Testing the Peregrine CO2 ejection System...

[Cameron Tinder]

Been a bit distracted lately...building another rocket. Designed in RockSim, everything built from scratch. 4.3" airframe, 57 inches tall and just under 5 lbs without a motor. Tested it today with a Peregrine CO2 ejection system fitted with a 12gm CO2 ctg. The test went as expected ejecting the nosecone with a good amount of force.

This test was noteworthy for several reasons:

1) The Peregrine that was tested is a prototype of the soon to be introduced "Improved Peregrine" CO2 ejection device where ALL burning particles are contained inside the device and are not released until long after the small amount of pyro burns out and/or is extinguished by the CO2 gasses. Normally and with other CO2 ejection systems (The Eagle seems to be the exception to this), a small amount of still burning pyro particles are ejected for a brief moment until the CO2 can extinguish them.

2) As with the Eagle CO2 ejection system, the Peregrine CO2 ejection system is mounted almost completely inside the avionics bay.

3) As with the Eagle CO2 ejection system, ALL GASSES ARE COMPLETELY SEALED FROM ENTERING THE AVIONICS BAY!

4) The Peregrine CO2 ejection system has no wires that breach the bulkhead into the parachute bay!

5) After two tests, the parachute bay is still CLEAN!

As expected, the Peregrine ejected the nose cone well and ALL gasses were completely sealed from the av-bay.

Please note that the Improved Peregrine is in production now, but I don't expect to have them done at least until the end of August or even into September if I keep getting distracted!

View attachment 12gm Peregrine Test.MOV

 

[WillMarchant]

Sounds good. Is there an upgrade path for “legacy” Peregrine owners?

 

[Cameron Tinder]

Sounds good. Is there an upgrade path for “legacy” Peregrine owners?

Hi Will,
I will figure something out... The differences are not easily noticeable. The threads on the housing and caps are different (finer threads) and there is one internal component that seals the burning gasses. Replacing the housings and the mounting caps would be expensive (and not necessary), the internal alignment seal is not. I might just make a run of alignment seals (To replace existing Alignment collars) just for the older Peregrines that would contain the burning pyro particles as in the improved Peregrines.

Regards,
Cameron

 

[bad_idea]

How does the Peregrine compare to the Eagle in terms of size and mass?

 

[Cameron Tinder]

How does the Peregrine compare to the Eagle in terms of size and mass?

The Peregrine CO2 ejection system was designed specifically so that you can use the very common and inexpensive 8 & 12gm CO2 ctgs that you can find locally. The Eagle was designed to use MUCH larger CO2 ctgs, though you can find threaded 8 & 12 gm ctgs, but they are neither common nor inexpensive compared to the non-threaded ctgs.

The OAL of the Peregrine fitted with a 12gm ctg is about 4-3/4". The Eagle fitted with a 16gm ctg is about 5-1/2" OAL. The Eagle can accept CO2 ctgs from 8-85 grams.

The Peregrine fitted with a 12gm ctg is about 5oz where the Eagle fitted with a 16gm ctg is about 6-1/2 oz.

The biggest upside to both of these two CO2 ejection systems is that they can safely co-exist almost completely inside the av-bay and along side the altimeters with only the flanges protruding into the parachute bay.

The below picture was snapped just prior to installing the nosecone for this test...

 

[bad_idea]

Thanks. I have an Eagle set I'd planned to use for larger rockets. Sounds like maybe I should pick up a Peregrine too when the new version is out.