Yes. I completely agree. I think we found the "smoking gun".
Seriously, I really appreciate you all. I really was at a loss as to what had
happened until the possibility of voids and cracks was mentioned and I
remembered how tough this particular grain was to pour due to my "improvements".
Thank you once again
Tad
-----Original Message-----
From: Bdale Garbee <bdale@xxxxxxx>
To: dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <sugpro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Fri, Nov 20, 2020 10:10 pm
Subject: [sugpro] Re: Near cato...what happened?
"" <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Redacted sender "tadserralt" for
DMARC) writes:
This IMM method produced consistent Isp of 110 - 114. And therein
lies the rub. Because the batches are so intimately mixed, the end
product was not as viscous as I had obtained with the less mixed
batches and lower Isp. The finished product with the IMM was more like
soupy mashed potato. The point is that IT DID NOT POUR SO EASILY AND
I HAD TO SCOOP IT IN.
I think this really sets the grain up for possible and even
unavoidable voids or cracks.
