School project
Zero 30 Oct 2008
A: A slingshot/catapult system be effective? I guess not since water tends to absorb so much of the energy and all the energy is released in one blow....
B: Would a railway system be effective? I need it to keep the rocket going straight....
C: What chemicals make a very powerful reaction when combined (think baking soda+ vinegar but with fifty times the punch (not literally)) I need a reasonable amount of thrust, to be able to move it five/seven feet in the water with only a few ounces of fuel while underwater.
D: Would I need any kind of overhead guidance system?
E: If I squeeze a relatively large amount of air through a small opening (such as a tube), would it have downsides? And if I slowly funneled it to make the output bigger in size than the intake, would it help?
F: I'm thinking of using the MiG (huge middle hole all the way through) approach, and working around it to accommodate the fuel (add a "skirt" to the bottom half of the rocket's body to make up for the shortened fuel storage.
G: If I made used the MiG approach, but kept the fuel space (in other words half-way through there's a stop) but then added small openings along the side to expel the air (would be angled down and angled) would that work?
Any Ideas?
Also, could I get a definitive formula for thrust?
Edited by tskasa1, 05 November 2008 - 00:18.
Sgt. Rho 30 Oct 2008
Chyros 30 Oct 2008
Quote
tskasa1, on 30 Oct 2008, 2:58, said:
Dauth 30 Oct 2008
You're on your own.
Zero 30 Oct 2008
Dauth, on 30 Oct 2008, 9:41, said:
You're on your own.
Thanks, and I would have, but then I found out that this needs to have some sort of appliance in the near future, so anything that has no foreseeable use within the next 100 years it taboo. Thanks for the suggestion anyway, and I did think about using it, but it is impossible to use now, as my teacher doesn't want me to as it has no foreseeable use to benefit mankind (and yes it does HAVE to benefit mankind).
Zero 31 Oct 2008
Dr. Strangelove, on 30 Oct 2008, 23:36, said:
How much thrust could I potentially get from it? Also, how easy and affordable is it? After all, I need to keep it all under one-hundred dollars. I like the idea and since it can move nukes it should do well, but again, I need to keep it all as cheap as possible.
Also, to answer all previous questions, yes, I AM planning to put a few rockets under water and launching them. I want to make holes in each one to see how it will affect them, whether it'll add aerodynamics (in other words, it should increase range/speed). I'm using water because it is a LOT harder to monitor it in the air and I don't have a wind tunnel, also water behaves a lot like air (save it is a LOT more... elastic for a lack of a better word). So, do any of the above ideas work, and still open to fuel ideas.
Chyros 31 Oct 2008
tskasa1, on 1 Nov 2008, 0:59, said:
Dr. Strangelove, on 30 Oct 2008, 23:36, said:
How much thrust could I potentially get from it? Also, how easy and affordable is it? After all, I need to keep it all under one-hundred dollars. I like the idea and since it can move nukes it should do well, but again, I need to keep it all as cheap as possible.
Also, to answer all previous questions, yes, I AM planning to put a few rockets under water and launching them. I want to make holes in each one to see how it will affect them, whether it'll add aerodynamics (in other words, it should increase range/speed). I'm using water because it is a LOT harder to monitor it in the air and I don't have a wind tunnel, also water behaves a lot like air (save it is a LOT more... elastic for a lack of a better word). So, do any of the above ideas work, and still open to fuel ideas.
Dr. Strangelove 31 Oct 2008
tskasa1, on 31 Oct 2008, 23:59, said:
Dr. Strangelove, on 30 Oct 2008, 23:36, said:
How much thrust could I potentially get from it? Also, how easy and affordable is it? After all, I need to keep it all under one-hundred dollars. I like the idea and since it can move nukes it should do well, but again, I need to keep it all as cheap as possible.
Also, to answer all previous questions, yes, I AM planning to put a few rockets under water and launching them. I want to make holes in each one to see how it will affect them, whether it'll add aerodynamics (in other words, it should increase range/speed). I'm using water because it is a LOT harder to monitor it in the air and I don't have a wind tunnel, also water behaves a lot like air (save it is a LOT more... elastic for a lack of a better word). So, do any of the above ideas work, and still open to fuel ideas.
The only cheaper option than pressurized CO2 or just plain old atmosphere would be a catapult(not an actual catapult, just any system that uses brute physical force to propel the missile.).
Zero 01 Nov 2008
Dr. Strangelove 01 Nov 2008
tskasa1, on 1 Nov 2008, 1:21, said:
Umm, let me clarify, SSBNs use the CO2 to just get the missile out of the tube and above the water, the liquid rocket fuel is what actually gets it to the target.
Chyros 01 Nov 2008
tskasa1, on 1 Nov 2008, 3:21, said:
Zero 01 Nov 2008
Jason, on 1 Nov 2008, 11:13, said:
tskasa1, on 1 Nov 2008, 3:21, said:
So....if I use CO2, I'm fucked.... yeah, any other ideas? Help me out anybody? I wish I could use CO2.... damn it! I need cheap and powerful!
Dr. Strangelove 01 Nov 2008
tskasa1, on 1 Nov 2008, 22:09, said:
Jason, on 1 Nov 2008, 11:13, said:
tskasa1, on 1 Nov 2008, 3:21, said:
So....if I use CO2, I'm fucked.... yeah, any other ideas? Help me out anybody? I wish I could use CO2.... damn it! I need cheap and powerful!
Buy the compressed oxygen tanks used for SCUBA gear, or compressed helium used in party balloons.
Jok3r 01 Nov 2008
Swimmer
Zero 02 Nov 2008
Rich19 02 Nov 2008
Edited by Rich19, 02 November 2008 - 14:50.
Dr. Strangelove 03 Nov 2008
tskasa1, on 2 Nov 2008, 14:55, said:
Now I have to ask: Hat in hell are you trying to make!?
BeefJeRKy 03 Nov 2008
Dr. Strangelove, on 3 Nov 2008, 3:42, said:
tskasa1, on 2 Nov 2008, 14:55, said:
Now I have to ask: Hat in hell are you trying to make!?
Apparently a model SLBM...
Dr. Strangelove 04 Nov 2008
Scope, on 3 Nov 2008, 9:20, said:
Dr. Strangelove, on 3 Nov 2008, 3:42, said:
tskasa1, on 2 Nov 2008, 14:55, said:
Now I have to ask: Hat in hell are you trying to make!?
Apparently a model SLBM...
You know you can buy those down at a hobby shop.
Zero 04 Nov 2008
A) Would a "de Laval nozzle" work under water?
B) Would the nozzle have to be made out of metal or could it be made out of wood as well.
C) Is 45 degrees a nice stable angle for cutting through air/water? If not, what is?
And to answer your question my dear doctor.... it's a secret....*evil laugh*
Oh, completely forgot, does anyone know where I can get some good wood? I need strong, nonporous, hardwood, capable of taking a lot of stress and that is light enough to be propelled by gas. Any ideas?
Edited by Dauth, 04 November 2008 - 15:40.