Ye Olde Rocket Forum

Go Back   Ye Olde Rocket Forum > BARCLONE > Designer's Studio
User Name
Password
Auctions Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts Search Mark Forums Read


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #281  
Old 04-03-2006, 08:56 PM
James Pierson James Pierson is offline
Master Modeler
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Washington State
Posts: 654
Lightbulb New Design: Thunder Strike

This is another design that is not what I actually intended. Its rather a happy accident. I played around with the motor choice and have achieved an Deployment velocity of 1.10 with the Quest C6-5 and the Estes was a Dv of 5.23. Kind of interesting.

Thanks and Enjoy, JP

James Pierson
NAR #77907
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:  Thunder Strike Image.png
Views: 132
Size:  14.4 KB  
Attached Files
File Type: rkt Thunder Strike.rkt (67.5 KB, 96 views)
Reply With Quote
  #282  
Old 04-03-2006, 09:51 PM
CPMcGraw's Avatar
CPMcGraw CPMcGraw is offline
BARCLONE Rocketry
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Mobile, Alabama
Posts: 5,357
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by James Pierson
I played around with the motor choice and have achieved an Deployment velocity of 1.10 with the Quest C6-5 and the Estes was a Dv of 5.23. Kind of interesting.


There is a difference in the power and formulation of those motors. They're not the same, just in the same range. Notice the big difference in the Estes B6-4 and the Quest B6-4 in your other runs? The Estes had a 30 FPS Dv, while the Quest only has an 18 FPS Dv. I haven't taken the time to study the differences in the RocSim motor files, but it's clear there is a difference in the power numbers.
__________________
Craig McGraw

BARCLONE Rocketry -- http://barclone.rocketshoppe.com
BARCLONE Blogsite -- http://barclone.wordpress.com
BARCLONE Forum -- BARCLONE Forum

BARs helping BARs

SAM 0044
AMA 352635

Last edited by CPMcGraw : 04-03-2006 at 09:56 PM. Reason: Looked again at the file...
Reply With Quote
  #283  
Old 04-03-2006, 10:55 PM
CPMcGraw's Avatar
CPMcGraw CPMcGraw is offline
BARCLONE Rocketry
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Mobile, Alabama
Posts: 5,357
Exclamation New Plan -- Scrappy

James noticed an interesting way to work with inside tubes with his Thunder Strike design, and it may be better than the cut-and-paste method for simulating tubes that are partially hidden and partially exposed.

I had to try his method out, and here's what I came up with.

Another "Schoolyard Sounder"...

Length: 18.3"
Diameter: 0.759" (ST-7)
Fin Span: 4"
Weight: 0.6 oz

1/2A3-4T.....235'.....19 FPS
A3-4T........565'.....20 FPS

Although the Dv is high for both motors, they're within limits. Just reef the chute and you should be safe.

As with some previous designs, the fin shape makes a big difference in the stability numbers. Adding that step in the leading edge can raise the margin while reducing the fin area as a bonus. Also, pulling the fin tip back at an angle is having a positive effect on the margin, while also reducing the total fin area.

Enjoy!
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:  Scrappy.jpg
Views: 135
Size:  35.9 KB  
Attached Files
File Type: rkt Scrappy.rkt (56.0 KB, 113 views)
__________________
Craig McGraw

BARCLONE Rocketry -- http://barclone.rocketshoppe.com
BARCLONE Blogsite -- http://barclone.wordpress.com
BARCLONE Forum -- BARCLONE Forum

BARs helping BARs

SAM 0044
AMA 352635
Reply With Quote
  #284  
Old 04-03-2006, 11:14 PM
A Fish Named Wallyum's Avatar
A Fish Named Wallyum A Fish Named Wallyum is offline
BP Mafia
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Ft. Thomas, KY
Posts: 7,908
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CPMcGraw
James noticed an interesting way to work with inside tubes with his Thunder Strike design, and it may be better than the cut-and-paste method for simulating tubes that are partially hidden and partially exposed.

I had to try his method out, and here's what I came up with.

Another "Schoolyard Sounder"...

Length: 18.3"
Diameter: 0.759" (ST-7)
Fin Span: 4"
Weight: 0.6 oz

1/2A3-4T.....235'.....19 FPS
A3-4T........565'.....20 FPS

Although the Dv is high for both motors, they're within limits. Just reef the chute and you should be safe.

As with some previous designs, the fin shape makes a big difference in the stability numbers. Adding that step in the leading edge can raise the margin while reducing the fin area as a bonus. Also, pulling the fin tip back at an angle is having a positive effect on the margin, while also reducing the total fin area.

Enjoy!


Reminds me of a certain Prometheus...........
(Sorry if I butchered that spelling. I'm too lazy to go back and check.)
__________________
Bill Eichelberger
NAR 79563

http://wallyum.blogspot.com/

I miss being SAM 0058

Build floor: StickerShock Vader Max

In paint: Centuri Stellar Hercules, Estes Air Commander, Indicator, Long Tom, Luna Bug, Menace, Nike Apache, Ricochet, Solar Warrior FRW Kormoran AS.34, Maverick AGM-65B, Star Blazer XL Quest Intruder Red River Stratos, Semroc Cyber III, Excalibur, Firefly, S.P.E.V., Texas Firefly

Ready to fly: Semroc Point
Reply With Quote
  #285  
Old 04-04-2006, 02:54 PM
Tau Zero's Avatar
Tau Zero Tau Zero is offline
Incurable SEMROC Fan
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Twin Falls, Idaho, USA
Posts: 2,219
Question "That's one scrappy Prometheus!"

Quote:
Originally Posted by A Fish Named Wallyum
Reminds me of a certain Prometheus........... (Sorry if I butchered that spelling. I'm too lazy to go back and check.)
But skinnier in the middle. Kind of like the seemingly anorexic teen models we're seeing these days. (Now, I *didn't* say "teen *model rockets!* )

--Seriously, guys, wouldn't having a tiny body tube like that BT-3 (with 6 of its 8" length exposed) contribute to a serious case of the "bends?" (Nothing personal, Craig, but as a klutz, I seem to instinctively understand the laws of physics, and at this particular scale -- especially given Estes' currently "Thermonuclear" ejection charges -- I'm just a little concerned for this design. ) Of course, you *could* do an SLS ~2.5OX upscale with Semroc's thick-walled "LT" tubes (LT-085, -125), but then you'd probably have to cluster it for the additional weight. Hmmm...


And now, for those of you who may have missed the Prometheus:

http://forums.rocketshoppe.com/show...60&postcount=48
http://forums.rocketshoppe.com/show...71&postcount=12

But yeah, Bill, you got the spelling write... er, "right." (You should *see* some of the news copy that comes over the TelePrompter. The folks who get Closed Captioning complain every once in a while. )


Cheers,

--Jay
Reply With Quote
  #286  
Old 04-04-2006, 02:58 PM
Tau Zero's Avatar
Tau Zero Tau Zero is offline
Incurable SEMROC Fan
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Twin Falls, Idaho, USA
Posts: 2,219
Talking "The Shape of Things to Come"

Quote:
Originally Posted by CPMcGraw
As with some previous designs, the fin shape makes a big difference in the stability numbers. Adding that step in the leading edge can raise the margin while reducing the fin area as a bonus. Also, pulling the fin tip back at an angle is having a positive effect on the margin, while also reducing the total fin area.
For the record, I *do* think that fin shape is pretty cool!


Cheers,

--Jay
Reply With Quote
  #287  
Old 04-04-2006, 03:14 PM
CPMcGraw's Avatar
CPMcGraw CPMcGraw is offline
BARCLONE Rocketry
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Mobile, Alabama
Posts: 5,357
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CenturiGuy
Seriously, guys, wouldn't having a tiny body tube like that BT-3 (with 6 of its 8" length exposed) contribute to a serious case of the "bends?" (Nothing personal, Craig, but as a klutz, I seem to instinctively understand the laws of physics, and at this particular scale -- especially given Estes' currently "Thermonuclear" ejection charges -- I'm just a little concerned for this design. )


The thought did manage to inch its way across my brain as I worked up the design. If this were being done for 18mm A-C motors, I'd agree completely. The smallest tube I would have used in that configuration would have been an ST-5 or BT-5. But since this design uses the 13mm motors instead, I felt it should be safe, even with those T-Nuke deployment charges.

In reality, though, I think the model will suffer less from actual flying and more from "hangar rash"...
__________________
Craig McGraw

BARCLONE Rocketry -- http://barclone.rocketshoppe.com
BARCLONE Blogsite -- http://barclone.wordpress.com
BARCLONE Forum -- BARCLONE Forum

BARs helping BARs

SAM 0044
AMA 352635
Reply With Quote
  #288  
Old 04-04-2006, 03:20 PM
CPMcGraw's Avatar
CPMcGraw CPMcGraw is offline
BARCLONE Rocketry
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Mobile, Alabama
Posts: 5,357
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CenturiGuy
For the record, I *do* think that fin shape is pretty cool!


Cheers,

--Jay


I'll probably be using some variation of the shape in future projects. I'm still curious as to why the shape has so much of an effect, as opposed to an increase of fin area. It's like that issue we beat to death about the Hi Flyer fins: A smaller fin with this step in the LE greatly improved that model's margin.
__________________
Craig McGraw

BARCLONE Rocketry -- http://barclone.rocketshoppe.com
BARCLONE Blogsite -- http://barclone.wordpress.com
BARCLONE Forum -- BARCLONE Forum

BARs helping BARs

SAM 0044
AMA 352635
Reply With Quote
  #289  
Old 04-04-2006, 03:27 PM
JRThro's Avatar
JRThro JRThro is offline
BAR Wannabee
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: NW Houston, TX
Posts: 1,304
Send a message via MSN to JRThro Send a message via Yahoo to JRThro
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CPMcGraw
I'll probably be using some variation of the shape in future projects. I'm still curious as to why the shape has so much of an effect, as opposed to an increase of fin area. It's like that issue we beat to death about the Hi Flyer fins: A smaller fin with this step in the LE greatly improved that model's margin.

Having that step in the leading edge moves the center of area, and therefore the center of pressure, for the fins further back than it would be with fins having a plain triangular shape. That moves the CP for the rocket further back.

I'll see if I can figure out where the CP for the two styles of fins are, and I may follow this up with an edit or another post if I do.
__________________
John Thro, NAR #84553 SR
I was too old when I started! Now I'll *never* become a BAR!
Reply With Quote
  #290  
Old 04-04-2006, 04:09 PM
CPMcGraw's Avatar
CPMcGraw CPMcGraw is offline
BARCLONE Rocketry
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Mobile, Alabama
Posts: 5,357
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRThro
Having that step in the leading edge moves the center of area, and therefore the center of pressure, for the fins further back than it would be with fins having a plain triangular shape. That moves the CP for the rocket further back.

I'll see if I can figure out where the CP for the two styles of fins are, and I may follow this up with an edit or another post if I do.


Thanks, JRT. That makes sense, it's just the degree of change that caught my attention. You wouldn't happen to know of a text on the subject that we could pull up and read, would you?
__________________
Craig McGraw

BARCLONE Rocketry -- http://barclone.rocketshoppe.com
BARCLONE Blogsite -- http://barclone.wordpress.com
BARCLONE Forum -- BARCLONE Forum

BARs helping BARs

SAM 0044
AMA 352635
Reply With Quote
Closed Thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:32 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Ye Olde Rocket Shoppe 1998-2021