Yeah sorry you guys can ostracize me if you want, but he did start off
answering a question that had nothing to do with what I asked then at the
end of the statement said he didn't know the answer to my question topping
it off with and that my question wasn't even the right question.
On Tue, Apr 25, 2023, 2:55 PM kevin ward <kevinward46@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I've only applied myself in rocketry at all in any shape or form other
than eighth grade STS rockets as of maybe 3 months ago thank you very much
and I'm already who knows how do you know and you're insulting me I
accidentally did no intentionally but I immediately apologized not only
directly to you but also in further questions from other people. Just
because I have that problem doesn't mean I'm not IQ your equal or better
than or less than you got no clue Mr throw my books at you you might even
be the foremost but you I feel we're just speaking just to be speaking just
to be heard in quara.. and there is a checks and balances within quora to
not shut them down but to correct them
On Tue, Apr 25, 2023, 2:51 PM kevin ward <kevinward46@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
And now you are openly attacking me
On Tue, Apr 25, 2023, 2:48 PM kevin ward <kevinward46@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
No, sir, I was in pain, when I responded poorly
On Mon, Apr 24, 2023, 10:57 AM Terry McCreary <prfesser@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I see...
Guess I'll leave it to the Arocket community...if I were to do a third
edition of ECP (probably won't), does Kevin's comment mean that I need to
make a correction? Do I need to delete much of the material in Chapter 4 on
specific impulse? Whaddaya say, folks?
Maybe my thought processes are going downhill faster than I
thought.....sigh.....
TWM
------------------------------
*From:* arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on
behalf of kevin ward <kevinward46@xxxxxxxxx>
*Sent:* Monday, April 24, 2023 1:37 AM
*To:* arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
*Subject:* [AR] Re: APCP properties, was Re: Re: starship abort?
Btw... Specific impulse does not change due to psi, though the produced
thrust, will
On Sat, Apr 22, 2023, 1:57 PM Terry McCreary <prfesser@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Kevin,
You will likely get more replies if you start a new thread with a new
subject line, rather than tacking a question onto an unrelated existing
thread.
The properties of APCP vary hugely with the composition. Burn rate can
be anywhere from 0.1"/s to 1"/s or even somewhat higher. Exponent anywhere
from zero to 0.6 or higher; additives can have an enormous effect. Specific
impulse from roughly 140 to 260 s. And all those figures are usually quoted
for 1000 psi; ballistic properties can be greatly---even
dangerously---different at higher pressures.
To find burn rate, a, and n.....make and burn the propellant.
Thermodynamic properties can be predicted/calculated fairly accurately from
composition. But kinetic properties generally require actual testing.
Changing to a different source for some of the ingredients? Re-testing is
almost a given. Many of those who do a lot of work with APCP often buy
ingredients in bulk to avoid concerns about different properties. (Despite
the fact that AP is a compound, 200 micron AP from Gary Rosenfield is
likely to be at least somewhat different in its behavior from 200 micron AP
purchased from, say, Skylighter or another pyrotechnics source. Morphology,
proportion of fines, etc.)
TM
------------------------------
*From:* arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on
behalf of kevin ward <kevinward46@xxxxxxxxx>
*Sent:* Saturday, April 22, 2023 9:30 AM
*To:* arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
*Subject:* [AR] Re: starship abort?
Hi everyone...
Can anyone give all propellant characteristics of Ap\Htpb+Al (BurnSim) ?
We've found all but the burn rate a, n.
Unsure if best recipe, as well. (Shuttle SRB's ?)