Hybrid rocket testing rig data share program | Hybrid engine discussion | Forum

Post edited 10:47 am – December 10, 2009 by Luke Maurits

Here's an idea I had which I'd like feedback on.  I think it would be a good idea but I don't know if this is the way that others want/envision us operating.

The first step in this plan would be designing a fairly decent hybrid rocket testing rig – something on the scale seen at Copenhagen Suborbitals or close to it.  Importantly, it should support not just firing of rockets but actual recording of thrust measurements for the entire length of the burn, so that we can establish thrust profiles.

When I say "design", I mean properly design.  Specify materials, precise measurements, catalogue numbers for parts from major suppliers, make CAD files, etc.  The design should be done well enough that someone could print everything out, take the papers to their local engineering firm and say "How much to make one of these?" and have the engineers there taken them seriously and actually offer a quote.  Needless to say, the design would be made so as to make the entire device as cheap as possible.  If we could get the whole thing <= $500 (excluding labour) that would be awesome.  I'd like to think this was possible, but I'm not at all experienced in this sort of manufacturing endeavour so perhaps I am dreaming.

With this rig designed, we could launch a program where advanced amateur rocketry clubs, university groups, small start ups etc. could sign up and CSTART would give them a rig (or the money to have a rig made for them from our plans).  In exchange, they would be contractually obligated to perform at least a certain number of test burns over a certain period, using oxidisers and fuel grains that we specify in advance.  They would have to give us all the thrust measurements, videos and written reports of all the burns (we would in turn have to CC license them).  At the completion of the program they could either give the rig back to us, or buy it from us at a reasonable price and keep it to do their own further testing.  Obviously we could only really afford to do this for a few clubs, depending on how our early fundraising goes.

The advantages of this program would be:

• We get a lot of independent measurements of performance of various oxidisers, fuel grains, port arrangements, etc. (and so does the rest of the world due to CC license)
• A handful of rocketry clubs around the world think we are absolutely the coolest thing sinced sliced bread because we gave them a fun new toy to play with – they will happily advertise us on their websites, their members will donate to us, etc.
• Many of the members of those clubs will think about becoming members of CSTART too – and they will be new members for us who have hands on experience with hybrid rocketry.

The biggest difficulty I can see in getting this to work is us being able to finance the construction of 5-10 of these rigs.  Our best bet may be to find an engineering firm who would be willing to sponsor us, manufacturing rigs at a discounted rate in exchange for us painting their name and logo on the side of the rig and praising them on our website.

What do people think?

EDIT: A quick afterthought: perhaps in order to participate in the program, clubs would have to donate $100 to us.  This would reduce the amount of money we would need to spend to run this program, but it would still be an attractive deal to clubs because they get to play with a rig that would cost a lot more than $100 to build themselves.

The competition format is something to consider.  We shouldn't think of it so much as "giving away our precious funds" as "using our precious funds to buy research and data".

While it is true that our knowledge is limited, I think that with a little research we could probably specify at least some fuels to test.  Bear in mind that it will take time to design the rig and raise the money to construct the first few.  During that time we can be reading up on fuels and oxidisers and talking to people with experience.

Maybe we could mix the two approaches up: specify a few particular combinations that we would like to see tested and also offer a prize for the team which produces the best overall burn which meets some criteria.

I wouldn't have thought a prize was anti-CSTART.  It doesn't contradict anything in our mission statement or social contract.  On the contrary, it would act to organise and finance the efforts of amateur rocketeers, which is our actual mission.

I don't think the image would be "CSTART didn't do anything, they paid others to do it" – I think all the people competing for the prize would become a part of CSTART.  Not formal members of the organisation, necessarily, but they would be helping out with our work in an open source kind of way.  Besides, we would be the ones deciding what prizes where available for what, in such a way that the data produced all it together.

Still, if some people feel like this is not the way we should work, and they can make a good case for it, we could adopt that stance and modify our defining documents to make it clear.  For the record, if it wasn't already clear, I don't see a problem with the prize approach.

Rizwan, how do you feel about the proposal aside from the prize aspect, i.e. in the form I presented it?