If it is an igniter issue, it's almost certainly solvable.

Most likely it would be the lesser mass of burning material resulting
from a fancy match ignition vs a Quest type.

> Images/movie are now posted on the wiki,
> http://psas.pdx.edu/LV2cNoseconeSeperationRing/
> -d
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Thanks for using the list, but yeah, the attachments were too big. I
>> think there's a 5 MB limit. Send them to Dave, have him post them.
>> Nice job on the success, that's cool! I just can't believe it's the
>> igniter, but, still,  I look forward to the test that shows the igniter
>> has nothing to do with it :)
>> Andrew
>> I wrote:
>>> I sent this to the list, but I don't think it's going to go through.
>>> Maybe it's off line again? Sorry for the double sent, Dave, but I forgot
>>> to ask about drilling holes...
>>> ~D
>>> Well, we all know how I don't like to be on the critical path of this
>>> project for too long...   I machined a separation ring set, loaded it
>>> with powder and assembled it, then tested the ring this morning.
>>> Success.
>>> I'll attach photos, and hopefully Dave can upload the movie and the
>>> pics to the wiki.
>>> What's different that makes this one work?
>>> 1) Wider area for the gas to act on separating the ring. Note how the
>>> ring imparted enough energy to lift the nose cone 4+ inches.
>>> 2) Foam used to retain powder is less than 1/8" wide, and very
>>> light/spongy. Note burn marks all the way around the ring.
>>> 3) Quest ignitor (as used on all other successful separations... Hmmm...)
>>> More tests to come.
>>> Dave, we need more holes drilled. This one might be tough since it
>>> wont fit the jigs and the inside isn't exactly concentric.
>>> No, I did not hire someone to yank on the rope attached to the cone
>>> just to trick everyone into thinking this was successful! It's all real.

psas-airframe mailing list

Reply via email to