Ideas for reusable recovery wadding
ronj...@ix.netcom.com
Hi all,
After searching for various kinds of reusable recovery wadding, I have
found a chemical called "Flamort" (spelling?) It is a chemical that when
applied to a fabric makes it flame resistant. While I have seen Nomex
covered Kevlar sheets from some web site, getting your own made will
probably save you alot of money.
In Orlando where I am, I cannot purchase the chemical myself, but I did
find a local cleaner that will charge only $3 per square yard to treat
fabric with this chemical. I was thinking of buying a few yards of a
cottony fabric, spending only $9 and voila! A boatload of reusable
recovery wadding.
I was then going to sew it into squares, press in a small grommet and
tie it with Kevlar to the nosecone or shock cord.
Any thoughts on using this for smaller (A-E Engine) applications?
Ron
Steven Malikoff
ronj...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
: After searching for various kinds of reusable recovery wadding, I have
: found a chemical called "Flamort" (spelling?) It is a chemical that when
: applied to a fabric makes it flame resistant. While I have seen Nomex
: covered Kevlar sheets from some web site, getting your own made will
: probably save you alot of money.
I haven't tried it myself, but I'd have a go at making (non-reuseable)
recovery wadding by just soaking some tissue paper in a sodium silicate
(or "waterglass") solution. This should make it fairly fireproof I should
think? At least it'd be extremely cheap.
--
Steve Malikoff
ste...@phaedra.apana.org.au
WW2 jeep page at http://phaedra.apana.org.au/ww2jeep.html
foxeye
foxeye wrote:
Crepe paper works ok for Estes type and sized kits. Its available just
about anywhere, and insullation (cellulose type) is about as cheap as
it comes. about 3 or 4 bucks for a big old plastic wrapped bale.
Available at most home and builder supply stores such as HQ, HD,
Menards, Scottys, Builders Square etc.
its more trouble thana itsworth producing your own wadding. Its easier
to buy a head of lettuce or cabbage, and use that than producing your
own.
OTOH Nomex is available, and in Estes sized or smaller rockets of the
LPR or HPR it would not take that much to make a nomex chute
protector, such as what Pratt hobbies etc sell. You can even find
Nomex in Army Navy surplus stores, by buying an old pair of aviators
flying coveralls, and using the material from it. I have seen some
coverallls (nomex) for $10.00 or less, that were ripped or had the
zippers broke in surplus stores.
Visit your local DRMO yards, the USAF and Army and NAVY's fabric
repair shops regularly scrap remnants of Nomex from day to day repair
of items, and finding large pieces is not uncommon. You may have to
but a box of mixed fabris (nylon, cotton, canvas and Nomex to get it,
but for 2 or 3 bucks the price is right.
foxeye
ste...@phaedra.apana.org.au (Steven Malikoff) wrote:
The opinions expressed by me are mine and mine alone. NAR 70031 TRA Someday
Remove the www portion for correct address. Use extreme caution when dealing
with U S Rockets
Balthezar
Ron Wrote about chemically treating fabric to use as reusable wadding:
Why go through all that trouble? IMHO, the best flameproof wadding material is
cellulose insulation available from Home Depot, etc. A large bag (enough to
last a L O N G time) cost only a few dollars. In a pinch you can also use
green grass if any is available around your launch site.
--
Bruce Kirchner
TRA L1 #5888 NAR #69850
Michigan Team 1 HUVARS
Visit My Rocketry Home Page - http://members.aol.com/balthezar/index.html
William Chops
I haven't tried it myself, but I'd have a go at making (non-reuseable)
recovery wadding by just soaking some tissue paper in a sodium silicate
(or "waterglass") solution. This should make it fairly fireproof I should
think? At least it'd be extremely cheap.
It would also lose a lot of flexibility. There are a lot of ways to make
your Charmin fireproof, and fortunately it's quite easy to test before you
send up that rocket over the dry field. Borax is a pretty standard
suggestion (see your laundy section.) I've tried Ammonium sulfate (cheap
fertilizer) and that worked too.
I hyaven't paid much attention since I started buying motors in bulk packs
and such. In this case, you get a fair amount of recovery wadding 'for
free.'
BillW
--
(remove spam food from return address)
Ed
foxeye wrote:
>
> OTOH Nomex is available, and in Estes sized or smaller rockets of the
> LPR or HPR it would not take that much to make a nomex chute
> protector, such as what Pratt hobbies etc sell.
<snip>
Having thought about it, in so much as I do not like PML rigid pistons,
I have, in a way, been using the piston idea all along. I use cellulose
insulaton packed loosely in first. Then, a Nomex sheet over that with
the edges pressed down around the body tube forming a tent. Ahh, the ER
flexible piston!???
No Charge....Ed
Jim K
I just use crepe paper and tape one end to the shock cord so it doesn't float away.
--
Jim K. ! Opinions: You want? I got!
ji...@ili.net ! No warranty expressed or implied
Bryan Parker
After reading the article in the NAR magazine, I recently tried teflon tape as both wadding and
for streamers for a modified Estes Prime Number Explorer. I made on flight before giving up on
the weather. Based on this flight, the teflon tape works really well. I plan to replace the nose
and chute (lost due to burned shock cord) on my daughters Bandit and use the tape for wadding.
I tied the tape to the shock cord, then wadded the tape loosely down into the BT. It worked
really well.
Bryan Parker
Rolla, Missouri
Jerome Craig
Cabbage leaves!
Whatever you don't use you can eat.
Jerome Craig
NAR/TRA
WillCarney
>After searching for various kinds of reusable recovery wadding,
>I have found a chemical called "Flamort" (spelling?) It is a
> chemical that when applied to a fabric makes it flame resistant.
>While I have seen Nomex covered Kevlar sheets from some
>web site, getting your own made will probably save you alot of
>square yard to treat fabric with this chemical. I was thinking of
>buying a few yards of a cottony fabric, spending only $9 and
>voila! A boatload of reusable recovery wadding.
>I was then going to sew it into squares, press in a small grommet
>and tie it with Kevlar to the nosecone or shock cord.
>Any thoughts on using this for smaller (A-E Engine) applications?
>
You being in Florida I don't know if you can get this but it works
great. Up here central Illinois or COLD country we can buy
blow in insulation from hardware stores. It's made for blowing
insulation into the attic or more importantly into walls that have
no insulation. It comes in very large bags and is basically fire
resistant treated paper. Our club uses it all the time. One bag
last a VERY LONG time since it is compressed into the bag and
is very cheap.
Keep'em Flying,
William
**********************************************
It's not what you got, it's what you do with it.
Try helping other's instead of hurting them.
Instead of fighting over an inch of ground lets
lets move out into space & live in peace.
Home is where the heart is.
ronj...@ix.netcom.com
>
> You being in Florida I don't know if you can get this but it works
> great. Up here central Illinois or COLD country we can buy
> blow in insulation from hardware stores. It's made for blowing
> insulation into the attic or more importantly into walls that have
> no insulation. It comes in very large bags and is basically fire
> resistant treated paper. Our club uses it all the time. One bag
> last a VERY LONG time since it is compressed into the bag and
> is very cheap.
>
but doesn't it just spread a gazillion glass fibers all over the launch
area? Does the insulation separate? How do you pack it to make sure that
there is enough room for the exhaust to blow the nose cone?
Ron
Manuel Mejia (GIA)
ronj...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
: I am intreagued about the idea of using insulation for recovery wadding,
: but doesn't it just spread a gazillion glass fibers all over the launch
: area? Does the insulation separate? How do you pack it to make sure that
: there is enough room for the exhaust to blow the nose cone?
: Ron
The insulation that is being referred to is the cellulose gray insulation
that is made from shredded newspaper, not the pink fiberglass material.
Fiberglass is basically taboo because it does not biodegrade and, if you
fly off farmland, the cattle will eat the used wadding and that can kill
them.
The recycled newspaper insulation biodegrades, is inexpensive, and if a
cow eats the stuff, he or she will just get fat and not die off because of
digestive tract problems that often occur after they eat the fiberglass
stuff.
Manuel Mejia, Jr.
NAR 34611
MAILTO (very important) sf...@scfn.thpl.lib.fl.us
John H. Cato, Jr.
> >
> > You being in Florida I don't know if you can get this but it works
> > great. Up here central Illinois or COLD country we can buy
> > blow in insulation from hardware stores. It's made for blowing
> > insulation into the attic or more importantly into walls that have
> > no insulation. It comes in very large bags and is basically fire
> > resistant treated paper. Our club uses it all the time. One bag
> > last a VERY LONG time since it is compressed into the bag and
> > is very cheap.
> >
ronj...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> I am intreagued about the idea of using insulation for recovery
> wadding, but doesn't it just spread a gazillion glass fibers all over
> the launch area? Does the insulation separate? How do you pack it to
> make sure that there is enough room for the exhaust to blow the nose
> cone?
>
> Ron
Notice, Ron, your poster said "fire resistant treated paper" -- IOW,
'cellulose'. This is a treated (fundamentally) newspaper that is,
indeed, very inexpensive and generally acceptable on sites that prohibit
fiberglass (as they should). The cellulose will disperse pretty good on
the way down and is naturally biodegradeable (I don't know and have
never heard about the treatment causing problems in the environment).
Cellulose *does* create a problem (of sorts) in that, in a large rocket
(4" an above), the ejection charge does tend to 'punch thru' the
cellulose, as the 'mesh' is small enough (1/4"-3/8") that it doesn't
'mat' together as well as fiberglass traditionally does. I would not
allow this as the ONLY means of separation between the EC and the chute
-- use some kind of fire-retardent 'wrap' for the canopy.
But it's cheap -- a bale-sized bag of the stuff only costs a few dollars
-- and available even in Florida :-).
-- john.
"Once you give up your ignorance, you can't ever get it back."
Unknown
The Silent Observer
John H. Cato, Jr. wrote:
> > >
> > > You being in Florida I don't know if you can get this but it works
> > > great. Up here central Illinois or COLD country we can buy
> > > blow in insulation from hardware stores. It's made for blowing
> > > insulation into the attic or more importantly into walls that have
> > > no insulation. It comes in very large bags and is basically fire
> > > resistant treated paper. Our club uses it all the time. One bag
> > > last a VERY LONG time since it is compressed into the bag and
> > > is very cheap.
> > >
>
> ronj...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>
> > I am intreagued about the idea of using insulation for recovery
> > wadding, but doesn't it just spread a gazillion glass fibers all over
> > the launch area? Does the insulation separate? How do you pack it to
> > make sure that there is enough room for the exhaust to blow the nose
> > cone?
> >
> > Ron
>
> Notice, Ron, your poster said "fire resistant treated paper" -- IOW,
> 'cellulose'. This is a treated (fundamentally) newspaper that is,
> indeed, very inexpensive and generally acceptable on sites that prohibit
> fiberglass (as they should). The cellulose will disperse pretty good on
> the way down and is naturally biodegradeable (I don't know and have
> never heard about the treatment causing problems in the environment).
The most common fire retardants are ammonium sulphate and borax or boric
acid. Neither one is an environmental hazard; ammonium sulphate is sold
commercially as a fertilizer!
> Cellulose *does* create a problem (of sorts) in that, in a large rocket
> (4" an above), the ejection charge does tend to 'punch thru' the
> cellulose, as the 'mesh' is small enough (1/4"-3/8") that it doesn't
> 'mat' together as well as fiberglass traditionally does. I would not
> allow this as the ONLY means of separation between the EC and the chute
> -- use some kind of fire-retardent 'wrap' for the canopy.
I'll keep that in mind -- I'd just as soon not fry the parachute in my Thug,
when I'll probably be test flying it just days (or >the< day) before my cert
flight. I've had pretty good results putting 2-3 sheets of wadding under
the cellulose in my Spike (2.6") -- does that work in a 4" tube, albeit with
larger, heavier wadding like the Estes/North Coast "High Impulse Wadding?"
> But it's cheap -- a bale-sized bag of the stuff only costs a few dollars
> -- and available even in Florida :-).
I'm on a cellulose exchange program -- buy a gallon tub of dog barf, and the
dealer will refill it as needed. He does the same with syringes of the same
teflon grease AT packages with their reload casings. I suspect he's taking
a loss to encourage the sale of more motors... B)
--
There are times when even the Weaver of Skeins can make an awful tangle
of a perfectly simple tapestry. -- M. A. R. Barker, _The Man of Gold_
Donald Qualls, aka The Silent Observer NAR # 70141-SR Insured
Rocket Pages http://members.aol.com/silntobsvr/launches.htm
Opinions expressed are my own -- take them for what they're worth
and don't expect them to be perfect.
John H. Cato, Jr.
I wrote:
>> I would not allow this as the ONLY means of separation between the
>> EC and the chute -- use some kind of fire-retardent 'wrap' for the
>> canopy.
The Silent Observer wrote:
>
> I'll keep that in mind --
> I've had pretty good results putting 2-3 sheets of wadding under
> the cellulose in my Spike (2.6") -- does that work in a 4" tube,
> albeit with larger, heavier wadding like the Estes/North Coast "High
> Impulse Wadding?"
I don't know what this 'HIW' stuff is, Silent (never seen it as yet) --
but I would want something more than my 'mental image' of Estes
wadding. If some local dealer has some of Pratt's "Heatshield" Nomex
stuff, a small 'patch' of that would be very good (or any locally
available substitution). Might would consider putting this ABOVE the
'barf' -- such that the WORST part of the EC expends itself against the
'barf' -- which could add flights to the life of the 'shield'.
I just would NOT fly 'barf' in a 4" rocket withOUT something else.
It'll 'git' your chute, for sure.
-- john.
The Silent Observer
John H. Cato, Jr. wrote:
> I wrote:
>
> >> I would not allow this as the ONLY means of separation between the
> >> EC and the chute -- use some kind of fire-retardent 'wrap' for the
> >> canopy.
>
> The Silent Observer wrote:
> >
> > I'll keep that in mind --
>
> > I've had pretty good results putting 2-3 sheets of wadding under
> > the cellulose in my Spike (2.6") -- does that work in a 4" tube,
> > albeit with larger, heavier wadding like the Estes/North Coast "High
> > Impulse Wadding?"
>
> I don't know what this 'HIW' stuff is, Silent (never seen it as yet) --
> but I would want something more than my 'mental image' of Estes
> wadding. If some local dealer has some of Pratt's "Heatshield" Nomex
> stuff, a small 'patch' of that would be very good (or any locally
> available substitution). Might would consider putting this ABOVE the
> 'barf' -- such that the WORST part of the EC expends itself against the
> 'barf' -- which could add flights to the life of the 'shield'.
Estes/North Coast High Impulse Wadding is sold for use in the Estes/North
Coast rocket line, with the Dark Star motors. It's both larger squares
and, AFAIK, heavier (i.e. thicker) material, possibly made from paper
towels instead of toilet paper. I guess I'll have to grab a pack of it and
test it in this kind of application -- because some of the Estes/North
Coast rockets are up to 4" diameter, and they're apparently intended to be
flown using >only< this HIW stuff; that would indicate to me that it's
substantially sturdier than ordinary Estes Ejection Wadding.
Alternately, I might have to just install a baffle -- there's room in the
Thug, heaven knows, and anything that keeps the recovery system further
forward is likely to gain more than I lose from the weight of the baffle.
Hmmm...I've got a spare Masonite c-ring that was stock in the kit (I used
two plywood rings, and one of the Masonite rings as the forward "3rd
ring"), and lots of plywood...but I've already put the shock cord mount
into the forward ring; that'd mean I'd need another eyebolt, washers and
nuts. Cheap, and not hard to come by...hmmm...
> I just would NOT fly 'barf' in a 4" rocket withOUT something else.
> It'll 'git' your chute, for sure.
Duly noted. Additional protection will be provided, and thanks for the
tip. B)
John H. Cato, Jr.
I wrote:
> > I just would NOT fly 'barf' in a 4" rocket withOUT something else.
> > It'll 'git' your chute, for sure.
... and Silent responded:
>
> Duly noted. Additional protection will be provided, and thanks for
> the tip. B)
That IS what this group's about, is it not?
:)
-- john.
Balthezar
In article <34C10C71...@almatel.net>, "John H. Cato, Jr."
<jc...@almatel.net> writes:
>I just would NOT fly 'barf' in a 4" rocket withOUT something else. It'll 'git'
your >chute, for sure.
That explains why a couple of shrouds burnt in my LOC IV! That's been the only
problem with 'dog barf' for me. (I'd forgotten that when I posted the
suggestion to use it).
Dave Davis
On the 4" and larger airframes, I place a couple of sheets of Estes
wadding over the "stuffer tube" hole to contain the ejection charge
heat, as well as, keep the bat barf away from the motor. If the
motor/stuffer tube fills up with wadding, the ejection charge
propagation front will be supressed and the effectiveness of the
ejection charge will be greatly reduced.