Anthony:
Good for you!
Bill
On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 6:27 PM Anthony Cesaroni <anthony@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Look for a patent application this spring that addresses the cartridge
loading issue in larger motors. We’re currently testing it in a 19 inch,
composite SRM.
Anthony J. Cesaroni
President/CEO
Cesaroni Technology/Cesaroni Aerospace
http://www.cesaronitech.com/
(941) 360-3100 x101 Sarasota
(905) 887-2370 x222 Toronto
*From:* arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> *On
Behalf Of *William Claybaugh
*Sent:* Friday, April 3, 2020 8:19 PM
*To:* arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Subject:* [AR] Re: Not Coronavirus
Anthony:
My conclusions as well, overwrapping insulation is much lower mass and not
prohibitively expensive at 6 inch diameter.
I am harder over about propellant cartridges: processing in the field is
far more complex and time consuming using cartridges than w/ a monolithic
cast.
Bill
On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 3:34 PM Anthony Cesaroni <anthony@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I’ve been advising many customers of this for years and it’s starting to
take. CF with integrated case insulation is generally more cost effective.
Alloy tubes much above 4”~5” become very expensive to keep within
tolerances, particularly, if it’s a cartridge loaded design. Cartridge
loaded motors above 6”~8” in anything are generally a headache in practice
as well. Gas paths and equalization pressure requirements go up
exponentially.
Anthony J. Cesaroni
President/CEO
Cesaroni Technology/Cesaroni Aerospace
http://www.cesaronitech.com/
(941) 360-3100 x101 Sarasota
(905) 887-2370 x222 Toronto
*From:* arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> *On
Behalf Of *William Claybaugh
*Sent:* Friday, April 3, 2020 2:18 PM
*To:* arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Subject:* [AR] Re: Not Coronavirus
Ken:
I’m inclined to simplicity: turning even a small aluminum tube on the
ID—which is the ideal answer since the insulation can go in the hollow—is
too expensive; that is a solution that calls for spin formed tubes. But
the cost of spin forming an aluminum tube is much greater than the cost of
doing the same thing using carbon fiber over insulation which also saves
far more weight than aluminum. The trade goes to CF over phenolic or EPDM.
I’m not a fan of magnesium (I watched Piers Courage burn to death at
Zandvoort in a magnesium fire). It really needs to be kept at room
temperature or lower; using it where it is fractions of an inch from 6000
degree F gases does not jump out at me as low risk.
The problem w/ snap rings is they force the wall to be heavy.
Bill
On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 11:55 AM roxanna Mason <rocketmaster.ken@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Bill, have you evaluated a snap ring instead of gang fastening?
I designed a 6" SCH 40 6061-T6 motor but turned down all but an inch at
each end where the snap rings are. The using a magnesium. bulkhead machined
out for lightening.
Ken
On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 7:32 AM William Claybaugh <wclaybaugh2@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Ken:
The “wagonwheel” you are seeing is the upper part of the forward bulkhead,
which is a flat plate facing the grain.
So long as I require a thick structure next to the tube (for o-rings) the
mass of this bulkhead is nearly identical to that of a semi-elliptical dome
while offering much simpler insulation of the bulkhead compared to a dome.
Bill
On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 1:12 AM ken mason <laserpro1234@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
At first glance it looked like a wagonwheel grain.
Fin and bulkhead attachment reminds me of Ray Goodson's nozzleless motors
with exception of 3 fins.
Post a flight video.
On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 10:07 PM Rick Wills <willsrw@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Bill
Nice lathe. Your shop looks much more organized then mine. Is that a
liquid or solid propelled?
Rick Wills
Huber Heights, Ohio
*From:* arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> *On
Behalf Of *William Claybaugh
*Sent:* Thursday, 2 April, 2020 8:59 PM
*To:* arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Subject:* [AR] Not Coronavirus