guest blogger john hare
I did a resin cast nozzle with embedded string today to observe the effects as an air tank blew down. My intent was to start withÂ a nozzle almost at separation and then add a boot to observe the flow patterns. Since the nozzle was slightly asymmetric and had excessive expansion, itÂ had Â separated flow from the start. Access to higher pressure air might cure this. Anyhow, it started with one string being sucked toward the throat, then two, then three of four. Since this was the result I wanted from the boot device, I think it somewhat more likely that the thing will work on aÂ nozzle at or beyond the point of normal separation. My theory is that separation under control is a good thing.
Â Since I don’t have the minimums suggested in ready cash, I will offer a smaller amount just in case someone is still interested. If not, I can increase it later when I have sufficient uncommitted green. Please don’t take this as not respecting the information, just as an indication of impatience and cash shortage.
$350.00 to the first published static test results of the boot compensating* device on an over-expanded rocket engine compared to the same engine operated in the same conditions without the device.
Test equipment must be capable of recording measured results, good, bad, or indifferent Â in a way that is generally understood by the readers of this blog. Short duration characteristics burns are probably sufficient.
Since I am obviously prejudiced by this being my idea and money, however small, judges of whether it was aÂ valid test are the regular commenter’s Â here. We want side by side thrust dataÂ at the same chamber pressure or propellant flow rate.
These rules change if someone brings up a valid reason, which is likely considering that I have never written contest rules and frequently am unclear in my explanations.