Ye Olde Rocket Forum

Ye Olde Rocket Forum (http://www.oldrocketforum.com/index.php)
-   Designer's Studio (http://www.oldrocketforum.com/forumdisplay.php?f=27)
-   -   BARCLONE Designer's Studio 2008 (http://www.oldrocketforum.com/showthread.php?t=2163)

CPMcGraw 09-14-2007 02:34 AM

BARCLONE Designer's Studio 2008
 
Welcome to BARCLONE's Designer Studio, a thread dedicated to the development of new model rocket designs using classic construction methods, modern materials and software creation tools. All persons interested in designing models are encouraged to participate by posting their work here for others to study and critique, giving you a "peer review" by fellow model builders, flyers, designers, and even manufacturers. Generally speaking, the best review you can receive because it comes from people just like yourself!

BARCLONE was started with the ideal of "BARs Helping BARs", and that ideal is carried forward in this thread. Feel free to submit and post your work here, and listen to the advice offered. Because that's the point -- making the hobby more enjoyable not only for yourself, but for others as well.

The thread is now OPEN.

CPMcGraw 09-16-2007 11:39 PM

New Plan -- Say Cheese
 
3 Attachment(s)
To inaugurate this thread with the first new plan we have the Say Cheese, which as the name implies, is a Camera Ship. It has been trimmed to reach 800' consistently on a D12-5, and is intended to fly the Aiptek Mini Pen like TBZEP uses in his modified Stormcaster.

The starting point for this design is a Screamin' Mimi, with the main tube cut into 12" and 6" lengths. To save weight, I used a simple 0.07" thick matteboard bulkhead and a tube coupler instead of a solid balsa bulkhead to join the payload body to the booster body.

Fins are standard 1/8" thick balsa.

A 48" x 3/16" rod is needed to reach a safe flight speed. The camera is listed as 45g, and I allowed 50g to account for the needed padding and support. With that much mass to move, even the reliable D12 can't push hard enough to get it off in less than 38".

Length: 25.75"
Diameter: 1.637" (BT-60)
Fin Span: 4.13"
Weight (with camera): 5 oz
Weight (without camera): 3.25 oz

If you fly the rocket without ballast, you will need to reef the parachute shrouds, as the Dv is above 25 FPS. The unballasted altitude is over 1030', or 330' better than with the camera. Use the 48" rod for unballasted flights as well.

Enjoy! And, if you build it before I do, you're obligated to share some in-flight videos!!!

CPMcGraw 09-18-2007 09:29 PM

New Plan -- Sky Lance
 
4 Attachment(s)
Ahem...

Another reuse of an old name...

This is a 13mm cluster ship, probably Skill Level 3 for difficulty. It requires some very careful surgery on a BC-1032 (used as the tailcone) to fit the ST-5 tubes through without breaking the remaining balsa. Also, you will need to cut and trim the ST-5 tube where it overlaps the ST-10. The gaps must be sealed completely, as the deployment pressurization would escape otherwise. The ST-10 does not need to be slotted. Study the 2D and 3D images carefully to see what I'm trying to describe (poorly) in words.

Note the override in the mass of the tailcone, reduced about 30%. The final piece will likely be even less mass than this, considering what has to be removed to fit the tubes. This is critical to the simulation, as it has much higher Dv numbers if left "stock".

Length: 18.70"
Diameter: 1.04" (ST-10)
Fin Span: 5.44"
Weight: 2.13 oz

(2) 1/2 A3-2T......120'......Dv 18 FPS.......23" guide length required
(2) A3-4T..........383'......Dv 3-7 FPS......33" guide length required

Don't try this with the 1/4 A3 as it never gets above 35'. The A10-3T is also not recommended as the Dv is above 30 FPS.

Enjoy!

James Pierson 09-19-2007 01:54 AM

New Design: Solar Sailor III
 
3 Attachment(s)
Another recycled name here as well ;) .

Here is another design I decided to call the Solar Sailor III after its two predecessors. This design will carry a 24 inch chute as well. The Dv's are a little high for the B4 and B6 so I reccomend flying this design on the C6-5.

Enjoy and Thanks Again, JP

James Pierson
NAR# 77907

Solar Sailor III (18mm)
Launch guide length: 48.0000 In

MOTOR.................MAX. ALTITUDE...........DEP. VELOCITY
B4-4..................205.06955 Ft............30.0259 ft/s
B6-4..................229.79921 Ft............25.3781 ft/s
C6-5..................640.47572 Ft............8.5704 ft/s

snaquin 09-22-2007 12:28 AM

New Plan -- Aiptek Mini PenCam 1.3 Rocket
 
5 Attachment(s)
A two-stage PenCam carrier .....

While waiting the five days for my two Aiptek Mini PenCam 1.3 cameras to arrive, I set out to build a quick and basic rocket to fly the camera in. Appropriately named "Aiptek Mini PenCam 1.3 Rocket" I found parts & fin cans from a couple of Estes Eliminator and OOP Longshot kits and some lengths of Semroc series 13 tubing.

The parts I selected stacked up to be an Estes Longshot only with Estes & some additional Semroc parts including a Mars Lander nose cone - a short length of Semroc ST-16, and the short Semroc BR-1316 transition. Although it wasn't my intention, after looking at it in RockSim I realized the capsule somewhat resembled the old Estes Camroc.

My main design goal for this project was quick assembly with the plastic fin cans and to get the camera in the air and launch it tomorrow, but the weather is flaring up again. I have since abandoned this design although someone else on the forum may have interest in it.

Length: 35.75"
Diameter: 1.64" (ST-16)
Fin Span: 5.716"
Weight (with camera): 8.21 oz
Weight (without camers): 5.76 oz

.

barone 09-22-2007 08:52 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by snaquin
A two-stage PenCam carrier .....

While waiting the five days for my two Aiptek Mini PenCam 1.3 cameras to arrive, I set out to build a quick and basic rocket to fly the camera in. Appropriately named "Aiptek Mini PenCam 1.3 Rocket" I found parts & fin cans from a couple of Estes Eliminator and OOP Longshot kits and some lengths of Semroc series 13 tubing.

The parts I selected stacked up to be an Estes Longshot only with Estes & some additional Semroc parts including a Mars Lander nose cone - a short length of Semroc ST-16, and the short Semroc BR-1316 transition. Although it wasn't my intention, after looking at it in RockSim I realized the capsule somewhat resembled the old Estes Camroc.

My main design goal for this project was quick assembly with the plastic fin cans and to get the camera in the air and launch it tomorrow, but the weather is flaring up again. I have since abandoned this design although someone else on the forum may have interest in it.

Length: 35.75"
Diameter: 1.64" (ST-16)
Fin Span: 5.716"
Weight (with camera): 8.21 oz
Weight (without camers): 5.76 oz

.
Well heck yeah. With all the interest that has been generated in the pencam, these will work out great. Now where were those instructions for converting the pencam to rocket use..... ;)

CPMcGraw 09-22-2007 12:32 PM

New Plan -- Rogue Star
 
3 Attachment(s)
This is a bit tricky to describe, as once again RockSim gets in the way of doing what I want to do visually. Rogue Star is 18mm powered, and qualifies as an upper-end VR-Class bird on "C" power. There are some features that the 3D image just cannot show:

1. The pods use the SST: Shuttle-1 engine tube nose and tail cone set.
2. The four fins at the rear of the ST-13 tube really belong on the ST-5 pods, 2 each, angled outbound 45 degrees above and below the horizontal. Think Estes Titan-III stabilizing fins here.
3. The cockpit canopy is also from the SST: Shuttle-1 mothership.
4. The forward end of the ST-13 should be cut with a "French Curve" styling, such that the 'forward protrusion' occurs just behind the canopy. Think of a sine wave curve, but only using half of the curve. The 'hump' of the curve points forward, on the top side of the modle, and the straight edge falls to the bottom of the model.

Length: 23.30"
Diameter: 1.34" (ST-13)
Fin Span: 6.34"
Weight: 1.82 oz

A8-3......130'......Dv 21 FPS......requires 33"
B4-4......320'......Dv 19 FPS......requires 27"
B6-4......330'......Dv 14 FPS......requires 28"
C6-5......710'......Dv 20 FPS......requires 28"

A cutting pattern still needs to be drawn out for the ST-13. Obviously, there are other details that could be added by the builder, and a good decal set could go a long way toward trimming it out.

Enjoy!

CPMcGraw 10-31-2007 06:14 PM

New Plan -- 24mm AstroVision Booster
 
3 Attachment(s)
Got one of these in working order today, after picking up a dud yesterday. I wanted to see if I could come up with a better booster that would give some real performance, or at least gain some substantial altitude, compared to the booster you get with the camera. This first version is a throw-together, what-if type of design, and I'm just guessing about the actual weight of the camera. I have not yet weighed the payload to get an accurate value, but I'm guessing no more than 2.5 oz. It really doesn't feel that heavy, maybe just a little more than a hollow plastic NC of the same size.

The camera shoulder loose-fits into a standard ST-13 tube, so that's where I'm starting from. Other variations of this theme are coming, so this is just a beginning baseline.

Length: 19.30"
Diameter: 1.34 (ST-13)
Fin Span: 4.84"
Weight: 3.31 oz (Camera estimated at 2.5 oz)

D12-5......1015'......Dv 26 FPS......48" x 3/16" Rod

Takes about 7.2 seconds to reach apogee, so the 12-18 seconds of record time should be enough to get a flight video.

Enjoy!

snaquin 11-01-2007 12:32 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by CPMcGraw
Got one of these in working order today, after picking up a dud yesterday. I wanted to see if I could come up with a better booster that would give some real performance, or at least gain some substantial altitude, compared to the booster you get with the camera. This first version is a throw-together, what-if type of design, and I'm just guessing about the actual weight of the camera. I have not yet weighed the payload to get an accurate value, but I'm guessing no more than 2.5 oz. It really doesn't feel that heavy, maybe just a little more than a hollow plastic NC of the same size.

The camera shoulder loose-fits into a standard ST-13 tube, so that's where I'm starting from. Other variations of this theme are coming, so this is just a beginning baseline.

Length: 19.30"
Diameter: 1.34 (ST-13)
Fin Span: 4.84"
Weight: 3.31 oz (Camera estimated at 2.5 oz)

D12-5......1015'......Dv 26 FPS......48" x 3/16" Rod

Takes about 7.2 seconds to reach apogee, so the 12-18 seconds of record time should be enough to get a flight video.

Enjoy!


Craig,

I really like the booster and your choice of fin design. Looks great!

There is however a limitation that I haven't been able to figure out in RockSim that is throwing your margin of stability out. Margin without engines in RockSim shows 32.28 & I think it's probably closer to 6.43

RockSim is throwing it out somewhere in your Nose Cone Tip, Transition or Fin used for the camera shroud estimation.

To determine this I eliminated those three items from the design file and replaced those items with a single ogive BC-12561 Semroc cone, same as used on the SLS Javelin. I then added a single mass object to the true CG of the Semroc cone at 4.595" to bring the total rocket weight to 3.3085 to match your designs weight and I get a 6.43 margin without engines.

RockSim just doesn't estimate the CG accurately in this case (and I'm not sure why it doesn't).

:confused:

.

CPMcGraw 11-01-2007 01:02 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by snaquin
Craig,

I really like the booster and your choice of fin design. Looks great!

There is however a limitation that I haven't been able to figure out in RockSim that is throwing your margin of stability out. Margin without engines in RockSim shows 32.28 & I think it's probably closer to 6.43

RockSim is throwing it out somewhere in your Nose Cone Tip, Transition or Fin used for the camera shroud estimation.

To determine this I eliminated those three items from the design file and replaced those items with a single ogive BC-12561 Semroc cone, same as used on the SLS Javelin. I then added a single mass object to the true CG of the Semroc cone at 4.595" to bring the total rocket weight to 3.3085 to match your designs weight and I get a 6.43 margin without engines.

RockSim just doesn't estimate the CG accurately in this case (and I'm not sure why it doesn't).

:confused:

.


Jay Goemmer emailed me with the heads-up. Change the setting on the first tab "Rocket Design Attributes" where it says "Static Margin Reference" from the default setting of "Nose Cone Base Diameter" to "Maximum Frontal Diameter". Everything else being equal, this should bring a loaded margin (with a D12-5) to about 5. The base diameter of the nose cone is actually larger in this case than the body tube, which is what RockSim normally defaults to. Empty margin comes to 8.

Jay put this info in another thread not too long ago, and I just forgot to make this change. I used his NC drawing method to produce the AV shape.

snaquin 11-01-2007 03:05 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by CPMcGraw
Jay Goemmer emailed me with the heads-up. Change the setting on the first tab "Rocket Design Attributes" where it says "Static Margin Reference" from the default setting of "Nose Cone Base Diameter" to "Maximum Frontal Diameter". Everything else being equal, this should bring a loaded margin (with a D12-5) to about 5. The base diameter of the nose cone is actually larger in this case than the body tube, which is what RockSim normally defaults to. Empty margin comes to 8.

Jay put this info in another thread not too long ago, and I just forgot to make this change. I used his NC drawing method to produce the AV shape.


Thanks Jay / Craig

Jay shot me an email too. I'm going to have to make a mental note to check that feature in some of my designs. That's the same feature that Carl just tweaked on the two Semroc Laser-X design files he had too that showed the wrong margins.

I threw out a contest entry for EMRR one time because I couldn't figure out what was causing this to happen and I don't ever remember the maximum frontal diameter feature ever being covered in one of the Apogee newsletters.

Good to know & thanks guys!

.

snaquin 11-04-2007 01:04 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by CPMcGraw
Got one of these in working order today, after picking up a dud yesterday. I wanted to see if I could come up with a better booster that would give some real performance, or at least gain some substantial altitude, compared to the booster you get with the camera. This first version is a throw-together, what-if type of design, and I'm just guessing about the actual weight of the camera. I have not yet weighed the payload to get an accurate value, but I'm guessing no more than 2.5 oz. It really doesn't feel that heavy, maybe just a little more than a hollow plastic NC of the same size.

The camera shoulder loose-fits into a standard ST-13 tube, so that's where I'm starting from. Other variations of this theme are coming, so this is just a beginning baseline.

Length: 19.30"
Diameter: 1.34 (ST-13)
Fin Span: 4.84"
Weight: 3.31 oz (Camera estimated at 2.5 oz)

D12-5......1015'......Dv 26 FPS......48" x 3/16" Rod

Takes about 7.2 seconds to reach apogee, so the 12-18 seconds of record time should be enough to get a flight video.

Enjoy!


Craig,

Picked up my AstroVision today at Hobby Lobby with the 40% off coupon. Funny story ..... I took my wife with me to the Hobby Lobby in Hammond today. While I was in the check out line she glanced over at the price tag and said "Hey, how much is that rocket"? When I whipped out my 40% off coupon and it discounted the price of the rocket by $28.00 she said, "hey that's not such a bad deal". I sent her back with another 40% off coupon to pick up a pack of D12-5's.

I'm interested in this BARCLONE design and I'd like to build a dedicated D engine booster. I do want to fly the AstroVision at our launch Nov. 17th so I'll probably put it up on it's first few flights with my EnerJet 1340 booster with a Semroc EM-9115 adapter, since that's what I have already built with Semroc series 13 tubing. I'm interested to see the other booster designs you come up with.

Also, I weighed my AstroVision camera tonight on my scale and with the batteries loaded and flight ready it is 1.4oz. Much lighter than I thought it would be.

.

CPMcGraw 11-04-2007 08:51 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by snaquin
Craig,

Picked up my AstroVision today at Hobby Lobby with the 40% off coupon. Funny story ..... I took my wife with me to the Hobby Lobby in Hammond today. While I was in the check out line she glanced over at the price tag and said "Hey, how much is that rocket"? When I whipped out my 40% off coupon and it discounted the price of the rocket by $28.00 she said, "hey that's not such a bad deal". I sent her back with another 40% off coupon to pick up a pack of D12-5's.

I'm interested in this BARCLONE design and I'd like to build a dedicated D engine booster. I do want to fly the AstroVision at our launch Nov. 17th so I'll probably put it up on it's first few flights with my EnerJet 1340 booster with a Semroc EM-9115 adapter, since that's what I have already built with Semroc series 13 tubing. I'm interested to see the other booster designs you come up with.

Also, I weighed my AstroVision camera tonight on my scale and with the batteries loaded and flight ready it is 1.4oz. Much lighter than I thought it would be.

.


Nice going, Steve! Those coupons do come in handy for "special" purchases...

Translation: She can use 'em, too... :D

Now I can run the sim over again and get a more accurate profile...

The altitude came to 1138' with a slightly reduced Dv, down to 24 FPS, when burning the D12-5.

Interesting outcome with the C11-5. I get 565' with a Dv of 8 FPS. That's a really nice, clean flight with low velocity over the top.

Both motors seem to need a 48" x 3/16" rod with this bird, as they take at least 33" of guide length to reach flight V. An extra 12" wouldn't hurt.

What I really want is a "D" bird that Dv's below 10 FPS, and still gets off easily on a 36" rod. This one comes close, but I want the next one to be a little quicker on the launch.

CPMcGraw 11-04-2007 08:55 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by snaquin
...That's the same feature that Carl just tweaked on the two Semroc Laser-X design files he had too that showed the wrong margins...


It also just occurred to my feeble mind that I may want to check this setting on the Andromeda, as the "Maximum Frontal Diameter" is not the nose cone, but the Reactor Shrouds.

Jay, if you're reading this, did you ever run the Tau Zero with this changed setting?

barone 11-04-2007 09:03 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by snaquin
Craig,

Picked up my AstroVision today at Hobby Lobby with the 40% off coupon. Funny story ..... I took my wife with me to the Hobby Lobby in Hammond today. While I was in the check out line she glanced over at the price tag and said "Hey, how much is that rocket"? When I whipped out my 40% off coupon and it discounted the price of the rocket by $28.00 she said, "hey that's not such a bad deal". I sent her back with another 40% off coupon to pick up a pack of D12-5's.

I'm interested in this BARCLONE design and I'd like to build a dedicated D engine booster. I do want to fly the AstroVision at our launch Nov. 17th so I'll probably put it up on it's first few flights with my EnerJet 1340 booster with a Semroc EM-9115 adapter, since that's what I have already built with Semroc series 13 tubing. I'm interested to see the other booster designs you come up with.

Also, I weighed my AstroVision camera tonight on my scale and with the batteries loaded and flight ready it is 1.4oz. Much lighter than I thought it would be.

.

Something to keep in mind....you only get about 15-16 seconds of video with the AstroVision....

CPMcGraw 11-04-2007 09:21 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by barone
Something to keep in mind....you only get about 15-16 seconds of video with the AstroVision....


I managed 17-18 seconds with mine, but the point is taken. The box says "launch to landing coverage", which is clearly misleading. On this "D" bird, it takes nearly 8 seconds to reach the moment of deployment (about 2+ seconds of burn, and 5 seconds of delay), but once the parachute pops out, it may take over 60 seconds to reach the ground.

Even with the "snapshot mode", with only three snaps per flight at 1.5 second intervals, you will take all three snaps well before reaching apogee.

The technology of the AV is about three or four years behind the curve; even cell phones from two years ago have better video capability. What the AV has to offer is price - it's relatively cheap if you get one with the HL coupon. I don't think I would have ever shelled out $80 for it, more likely opting for one of those Aipteks instead. Two, if the refurbished prices are still holding.

What this camera needs badly is a better frame rate and an SD card slot, so that we could swap out the memory for each flight.

Tau Zero 11-04-2007 04:44 PM

An Exception to Every Rule...
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CPMcGraw
Jay, if you're reading this, did you ever run the Tau Zero with this changed setting?
What's interesting about the Tau Zero is that the main body tube is actually *smaller* in diameter than the "base" of the nose cone, since the nose cone and "transition" are turned as a single piece.

I had RockSim guru Bruce S. "teflonrocketry1" Levison take a look at a relatively functional RS file that I'd cobbled together of the TZ. He said I'd done pretty good in working up a fairly complex design (or something to that effect), :cool: and he only tweaked about 4 elements of it to make it "better."

One of the things he did was to change the "Nose Cone Base" setting to the "Reference Base Diameter," and specified the outer diameter of the ST-7 body tube, which is 0.759".

So I guess my Tau Zero is the exception to *this* rule! :o


Cheers,

James Pierson 11-04-2007 05:28 PM

What New Rule!
 
Here I am, all confused again. ;)
So, concider the following Mr. Wizard:

= Do I use the Full Frontal Diameter option if the nose cone is larger than the main body and only then?? :confused: If not then when??

James Pierson
NAR# 77907

CPMcGraw 11-04-2007 05:41 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by James Pierson
Here I am, all confused again. ;)
So, concider the following Mr. Wizard:

= Do I use the Full Frontal Diameter option if the nose cone is larger than the main body and only then?? :confused: If not then when??

James Pierson
NAR# 77907


Obviously, there are some important exceptions to such a rule. Can anyone remember if the Apogee Newsletter ever covered this topic?

snaquin 11-05-2007 10:50 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by barone
Something to keep in mind....you only get about 15-16 seconds of video with the AstroVision....


I'm thinking of using the AstroVision on it's first few flights in still mode and saving the video work for my two Aiptek cameras since those record in video mode for 120 secs.

I bring my laptop computer to the launch site to download data from my PerfectFlite altimeter anyway so I'll have it with me to download the AstroVision data.

I do wish the AstroVision had an SD card slot or more onboard memory for longer record times but considering the 40% off price I still think it's a worthwhile purchase. I'm excited to try it out.

.

snaquin 11-05-2007 10:54 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by CPMcGraw
Obviously, there are some important exceptions to such a rule. Can anyone remember if the Apogee Newsletter ever covered this topic?


I don't remember it being covered in the Apogee Newsletter and I usually do read the articles that deal specifically with RockSim. I may have overlooked it though. I may email Tim and see if he can shed some light on this feature. I had an entry for an EMRR virtual rocket contest that had a transition and reverse transition close to the nose cone and remember not being able to figure out why the calculations were so far off. I wasn't aware of this feature at the time so I trashed the design and went another direction.

.

snaquin 11-05-2007 10:57 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by CPMcGraw
Nice going, Steve! Those coupons do come in handy for "special" purchases...

Translation: She can use 'em, too... :D

Now I can run the sim over again and get a more accurate profile...

The altitude came to 1138' with a slightly reduced Dv, down to 24 FPS, when burning the D12-5.

Interesting outcome with the C11-5. I get 565' with a Dv of 8 FPS. That's a really nice, clean flight with low velocity over the top.

Both motors seem to need a 48" x 3/16" rod with this bird, as they take at least 33" of guide length to reach flight V. An extra 12" wouldn't hurt.

What I really want is a "D" bird that Dv's below 10 FPS, and still gets off easily on a 36" rod. This one comes close, but I want the next one to be a little quicker on the launch.


Craig,

I did get a little progress on the 24mm AV Booster tonight. Engine mount is finished and mounted with kevlar shock cord anchor and fins are cut and covered with label paper and edges sealed with CA. I would normally use a Semroc ST-13 baffle but I'm trying to get it built to paint this weekend since our next launch is on Nov. 17 and I want to fly it at least a few times.

.

CPMcGraw 11-06-2007 12:31 PM

New Plan -- 24mm AstroVision Booster #2
 
3 Attachment(s)
Here's the second design for a 24mm "D" power booster for the AstroVision package. My goals were to create something that could get off the pad on a 36" rod, and pop-the-top with a moderate Dv. I think this design meets those goals. If it looks vaguely familiar, then understand that some designs just can't be improved upon, just adapted...

Length: 18.30"
Diameter: 1.375" (AV base diameter)
Fin Span: 3.34"
Weight: 2.27 oz

D12-7......1350'......Dv 18 FPS......36" x 3/16" launch rod (only needs 30")

The flight from GL to deployment is 8.2 seconds.

CPMcGraw 11-13-2007 09:11 PM

New Plan -- Snark
 
3 Attachment(s)
This one is a "Schoolyard Sounder".

Snark is a simple "Tau-styled" model with incredible performance on 13mm A3-4 motors. This is very likely going to be my next prototype!

Length: 18.27"
Diameter: 1.04" (BC-760)
Fin Span: 2.42"
Weight: 0.93 oz

A3-4T......460'......Dv 5.5 FPS......36" standard rod

Enjoy!

Tau Zero 11-14-2007 10:52 PM

"*Dude!* That's TAU Snarky!"
 
Craig,

This one definitely looks very "Snarky!" :cool: (No Apogee Components reference intended! :eek: )


Quote:
Originally Posted by CPMcGraw
Snark is a simple "Tau-styled" model with incredible performance on 13mm A3-4 motors. This is very likely going to be my next prototype!
(BEAVIS AND BUTT-HEAD VOICES) "Heh heh, heh heh. He said, 'Tau-styled.' --That was *cool.*"

(DUDE, WHERE'S MY CAR? VOICES) "*Dude.* -- *Sweet.*"


Cheers,

--Jay

James Pierson 01-05-2008 11:06 PM

New Design: Cap Ship
 
4 Attachment(s)
Now that is it 2008 look like we need to bring this thread back on top. Lately I have added all of the Semroc Classic tubes and balsa transitions to my database and my parts options have doubled. Still have yet to get around to the Centering Rings files. I also need to update alot of early designs using the Maximum Frontal Diameter and other necessary changes in the next year.

The bad news is that Tranquility 1 will need a slight redesign. Only found this out after it was built. There is a problem with the lower retaining cup that hold the pods. I use a 1/2 inch piece of ST-16 and the pods fit just fine, however there is no room for a streamer once they are wraped around the pods. The fix will be to change the ST-16 to an ST-18 and replace all the lower fins :( . This give enough room for the streamer and a little extra for easy deployment. This is called learning the hard way :rolleyes: .

Here is a ring fin design that I call the Cap Ship. It was inspired by a vintage cap toy that I saw on ebay. It uses 1 inch section of ST3030 which are about 3.6 iches in diameter.

Enjoy and Thanks Again, JP

Cap Ship (18mm)
Launch guide length: 36.0000 In

MOTOR.................MAX. ALTITUDE...........DEP. VELOCITY
A8-3..................152.30348 Ft.............14.5008 ft/s
B4-4..................382.48360 Ft..............5.1734 ft/s
B6-4..................389.86549 Ft..............3.6389 ft/s
C6-5..................867.97244 Ft..............1.8969 ft/s

James Pierson
NAR# 77907

CPMcGraw 01-06-2008 08:30 AM

Design Count
 
As I continue working on the website update, I am watching the number of designs gradually inching upward as I 'discover' some additional designs posted on the forum that were somehow overlooked. So, I thought I'd share these numbers with you for encouragement...

In the PROVENS category, we have 413 designs, the most recent being James Pierson's Cap Ship.

In the CONCEPTS category (designs that have either not been sufficiently debugged, or cannot be simulated with RockSim) we have 41 entries.

This brings us up to 454 designs at the start of 2008. Can we make this number cross 500 before the end of the year? I think it's possible!

Also remember, now that we're into the new year, the "Scrounged...2007" thread is closed for new posts. All new submissions need to be posted here in the Designers Studio.

I'm looking forward to seeing what develops here!

Tau Zero 01-13-2008 02:28 AM

Laser Wolf -- Another mutated design
 
6 Attachment(s)
I did this one back in August, and sent it to Craig (so it may already count as a 2007 BARCLONE design) , but I unearthed it again this week. I sent propaganda to JP and BillE, but apparently I didn't share it with the rest of the forum until now. :o

From the Can't Leave Well Enough Alone Department, this is,

"A collision between Wolverine #0861 and Laser Torpedo #1311 -- Upscaled to 1.68X."


Any comments or suggestions (aside from, "So, tell us about these voices you hear in your head" :eek: ) are welcome.


Cheers,

CPMcGraw 01-13-2008 07:22 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by CenturiGuy
I did this one back in August, and sent it to Craig (so it may already count as a 2007 BARCLONE design) , but I unearthed it again this week. I sent propaganda to JP and BillE, but apparently I didn't share it with the rest of the forum until now. :o

From the Can't Leave Well Enough Alone Department, this is,

"A collision between Wolverine #0861 and Laser Torpedo #1311 -- Upscaled to 1.68X."


Any comments or suggestions (aside from, "So, tell us about these voices you hear in your head" :eek: ) are welcome.


Cheers,


AKA "Laserene"...:p

Be sure to look at those "launch guide lengths" in the sim sheets. Both the C11 and the D12 require 48" x 3/16" rods. The E9 takes 47 out of 48, so you need a 60" rod or tower.

I still like the design. "She jus' needs more power, Capt'n..." :o

...And as for those voices, you might try a few generous doses of " PF Dark Side" and "AP Valid Path". (Now there's a combination of music: A Valid Path to the Dark Side...)

James Pierson 01-13-2008 08:37 PM

Laser Wolf on Diet
 
Looks great Jay, however after a closer look the Laser Wolf is a bit heavy as Craig has suggested. Its also way overstable. Both heavy and overstable are to blame for the take off speeds and launch rod length required.
Might concider the following:
Change from Nylon to plastic chute (Nylon Heavy)
Upper fins to 1/16" thickness
Other fin to 3/32" thickness
Reduce large lower fins size by 25% or so
Reduce length of upper BT-60

Hope this is helpful, and don't worry, I have to do the design diet thing all the time with my freaky design. ;) .

James Pierson
NAR# 77907

James Pierson 01-21-2008 09:46 PM

New Design: Discord Missile
 
5 Attachment(s)
Here is my version of the Star Wars Discord Missile. I decided to delete the froward nose
fins as they make the design unstable. For as many add on tubes as this design has the
preformance seems to be good. Gotta love this sci-fi stuff :D .

Enjoy and Thanks Again, JP

Discord Missile (18mm)
Launch guide length: 36.0000 In

MOTOR.................MAX. ALTITUDE...........DEP. VELOCITY
B4-4..................326.50787 Ft.............12.6591 ft/s
B6-4..................336.08268 Ft..............7.4773 ft/s
C6-5..................817.55906 Ft..............6.8211 ft/s

James Pierson
NAR# 77907

Tau Zero 01-26-2008 06:21 PM

Laser Wolf, version 2
 
5 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by CPMcGraw
AKA "Laserene"...:p

Be sure to look at those "launch guide lengths" in the sim sheets. Both the C11 and the D12 require 48" x 3/16" rods. The E9 takes 47 out of 48, so you need a 60" rod or tower.

I still like the design. "She jus' needs more power, Capt'n..." :o
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Pierson
Looks great Jay, however after a closer look the Laser Wolf is a bit heavy as Craig has suggested. Its also way overstable. Both heavy and overstable are to blame for the take off speeds and launch rod length required.
Might concider the following:
Change from Nylon to plastic chute (Nylon Heavy)
Upper fins to 1/16" thickness
Other fin to 3/32" thickness
Reduce large lower fins size by 25% or so
Reduce length of upper BT-60
Craig and James,

I took your suggestions to heart (for the most part), and here is "Laser Wolf" Version 2. I hacked 5 inches off the BT-60, and moved the small fins forward from the LT-115. I put the fins on a diet, and reduced the largest fins from a 1.68X upscale to only 1.36X (about 26% smaller now). I moved the launch lug aft, and put it on a standoff.

While I was able to switch to a C11-5 instead of a C11-3, the launch rod lengths will need to stay at 48" for the C11 and D12 (which appear to stabilize at 38" and 35", respectively). The E9-6 doesn't "get stable" until 44", so a 60" rod will still be needed.


Quote:
Originally Posted by James Pierson
Hope this is helpful, and don't worry, I have to do the design diet thing all the time with my freaky designs. ;) .
Quote:
Originally Posted by CPMcGraw
...And as for those voices, you might try a few generous doses of "PF Dark Side" and "AP Valid Path". (Now there's a combination of music: A Valid Path to the Dark Side...)
"The lunatic is in the hall... The lunatic is IN MY HEAD..." :eek:

James Pierson 01-26-2008 06:51 PM

Looks Good Jay.
 
I really like this design Jay. This one get my vote for your next kit release ;) . I you don't like the fin standoff amd the launch lug placement concider the following.


Cut that LL330 in half or just use two LL320 launch lugs.
One LL on the upper body tube and the other on the side of an large fin.
You end up with an Upper LL and an Lower LL. (Lower LL in rocksim Make Inside Tube)
One drawback to this is a launch rod is needed for alignment during assembly :rolleyes: .

Once again Jay, Great Design!

Your Pal, JP

James Pierson
NAR# 77907

CPMcGraw 01-27-2008 02:41 PM

Jay,

I like what you've done here, too. Dv numbers are high, but not horribly so. She just needs a bit more "kick" off the pad (like a lot of us...).

I'm still trying to figure out how I could inspire anything to go on a diet...

Tau Zero 01-27-2008 11:53 PM

Jay (ahem) "weighs in"
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CPMcGraw
She just needs a bit more "kick" off the pad (like a lot of us...).

I'm still trying to figure out how I could inspire anything to go on a diet...
Craig,

My wife's been insisting for years that I could lose some weight. I keep telling her I'd look stupid without a head and one arm. :eek:

I didn't start gaining weight until after I'd met her. So I ask her if she'd like me to be fat and happy or thin and miserable. ;)

She tells me that's *not* what she means. I just say, "Oh, well." :rolleyes: :p


Cheers,

Tau Zero 01-30-2008 10:54 PM

Jay's next release?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Pierson
I really like this design Jay. This one get my vote for your next kit release ;) .
*I'd* probably pick something a lot simpler. ;)

Although I'd need to figure out a more effective (not to mention aesthetically pleasing) method for compiling instruction sheets. :o

Y'know, Dave at Sirius Rocketry uses black and white photos. (--Hmm...) :rolleyes:


--Sorry, did I say that out loud? :o


(It doesn't help that I get distracted with writing songs and screenplays, either. :eek: )


Cheers,

CPMcGraw 01-30-2008 11:06 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by CenturiGuy
...Although I'd need to figure out a more effective (not to mention aesthetically pleasing) method for compiling instruction sheets. :o...(It doesn't help that I get distracted with writing songs and screenplays, either. :eek: ) ...


You want distraction from rocketry? Try PHP/HTML/CSS/MySQL haiku...

Call it 'Ode to a BLOB I once thought I knew'...

My hair drops in clumps and my face turns dark blue...

Cause it takes all my time from drawing something new...

James Pierson 02-13-2008 12:50 AM

New Design: Hostile Intentions
 
4 Attachment(s)
I Have been fighting with this design for some time now. I think I have finally got it in a version that will actually fly. DV's are good and most importantly the lift off velocities are acceptable with a 36" rod. The DV's are still a little high so I used 1/4" shock cord that is 36" long. Also funny twist is that I actually have built this design (All Semrco Parts) as of 02-08-08 and am just now posting the Rocksim file. OOPS! I will post photo's later of all that I have built before they under go the spring test flights hopefully with Jon ;) .

A big THANK YOU to Carl nd Sheryl of SEMROC for sending me all the right part no matter how poorly I describe what I need. Carl always seem to go above and beyond the call of duty. Thanks Carl, the CR-KV-60 was exactly what I needed for the Tranquility 9 design (to be built and unvaled soon) ;) .

Enjoy and Thanks Again, JP

Hostile Intentions Version 4 (18mm)
Launch guide length: 36.0000 In

MOTOR.................MAX. ALTITUDE...........DEP. VELOCITY
B4-4..................249.67093 Ft.............26.9488 ft/s
B6-4..................257.11778 Ft.............23.3635 ft/s
C6-5..................640.75787 Ft. ...........19.1385 ft/s

James Pierson
NAR# 77907

.

EchoVictor 02-13-2008 02:19 PM

WOW, James, just WOW!

Later,
EV

James Pierson 02-13-2008 11:49 PM

Thanks EV, I knew you would be tempted with the Sci-Fi design ;) . I am glad you like it and lets hope it flies as well as it looks :rolleyes: . One never knows when a test flight design will turns into a W.S.M. ( Worm Seeking Missile). Its happend to me twice now. :eek: LOL.

James Pierson
NAR# 77907


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:40 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.