 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / General / Rockets / January 2006Propellants on the explosives list
It looks to me that Ammonium nitrate, potassium nitrate, and potassium perchlorate composite propellants are not on the ATFE explosives list. Only APCP. Is that correct? What is the disadvantage of potassium perchlorate? Lower ISP? Thanks. -- David > What is the disadvantage of potassium perchlorate?>>> High exponent. Mike Fisher Seems that it would have to be more than that. A high exponent can be managed with a reasonable chamber pressure by adjusting the Kn. Would the problem be that for commercial manufacturers, you can't ue the same nozzle size for different burn rate catalysts because of the high exponent? Thanks! -- David >> What is the disadvantage of potassium perchlorate?>>> > > High exponent. > > Mike Fisher > Seems that it would have to be more than that. A high exponent can be > managed with a reasonable chamber pressure by adjusting the Kn. I hear that the exponent is nearly unworkable. Define "reasonable chamber pressure". I know several people that have tried to run Kp motors at low pressures. At one nozzle throat size, they would chuff. At the next throat size down, they would cato. I hear that Kosdon has gotten them to work. Feel free to let us know how it turns out. At any rate, just because they are not listed, it does not mean that they escape the regulations of the ATF. The orange book is written so that it is basically all inclusive. Basically if all of the propellant manufacturers switched over to ANCP, the ATF would be just as vigilant on regulating it as they have been on APCP. Then we'd have a lower ISP propellant, with the same regulations. Not a good option IMO. Mike Fisher >> Seems that it would have to be more than that. A high exponent can be >> managed with a reasonable chamber pressure by adjusting the Kn. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > hear that Kosdon has gotten them to work. Feel free to let us know how > it turns out. Ok, that makes sense. Thanks for the info. > At any rate, just because they are not listed, it does not mean that > they escape the regulations of the ATF. The orange book is written so [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Mike Fisher Believe me, that's enough. Equilibrium chamber pressure is proportional to (BurningSurfaceArea/NozzleThroatArea)^(1/(1-n)) where n is the pressure exponent. With KN, chamber pressure can increase with the fourth or fifth power of burning surface area. Also, the nozzle fouls and it blows up. The nozzle erodes and it fizzles. High exponents are bad news. > Seems that it would have to be more than that. A high exponent can be > managed with a reasonable chamber pressure by adjusting the Kn. Would the [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > > > Mike Fisher Not one of them by itself is an explosive but that wouldn't stop them from listing them. We are all going to be making our own engines soon because BP is an explosive and that's what most of the hobby rockets are. > Not one of them by itself is an explosive but that wouldn't stop them > from listing them. We are all going to be making our own engines soon > because BP is an explosive and that's what most of the hobby rockets > are. The ATF isn't going after modroc BP motors, just APCP motors. >> Not one of them by itself is an explosive but that wouldn't stop them >> from listing them. We are all going to be making our own engines soon >> because BP is an explosive and that's what most of the hobby rockets >> are. > >The ATF isn't going after modroc BP motors, just APCP motors. The ATF is not going after modroc APCP motors either. > It looks to me that Ammonium nitrate, potassium nitrate, and potassium > perchlorate composite propellants are not on the ATFE explosives list. Only [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > -- David "While the list is comprehensive, it is not all-inclusive. The fact that an explosive material is not on the list does not mean that it is not within the coverage of the law if it otherwise meets the statutory definitions in 18 U.S.C. 841." http://www.atf.gov/forms/notices/e5-7183.pdf  SignatureDavid W. Schultz http://home.earthlink.net/~david.schultz/ "If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure." J, Danforth Quayle > "While the list is > comprehensive, it is not all-inclusive. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > otherwise meets the statutory > definitions in 18 U.S.C. 841." Rocket propellant, be it APCP, KPCP, or whatever does not meet this definition. Thus the lawsuit... SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org "To enslave men, successfully and safely, it is necessary to have their minds occupied with thoughts and aspirations short of the liberty of which they are deprived. A certain degree of attainable good must be kept before them." Frederick Douglas, "My Bondage and My Freedom," 1855 |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.