Quantcast

Statologger CF

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

kwrocket

Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2017
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Without sounding like a total noob, is there a correct "*** position for the Stratologger CF no reference in manual that I saw...second on a 7.5" diameter rocket the manual calls for (4) .50 static pressure sampling holes, that seems a bit excessive. My Perfectflight HiAlt only required (4) .250 holes on a 7.5" diameter ... Before I modify my bird, I want to make sure these concerns are correct....any experiences or suggestions?
THX
Ed
 

Earache

Active Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2014
Messages
35
Reaction score
9
THe StratologgerCF doesn't have a required orientation. It will work in any orientation. If using it for firing ejection charges, it should be in the electronics bay with either 3 or 4 vent holes and no others. As for the hole-size formula, I haven't tested anything above a 4" diameter payload bay, but the PerfectFlite formula works well for the smaller sizes. You could try Adept Rocketry's formula if you like the results better http://www.adeptrocketry.com/ALT1Rds.htm.
 

Spicer007

Senior Member
TRF Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Messages
177
Reaction score
2
Ed,

I fly with two 71/2" BlueTube av-bays with CF altimeters, on different rockets, a 14" long AB with (3) 1/4" static ports and an 18" AB with (3) 5/16" static ports. I don't believe (4) 1/2" static ports are needed. I've flown twelve flights on these rockets with good deployments.
 

Buckeye

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Sep 6, 2009
Messages
2,611
Reaction score
463
THe StratologgerCF doesn't have a required orientation. It will work in any orientation. If using it for firing ejection charges, it should be in the electronics bay with either 3 or 4 vent holes and no others. As for the hole-size formula, I haven't tested anything above a 4" diameter payload bay, but the PerfectFlite formula works well for the smaller sizes. You could try Adept Rocketry's formula if you like the results better http://www.adeptrocketry.com/ALT1Rds.htm.
Good info from Adapt, but this statement is a bit contradictory:

Keep hole sizes within +100% or -50% of the general guideline. Do not make the holes too small, and especially do not make them too large.

At least for apogee detection, the way the altimeter is programmed to determine apogee and when to fire the drogue charge may be more important than hole size details. Some add too much delay in my view. I think the Perfectflight MAWD (legacy product) was very good in this regard. I hope to have same success with the CF.
 

jeff2space

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2011
Messages
580
Reaction score
7
Location
Waterford, WI
Good info from Adapt, but this statement is a bit contradictory:

Keep hole sizes within +100% or -50% of the general guideline. Do not make the holes too small, and especially do not make them too large.
If guideline is 1/8":
Don't go larger than 1/8+1/8=1/4".
Don't go smaller than 1/8-1/16=1/16".
 
Top