with the accelerometer in the same way as 'conventional' e-bay setups.

The added bonus is that most times the nose is a waste of space. The intellicone design allows this to be used and puts the weight in the 'right' place.
 
Originally posted by init 6
I've used an intellicone and quite like it.

I vent my electronics bay slightly differently though. As well as a hole in the nose straight through to the bay, I also have a hole from the bay to the main chute compartment. In this part of the BT I have another hole to the outside world more than 1 calibre from the nose.

I've not had a problem detecting apogee and the barometric readings seem to tie in with the accelerometer in the same way as 'conventional' e-bay setups.

The added bonus is that most times the nose is a waste of space. The intellicone design allows this to be used and puts the weight in the 'right' place.

I thought about trying something like this as well. The only concern I had about this is that the ebay was exposed to the ejection charge through the hole to the main chute compartment. Doesn't this expose you electronics to all those nasty, corrosive gases from the ejection charge?
What electronics do you use in the Intellicone?
I am also concerned that if I don't have a payload bay and I tether (burrito) the parachute, will the motor ejection cause a false trigger with the electronics and deploy the parachute at apogee?

Thanks!
 
Originally posted by ultrasonicTim
I thought about trying something like this as well. The only concern I had about this is that the ebay was exposed to the ejection charge through the hole to the main chute compartment. Doesn't this expose you electronics to all those nasty, corrosive gases from the ejection charge?

Well spotted! I forgot that I have a bulkhead between the base of the cone and the 'chute section. That stops the gases from getting to the electronics. You do lose a bit of useful space, but the e-bay protrudes a bit from the bottom of the cone.


What electronics do you use in the Intellicone?
I used an RDAS and an ARTS. Loads of room in the 54mm tube.


I am also concerned that if I don't have a payload bay and I tether (burrito) the parachute, will the motor ejection cause a false trigger with the electronics and deploy the parachute at apogee?
My rocket was retrospectively designed for dual deploy using an ARRD. Starting from the top I have the intellicone then my payload bay. This has a bulkhead near the top that protects the electronics and holds the ARRD. The payload bay is connected to the booster section, which is a zipperless design. So, at apogee the main (accelerometer) charge splits the rocket and lets the drogue come out. At a preset altitude, the drogue (barometric) charge fires the ARRD and releases the main chute. The main shouldn't be affected by the motor ejection (is this a backup charge?).
I suppose everything is upside down compared to a normal tether/ARRD dual deploy system.

I'll dig out my rocksim file or take a few photos later if that will help.
 
Thanks! I think I understand what you have described, although it may be a little fuzzy. Pictures would be great if you can manage them. Thanks again.

Not sure if I will be able to take quite the same approach for my rebuild or not. It does sound interesting. I only have a 65mm diameter body tube so the Intellicone ebay for this rocket will probably be much smaller than yours? I'll definately give it a look.

Tim
 
Originally posted by init 6
I've used an intellicone and quite like it.

I vent my electronics bay slightly differently though. As well as a hole in the nose straight through to the bay, I also have a hole from the bay to the main chute compartment. In this part of the BT I have another hole to the outside world more than 1 calibre from the nose.

I've not had a problem detecting apogee and the barometric readings seem to tie in with the accelerometer in the same way as 'conventional' e-bay setups.

The added bonus is that most times the nose is a waste of space. The intellicone design allows this to be used and puts the weight in the 'right' place.

I am confused by the two vent holes in your design. Doesn't the hole in the nose cone make the altimeter susceptible to big pressure fluctuations regardless of the other hole downstream? Why bother with the hole in the nose at all?

I am building my own "intellicone" inside a Minnie Magg, so I find this discussion useful.

Thanks,

Ken
 
OK, my mistake. I re-read your post. There is only one hole to the outside. Air pressure is read from the hole, through the payload bay, then into the cone. Correct?

Ken
 
Originally posted by rocket72175
OK, my mistake. I re-read your post. There is only one hole to the outside. Air pressure is read from the hole, through the payload bay, then into the cone. Correct?

Ken

I intepreted it the same way you did.
 
Nothing wrong with your interpretation, I caused the confusion :)

Originally I had a hole straight through the body tube into the shoulder of the cone and into the e-bay. This was for the PML Aurora that the cone belonged too. I flew it a couple of times like this and had no issues, but they were fairly wimpy flights.

The dual deployment rocket was liable to reach mach so I wanted to get the vent hole as far back as possible hence the later design, venting into the body and out lower down. The bulkhead is placed 6.5" from the top end of the tube with the hole slightly above this. The nose is held in place with screws during the flight.



Mental note to self: go look at the rocket and don't rely on memory :)
 
Well, I have successfully removed the remaining body tube from the fins and motor mount of my crashed PML Explorer. I have since remounted the fins to the motor mount and I have ordered a new section of body tube and a new nose cone. I decided to keep the nose cone of the traditional type. I want to rebuild this as close as I can to original because it is my L1 rocket. Perhaps I will save the Intellicone for a scratch build rocket. Thanks for all your help.

Tim
 
A little late to the party, but yes, I've used the Intellicone. I'll have to give it praise for ingenuity, but that flimsy little cable has GOT to go!

It comes with a little bitty cable with little bitty clamps on either end of it... and those tiny clamps are supposed to hold the cone to the 54mm phenolic e-bay. Ridiculous.

I ended up scrapping the idea and using the tube for a short MMT in another rocket. The now-baseless nose cone provides me with extra space in which to store my parachute on my short, stumpy U.G.L.Y. rocket. It's only 29" long now (post-zipper) but I love flying it on the venerable I600R.

My take on it? Don't bother. It's an interesting idea, but unless you want to re-engineer the cable thing, find another way.
 
Thanks for the input Charlie. I thought I saw that cable in the cone documentation too and wondered what the purpose for it was.
 
Back
Top