E12 Bummers

[stefanj]

I flew my first Estes BP E12 motors yesterday. I flew my 1964 Aero-Dart and my Badger on E12-6s. Both worked great.

Unfortunately, about half of the OTHER E12 motors used at an Oregon Rocketry launch yesterday catoed. At least four motors. Bulkhead blow-through.

All of the bad 'uns we could gather were from the same batch; unfortunately, the two good ones I flew were also from the same batch. (8 18 11, as I recall.)

George Rachor is filing a report.

I hope this was a problem with just that batch. I'm counting on using E12-0 in my Lil' Beth upscale.

[A Fish Named Wallyum]

I flew my first Estes BP E12 motors yesterday. I flew my 1964 Aero-Dart and my Badger on E12-6s. Both worked great.

Unfortunately, about half of the OTHER E12 motors used at an Oregon Rocketry launch yesterday catoed. At least four motors. Bulkhead blow-through.

All of the bad 'uns we could gather were from the same batch; unfortunately, the two good ones I flew were also from the same batch. (8 18 11, as I recall.)

George Rachor is filing a report.

I hope this was a problem with just that batch. I'm counting on using E12-0 in my Lil' Beth upscale.
I just bought my first pack on Friday. :eek: Gonna have to wait until the cornfield opens before I get a chance to fly them. I also picked up another Ventris for $21.

[PaulK]

I flew my first Estes BP E12 motors yesterday. I flew my 1964 Aero-Dart and my Badger on E12-6s. Both worked great.

Unfortunately, about half of the OTHER E12 motors used at an Oregon Rocketry launch yesterday catoed. At least four motors. Bulkhead blow-through.

All of the bad 'uns we could gather were from the same batch; unfortunately, the two good ones I flew were also from the same batch. (8 18 11, as I recall.)

George Rachor is filing a report.

I hope this was a problem with just that batch. I'm counting on using E12-0 in my Lil' Beth upscale.This was a problem date code, many reports of problems, seach TRF for E12 CATO. Probably half of 8/18/11 E12's I flew failed. Other date codes have been fine for me.

[tbzep]

This was a problem date code, many reports of problems, seach TRF for E12 CATO. Probably half of 8/18/11 E12's I flew failed. Other date codes have been fine for me.
That was a Thursday. You wouldn't think Mabel would be hung over on a Thursday. :eek:

[Shreadvector]

I flew my first Estes BP E12 motors yesterday. I flew my 1964 Aero-Dart and my Badger on E12-6s. Both worked great.

Unfortunately, about half of the OTHER E12 motors used at an Oregon Rocketry launch yesterday catoed. At least four motors. Bulkhead blow-through.

All of the bad 'uns we could gather were from the same batch; unfortunately, the two good ones I flew were also from the same batch. (8 18 11, as I recall.)

George Rachor is filing a report.

I hope this was a problem with just that batch. I'm counting on using E12-0 in my Lil' Beth upscale.

I've reoprted extensively on the E12 topic in many postes in different threads and on TRF.

I had 1 out of 3 from the first batch of E12-4 nd E12-6 fail and none of the E12-0 or E12-8 motors failed.

All other dates codes have been perfect.

Select later dates codes if you are buying locally. The date is stamped on the motors AND on the back of the blister card.

I did not see the date stamped on the first packs of E16 and F15 motor blister cards and they have several different date codes in the few packs I've seen. I've seen about 6 launched so far and they are AWESOME. but so are the E12 motors and I have not seen one fail in many months now. We told club folks to burn up all their suspect date code E12-4 and E12-6 motors in rockets they did not care much about. Those that failed resulted in very nice replacements from Estes (rocket and motors).

[Royatl]

That was a Thursday. You wouldn't think Mabel would be hung over on a Thursday. :eek:

"Today must be a Thursday. I never could get the hang of Thursdays." —Arthur Dent.

[tmacklin]

Speaking of new products, I attended the DARS Mod-Roc launch at Frisco this past Saturday.
Beautiful day, low humidity, temp in low eighties and variable winds.

After two failed igniter attempts using the new pyrogen free, politically correct Estes igniters, Sam Barone finally put one way up on one of the new 29 mm Estes motors (F16????) Nice smooth flight.

As I understand it, the third and successful ignition was accomplished using one of the old pyrogen tipped Estes igniters. I was told that the "reason" for these new pyrogen free igniters was mandated by the BATFE as part of their Utopian vision of a hazard free society.

Bless them, for they know not what they do.

[BEC]

Odd about that igniter/"starter". I only used one this past weekend (despite having a small supply from recent F15/E16 purchases). Worked fine.

[Shreadvector]

Beyond odd. Something wrong with the way it was used or installed.

Estes shipped every NAR section in the USA about 50 pyrogen-free Solar Igniters many years ago.

The request was made to pass them out to beginners and experienced flyers and use them in everything from single motor launches to clusters. They were used with the normal plugs that came with the motors.

We had zero misfires. We handed them to beginners with zero additional instruction (beyond the usual first time explanation to 'install them just like it shows in your instructions - hold the rocke motor upside down, drop the igniter in and then push in the plug.) and they had no problem. I used them in many clusters and they worked 100%.

The new version should work just as fine. I fired one to demonstrate the new Starter for club members and the bridge wire glowed red hot and the coating burst into flame (but no pyrotechnic fizz). i used a regular Estes controller with 4 AA batteries.

For the pyrogen-free test most used the club system with the 12V car battery.

So, for the failures you observed, was there a short, such as twisted wires? There really is no logical scientific reason for these new Solar Starters to not work perfectly in all motors.

And the 29mm F is an F15.

The 29mm E is an E16.

Odd about that igniter/"starter". I only used one this past weekend (despite having a small supply from recent F15/E16 purchases). Worked fine.

[tmacklin]

I don't know either. Just reporting what I heard and observed. Maybe my friend Sam can clarify things a bit.

As for the motor designation it was one of the new 29 mm Estes motors (AKA engines) and worked very smoothly once it ignited.

My question is why was it necessary for Estes to devise a new igniter when the original version worked so well for so long. How many of these pyrogen coated igniters have actually "exploded" and resulted in property damage and/or injuries, other than the GM/Chevy truck experiments of a few years ago. If it ain't broke, why fix it? :confused:

[samb]

Finally got a minute to log on over here.

I flew the F15-6 in a modified Executioner that sat on the pad at about 12 - 12 1/2 ounces give or take the weight of dog barf. I flew it off the DARS mid-power pad from a 6 foot, 1/4 inch diameter rod. I had proudly showed off the new starter to Ted and others and we had some discussion about the new material and change in nomenclature. Once on the pad, the first countdown resulted in no joy. Me and my friend Gary Briggs went out to investigate; I removed the igniter (still intact), re-installed, cleaned the clips (again) and went to round 2.
Again, no joy. This time Gary brought a regular Estes black pyrogen igniter and we installed that in the rocket. Before leaving the pad area we hooked the clips to the starter outside of the engine for a static test. The bridge wire glowed and melted but neither of us observed any flame or heard any fizz.

Third times a charm. The igniter lit the motor and I'd categorize the lift-off as deliberate; not weak at all but certainly no neck-snapper. But Oh My, that lovely 3.5 second burn ! We had a pretty steady north wind all day but by the time I flew in the afternoon it was probably under 10 mph ("Texas calm"). The flight path veered into the wind slightly but I wouldn't categorize it as excessive weather cocking at all.

I look forward to another go with the new starters and to see what others report as these things make their way into common usage. Some action shots courtesy of Gary Briggs: https://darsrocketrypics.shutterfly.com/pictures/837

[A Fish Named Wallyum]

"Today must be a Thursday. I never could get the hang of Thursdays." —Arthur Dent.
:chuckle:

[Shreadvector]

Who ever made claims that they changed it for the bizzare reasons that you stated?


They said they changed it to allow them to be mailed. No special labels or any special packaging or procedures for mailing Solar Starters.

Also, look at the package on the Estes website. Notice it has SIX languages? Some countries have different regulations than the USA.


They work just as well or better than the brittle Solar Igniters with the pyrogen that would crack and crumble off in the hands of users who could not handle them properly. The same users who install them and twist them so the lead wires short. The same users who install them with the incorrect plug and wonder why they fall out.


I don't know either. Just reporting what I heard and observed. Maybe my friend Sam can clarify things a bit.

As for the motor designation it was one of the new 29 mm Estes motors (AKA engines) and worked very smoothly once it ignited.

My question is why was it necessary for Estes to devise a new igniter when the original version worked so well for so long. How many of these pyrogen coated igniters have actually "exploded" and resulted in property damage and/or injuries, other than the GM/Chevy truck experiments of a few years ago. If it ain't broke, why fix it? :confused:

[Shreadvector]

Simple:

If the Starter did not go the first two times and the bridge wire was intact when removed, then there was no electrical connection (or there was a very weak connection that only gave a low current continuity indication but was inadequate to deliver the low milliamp rating needed to make the bridge wire glow and melt).

When it was removed and connected properly you got it to glow and melt. If that had happened inside the motor, it would have ignited the motor.

Do you use "toothed" alligator clips or smooth jawed micro clips? Toothed clips build up massive gunk and are horrible. I prefer the stainless steel smooth jawed micro clips - available through NARTS. Estes uses a heavy plated clip that works pretty good as well.

Finally got a minute to log on over here.

I flew the F15-6 in a modified Executioner that sat on the pad at about 12 - 12 1/2 ounces give or take the weight of dog barf. I flew it off the DARS mid-power pad from a 6 foot, 1/4 inch diameter rod. I had proudly showed off the new starter to Ted and others and we had some discussion of the new material and change in nomenclature. Once on the pad, the first countdown resulted in no joy. Me and my friend Gary Briggs went out to investigate; I removed the igniter (still intact), re-installed, cleaned the clips (again) and went to round 2.
Again, no joy. This time Gary brought a regular Estes black pyrogen igniter and we installed that in the rocket. Before leaving the pad area we hooked the clips to the starter outside of the engine for a static test. The bridge wire glowed and melted but neither of us observed any flame or heard any fizz.

Third times a charm. The igniter lit the motor and I'd categorize the lift-off as deliberate; not weak at all but certainly no neck-snapper. But Oh My, that lovely 3.5 second burn ! We had a pretty steady north wind all day but by the time I flew in the afternoon it was probably under 10 mph ("Texas calm"). The flight path veered into the wind slightly but I wouldn't categorize it as excessive weather cocking at all.

I look forward to another go with the new starters and to see what others report as these thing make their way into common usage. Some action shots courtesy of Gary Briggs: https://darsrocketrypics.shutterfly.com/pictures/837

[samb]

Well I'll beg the OP's pardon for my part in this hijack and just make a few final comments in this thread.

I hope that between the two of us we ruled out starter installation error (Gary: model rocket Jedi, me: faithful indian companion). I agree that dirty clips are always a prime suspect in these situations (we do use toothed clips). I certainly won't draw any conclusions about the new part from this 1 time sample. And the new motors are way cool ! :)

Simple:

If the Starter did not go the first two times and the bridge wire was intact when removed, then there was no electrical connection (or there was a very weak connection that only gave a low current continuity indication but was inadequate to deliver the low milliamp rating needed to make the bridge wire glow and melt).

When it was removed and connected properly you got it to glow and melt. If that had happened inside the motor, it would have ignited the motor.

Do you use "toothed" alligator clips or smooth jawed micro clips? Toothed clips build up massive gunk and are horrible. I prefer the stainless steel smooth jawed micro clips - available through NARTS. Estes uses a heavy plated clip that works pretty good as well.

[tmacklin]

Well I'll beg the OP's pardon for my part in this hijack and just make a few final comments in this thread.

I hope that between the two of us we ruled out starter installation error (Gary: model rocket Jedi, me: faithful indian companion). I agree that dirty clips are always a prime suspect in these situations (we do use toothed clips). I certainly won't draw any conclusions about the new part from this 1 time sample. And the new motors are way cool ! :)

Thanks Sam for the clarification. As you know, I'm somewhat feeble minded and require all the remedial education I can get, even from Fred, who turns 55 tomorrow.

Happy birthday Fred!

[ghrocketman]

I manage to get reliable ignition of single BP motors with BARE NICHROME still held in place with a ball of wadding and a piece of masking tape. No plugs, no pyrogen, no baloney.
For clusters, I use old-school solar igniters, but that may have to change to thinner nichrome with added pyrogen.

[stefanj]

To second what Bill said:

I often use nichrome igniters, with a little coil at the tip. They're dipped in dope for insulation purposes. Tamped in with a bit of wadding.

[ghrocketman]

Dipped in Dope for insulating purposes ay ?
Would that be the great insulating Nitrate Dope ?

[Shreadvector]

I install hundreds and hundreds of nichrome wire igniters in advance to save time. They are super durable and cannot "go off" accidentally. I mostly use 31 ga since I have a 5 pound spool that was unravelling itself and made a mess, so I've been removeing the tangled/crossed coils falling from the spool and cutting the 2 to 2.5 inche lengths I use.

I cut hundreds of them and then install them later.

Installation is simple. Coil the middle around the end of a straightened paperclip. Insert in nozzle. Place a bit of t.p. wadding over the nozzle and install the plug that came with or fits the motor. The wadding is helpful since it adds thickness so that the plug fits properly with the smaller diameter wire AND it prevents the plg from melting and falling out as the wire heats up.

The tip coil heats up first and pretty fast with a good battery.

I seldom use a ball of wadding as the plugs are super fast. I use the wadding ball when I don't have a plug.

I've used nichrome for clusters (with copper wire twisted on), but I've switched to Q2G2 igniters for all large clusters and I also will use Estes igniters for small clusters if I feel like it. They all work perfectly as long as you install them properly (no shorts, unable to fall oout or 'pull away' from the propellant face), connect the clips properly and have plenty of electrical power.