Help Support RocketryForum by donating using the link above or becoming a Supporting Member.


Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 53
  1. #1
    Join Date
    1st February 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,219

    I've been asked again....

    ...about making a miniature version of my Guillotine Fin Jig. If there is enough interest to justify the cost of down scaling for production of this device it could be done. Any input would be appreciated and I cannot proceed without it. Thanks.

    http://www.macklinmissileworks.com/

    Making Guillotines Great Again

  2. #2
    Join Date
    7th December 2014
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    706
    A circumcised guillotine...

    Model rocketry is not my religion.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    1st February 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,219
    I've got a slogan I could use but...well...you'll just have to use your imaginations.
    http://www.macklinmissileworks.com/

    Making Guillotines Great Again

  4. #4
    Join Date
    18th January 2009
    Posts
    2,098
    Quote Originally Posted by tmacklin View Post
    I've got a slogan I could use but...well...you'll just have to use your imaginations.
    "The Mini Guillotine Fin Jig, not normally this small, it's just really cold in here."
    Don Magness
    The Squirrel Works Model Rocketry
    http://www.squirrel-works.com

    Follow us on Facebook

    I have seen the future and it is just like the present, only longer.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    1st February 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,219
    Quote Originally Posted by SecretSquirrel View Post
    "The Mini Guillotine Fin Jig, not normally this small, it's just really cold in here."
    Close, but as Bill said to Monica, "no cigar."
    http://www.macklinmissileworks.com/

    Making Guillotines Great Again

  6. #6
    Join Date
    7th December 2014
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    706
    Quote Originally Posted by tmacklin View Post
    I've got a slogan I could use but...well...you'll just have to use your imaginations.
    Because little rockets need love too...
    Model rocketry is not my religion.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    25th January 2009
    Location
    Glennville, GA
    Posts
    17,900
    I might be interested.
    -----------------------
    Chuck Haislip
    NAR/Tripoli Level 3
    Formerly a Prefect of ICBM - TRA #60

    Level 1 - LOC Minie Magg; Level 2 - PR Broken Arrow;
    Level 3 - 10 inch Nike Smoke
    2015 Ns for Year: 1315 Newtons
    My rockets usually fly naked. If they survive, they earn their paint.

    Come fly with ROSCo or ICBM in Camden SC => http://rocketrysouthcarolina.org

  8. #8
    Join Date
    21st May 2014
    Location
    Gardendale, AL
    Posts
    1,872
    I'm heading into MMX. Depending on price point I might be interested. What's the tube range going to be?
    NAR #99604 L2
    L1 - 08/15/15 - Estes Partizon - Aerotech H128W - Birmingham, AL
    L2 - 02/04/17 - MadCow 4" PAC-3 - Aerotech J350W - Talladega, AL
    L3 - TBD

  9. #9
    Join Date
    1st February 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,219
    Quote Originally Posted by Kruegon View Post
    I'm heading into MMX. Depending on price point I might be interested. What's the tube range going to be?
    I have no idea what the tube range might be and to some degree I am dependent upon those of you who are experienced in this arena. It will require some thought and may need to be made from materials other than wood or wood products.
    http://www.macklinmissileworks.com/

    Making Guillotines Great Again

  10. #10
    Join Date
    27th January 2015
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    2,017
    I think your current small jig works quite well from BT55 or 60 size and up. I've used it on smaller, but if the fins are small, it can be borderline useful. If the proposed compact jig handled tubes from .5" to 1.5" diameter, that would be ideal IMHO. Keeping in mind, of course, that models that size also have fins that are equally small in span... If the price was more or less in proportion with the other jigs, I'd likely buy one.
    Rick
    URRG, MARS
    Tripoli #15706
    http://www.rocketreviews.com/rick-barness-page.html

    There is a theory that states that if anyone figures out why the universe is for or why it is here, it will suddenly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarrely inexplicable.
    There is another theory that says this may have already happened...



  11. #11
    Join Date
    6th March 2010
    Location
    Amesbury, MA
    Posts
    1,997
    Is it so much a diameter issue or body tube length issue? I've seen the smaller version used down to BT-20 without any problems. A smaller diameter tube may need something to extend the angles to touch the fins but the larger problem would be the ability to hold the tube at both ends of the device. Even the Estes Mega Der Red Max needed to mounted to a mandrel to span from one support to the other.
    KENN BLADE
    NAR #80160
    CMASS President
    MMMSC Ambassador-at-Large
    NAR S&T Member

  12. #12
    Join Date
    9th August 2013
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    9,918
    Do you still sell the plans?
    There's probably like 20 people in the entire world that take MMX seriously enough to want one, and if they are such fine micro craftsmen, they should certainly be able to build a MMX size Jig. I made a down scale using the plans I got from you, but like lots of other things, now that it is complete I just need to get around to assembling it. I have nearly 30 projects or more right now that are complete and dry fitted, but require final assembly.
    Your Jig was a challenging build for sure, as I only use hand tools, to include a hand cranked drill.
    The digital caliper is a must for a Jig build, but if you want to make small rockets with a precision jig, yours is the best design I can think of.
    I really could not find the time to even try to make any improvements to it.
    If they are economically priced as kits, I'de actually like to get one because I enjoyed scratch building your plans so much.
    A wooden one would be kinda neat, but at such a tiny scale, you should offer one that is machined from carbon fiber plates.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Dry Fit Macklin Jig 2016-06-21 003.jpg 
Views:	151 
Size:	82.8 KB 
ID:	296567Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Carbon Fiber Micro Mosquito 2016-06-30 007.JPG 
Views:	126 
Size:	167.8 KB 
ID:	296568
    Last edited by TopRamen; 11th July 2016 at 02:17 AM.
    Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn

  13. #13
    Join Date
    6th June 2011
    Location
    San Diego. CA.
    Posts
    6,432
    Always wanted a guillotine in my pocket, but that's just me......
    ( I just KNOW I've set myself up, but what the hay...)
    TRA 2383
    Somebody told me I was on the watch list-I hope I get a Rolex.....
    The road to Hell is paved....you're welcome.
    I can't remember the last rocket I built, because I haven't built it yet.....

  14. #14
    Join Date
    19th July 2015
    Posts
    27
    Endorsed by Lorena Bobbit

  15. #15
    Join Date
    19th January 2009
    Location
    Washington D.C.
    Posts
    14,999
    Quote Originally Posted by tmacklin View Post
    I have no idea what the tube range might be and to some degree I am dependent upon those of you who are experienced in this arena. It will require some thought and may need to be made from materials other than wood or wood products.
    Like CW & Krurgon, I'd be interested depending on the price point.
    For us MicroMaxxer's we would need a jig that would handle Tubes from T2 (.246" OD) to prehaps as large BT-50 (.976" OD). To be perfectly Honest BT-5, BT-20 and BT-50 size models are ONLY 3,4 & 5 motor clusters. Most micro powered models BT-5 and Up are not very good flying machines.
    The rest of our range would be T2 (.246") T2+ (.281") MMX minimum motor size, T3 (.375"), T4 (.448"), with BT-5 (.544"), BT-20 (.736") and BT-50 Only of minor importance.

    More important I my mind; Many of our Micro Rockets are no more the 4.0" long. Some with fins smaller are less then 1/2" Root to tip so some very small Alignment angles would be required. Many of our models use fin materials as thin as .005" and .010" Waferglass (super thin G10). Styrene and Lexan fins down to .010" and as thick as .030", Standard 1/64 and 3/64 3ply aircraft Plywood, and Balsa and Basswood 1/20th" .032" and 1/16" is just about the max.

    I've looked before for Tiny Brass, Stainless Steel or Aluminum 3/8" or under Angles rigid enough for such use without much luck.

    I've looked at fabricating a Micro Guillotin type fin jig a couple times in the past just for fun. My inclination would be to fab. the either thing from all aluminum, Stainless steel or possibly a high strength laminate. Woods; even Aircraft birch Plywood would seem to be to thick for such a project. The alternates materials however I fear would make this little machine far to expansive to purchase????

    I'll keep my eye on this thread, If you need any specific specs on materials or processes used please let me know.
    Keep em Flyin Micronzied
    John
    Mrcluster/Micromeister
    Nar-15731
    Co-moderator MicroMaxRockets yahoo group.
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MicroMaxRockets/
    Narhams Section 139 - ROMCC

  16. #16
    Join Date
    1st February 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,219
    Quote Originally Posted by TopRamen View Post
    Do you still sell the plans?
    There's probably like 20 people in the entire world that take MMX seriously enough to want one, and if they are such fine micro craftsmen, they should certainly be able to build a MMX size Jig. I made a down scale using the plans I got from you, but like lots of other things, now that it is complete I just need to get around to assembling it. I have nearly 30 projects or more right now that are complete and dry fitted, but require final assembly.
    Your Jig was a challenging build for sure, as I only use hand tools, to include a hand cranked drill.
    The digital caliper is a must for a Jig build, but if you want to make small rockets with a precision jig, yours is the best design I can think of.
    I really could not find the time to even try to make any improvements to it.
    If they are economically priced as kits, I'de actually like to get one because I enjoyed scratch building your plans so much.
    A wooden one would be kinda neat, but at such a tiny scale, you should offer one that is machined from carbon fiber plates.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Dry Fit Macklin Jig 2016-06-21 003.jpg 
Views:	151 
Size:	82.8 KB 
ID:	296567Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Carbon Fiber Micro Mosquito 2016-06-30 007.JPG 
Views:	126 
Size:	167.8 KB 
ID:	296568
    Yes, I still sell the plans and they still sell for $12 on my website. You certainly did a fine rendition of my contraption using carbon fiber, especially considering your use of hand tools only. Fantastic actually.

    From what little research I have done on these tiny rockets, I understand that the motors are 6 mm OD x 26 mm long. Thus a minimum diameter rocket would require a BT 2.5 having an OD of 0.281 inches.
    I'm thinking the range of the variable opening should fall between 3/16" minimum to 1 3/8" maximum, or BT2 to BT55. The length of the device is determined by the finished design of the rocket and must allow not only for support of the tube on each fixed end panel but also for projection or cantilever beyond the device for fin placement. Perhaps a longitudinal adjustment would be a nice feature. Unfortunately, every additional feature takes time and thus increases the cost.

    Source: http://www.fliskits.com/products/roc...x/mmx_body.htm

    Today I went to a REAL Watering Hole with my son in his boat: Lake Texoma, 89,000 acres of clear, blue water and NO COMPUTERS!
    http://www.macklinmissileworks.com/

    Making Guillotines Great Again

  17. #17
    Join Date
    1st February 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,219
    Quote Originally Posted by Micromeister View Post
    Like CW & Krurgon, I'd be interested depending on the price point.
    For us MicroMaxxer's we would need a jig that would handle Tubes from T2 (.246" OD) to prehaps as large BT-50 (.976" OD). To be perfectly Honest BT-5, BT-20 and BT-50 size models are ONLY 3,4 & 5 motor clusters. Most micro powered models BT-5 and Up are not very good flying machines.
    The rest of our range would be T2 (.246") T2+ (.281") MMX minimum motor size, T3 (.375"), T4 (.448"), with BT-5 (.544"), BT-20 (.736") and BT-50 Only of minor importance.

    More important I my mind; Many of our Micro Rockets are no more the 4.0" long. Some with fins smaller are less then 1/2" Root to tip so some very small Alignment angles would be required. Many of our models use fin materials as thin as .005" and .010" Waferglass (super thin G10). Styrene and Lexan fins down to .010" and as thick as .030", Standard 1/64 and 3/64 3ply aircraft Plywood, and Balsa and Basswood 1/20th" .032" and 1/16" is just about the max.

    I've looked before for Tiny Brass, Stainless Steel or Aluminum 3/8" or under Angles rigid enough for such use without much luck.

    I've looked at fabricating a Micro Guillotin type fin jig a couple times in the past just for fun. My inclination would be to fab. the either thing from all aluminum, Stainless steel or possibly a high strength laminate. Woods; even Aircraft birch Plywood would seem to be to thick for such a project. The alternates materials however I fear would make this little machine far to expansive to purchase????

    I'll keep my eye on this thread, If you need any specific specs on materials or processes used please let me know.
    Thanks John. The concerns you raised are the same concerns I've had since the idea of a "Mini-Guillotine" first came up. What works well at the large scale does not always translate to the small scale, and vice versa. It's why watchmakers tools are so expensive!
    http://www.macklinmissileworks.com/

    Making Guillotines Great Again

  18. #18
    Join Date
    1st February 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,219
    I have been thinking, sketching and formulating my ideas toward this challenge and hope to produce a prototype soon. Stay tuned sports fans!
    http://www.macklinmissileworks.com/

    Making Guillotines Great Again

  19. #19
    Join Date
    1st February 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,219
    John, AKA Micromeister,

    Am I correct in the assumption that the smallest outside diameter of any Micro-Maxx type rocket air frame would be 0.246 inches?
    http://www.macklinmissileworks.com/

    Making Guillotines Great Again

  20. #20
    Join Date
    14th October 2010
    Location
    Middle TN
    Posts
    695
    AFAIK, BT-2 is the smallest body tube that is commercially available. Generally, most of the Micro-Maxx rockets that I have seen use either BT-2.5 (0.281"), BT-3 (0.375"), BT-4 (0.448") or BT-5 (0.544") tubes for a single motor model. Micro-Maxx clusters can BT-20 or BT-50 tubes, but the drag penalty is high for Micro-Maxx motors. The limited power of these motors tends to favor lighter and skinnier models. Compared to standard Estes/Quest models, you really need additional tools such as modelling tweezers and glue applicators (the leftover red tube from a canned air can works really great.)
    'Til next time,

    Mike Toelle

    NAR 31692 L1

    SAM 0373

  21. #21
    Join Date
    1st February 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,219
    Quote Originally Posted by mwtoelle View Post
    AFAIK, BT-2 is the smallest body tube that is commercially available. Generally, most of the Micro-Maxx rockets that I have seen use either BT-2.5 (0.281"), BT-3 (0.375"), BT-4 (0.448") or BT-5 (0.544") tubes for a single motor model. Micro-Maxx clusters can BT-20 or BT-50 tubes, but the drag penalty is high for Micro-Maxx motors. The limited power of these motors tends to favor lighter and skinnier models. Compared to standard Estes/Quest models, you really need additional tools such as modelling tweezers and glue applicators (the leftover red tube from a canned air can works really great.)
    Fliskits shows a BT-2 tube as having an outside diameter of 0.246 inches. Their MMXII motors have an OD of 6mm, or 0.236 inches if my math is correct. So based on that data, I will size the minimum opening for the Mini Guillotine to be 0.243 inches. I hope to begin fabrication of this little gem tomorrow. Thanks for your input.

    http://www.fliskits.com/products/01prod_fs.htm
    http://www.macklinmissileworks.com/

    Making Guillotines Great Again

  22. #22
    Join Date
    19th January 2009
    Location
    Washington D.C.
    Posts
    14,999
    Quote Originally Posted by tmacklin View Post
    Fliskits shows a BT-2 tube as having an outside diameter of 0.246 inches. Their MMXII motors have an OD of 6mm, or 0.236 inches if my math is correct. So based on that data, I will size the minimum opening for the Mini Guillotine to be 0.243 inches. I hope to begin fabrication of this little gem tomorrow. Thanks for your input.

    http://www.fliskits.com/products/01prod_fs.htm
    Sorry for the late reply, been busy working on several Scale Micro models so haven't been on-line much last week.

    The Smallest Airframe tube for Micro Maxx motors is T2+ (.281" OD .255" ID). T2 tubes are .246"OD, .220" ID Which make EXCELLENT motor stops and shoulders but you can NOT get a MMX motor in them.
    Keep em Flyin Micronzied
    John
    Mrcluster/Micromeister
    Nar-15731
    Co-moderator MicroMaxRockets yahoo group.
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MicroMaxRockets/
    Narhams Section 139 - ROMCC

  23. #23
    Join Date
    1st February 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,219
    Quote Originally Posted by Micromeister View Post
    Sorry for the late reply, been busy working on several Scale Micro models so haven't been on-line much last week.

    The Smallest Airframe tube for Micro Maxx motors is T2+ (.281" OD .255" ID). T2 tubes are .246"OD, .220" ID Which make EXCELLENT motor stops and shoulders but you can NOT get a MMX motor in them.
    Thank you very much. This information is critical in establishing the dimensions of the minimum opening. I would be working on this today but the heat, humidity and my sore feet prevent it.
    http://www.macklinmissileworks.com/

    Making Guillotines Great Again

  24. #24
    Join Date
    30th January 2016
    Location
    US > OK > NE
    Posts
    3,484
    Might be just me, but I very much dislike operating tools at the extreme end of their stops.

    OD of the MMX motor, .236 would be the number I'd like. Why would I want to hold an MMX wrapped in parchment or .75oz glass, no idea.

    Would I ever want to attach fins directly to an MMX casing? Maybe for a dummy upper stage.

    Disclaimer : I have less experience at this scale than almost anyone.

    PS: This thing could probably ship as a single 8.5x11 mostly-routed sheet plus a tube of hardware.

    PPS: Put me down for the first production run, whatever you decide :-)
    Last edited by dhbarr; 17th July 2016 at 07:40 PM.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    1st February 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,219
    My original concept for the Guillotine Fin Jig was a tool that would adjust for a range of body tube diameters then in production (2011) and resulted in a device with a range from BT-5 through BT-80. That original design has evolved over time and I now produce two versions for Apogee, one that rages from BT-5 to 3.00 inches and a larger version that ranges from 1.75 to 6.125 inches. (I also make a mid-sized version which I sell directly through my website) These all function exactly alike, i.e., the tool is adjustable to the OD of the tube desired and the alignment rails adjust and center the fins, one at a time, relative to the tube. Unfortunately, "going small" presents a number of problems that "going big" does not, the first of which is the size of the average human hand.

    Whether or not I go into production of these will depend upon reaction to my as yet un-built prototype and the size of the marketplace. I anticipate a kit which will consist of two fixed end panels, two sliding end panels, two side panels and a bottom panel. The fin alignment rails will still be of aluminum extrusions, but smaller and with a different configuration. I need a bit of time to do all this, and Texas in summer is not helpful!
    http://www.macklinmissileworks.com/

    Making Guillotines Great Again

  26. #26
    Join Date
    1st February 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,219
    Today was much too hot to do anything in my shop so I went with "plan B", stayed in the air conditioning and fabricated a full size prototype from 3/16" foamboard and 1/4 x 1/2 inch balsa scrap. I'm short some 1/16 x 1/2 x 3/4 inch aluminum angle for the rails. Here are a couple of pics next to the original sized version. The first pis shows a 1/4 inch OD tube in the jig; the second pic shows a BT-56 in place and a part of the alignment rail which will ultimately support a 1/8 x 1/2 aluminum flat that will cantilever beyond one end. The end panels are 4 inches square and the side panels are 4 inches high x 5 inches long, which leaves 3 inches clear between the fixed end panels. It could be made to any length but making it much shorter will be at the sacrifice of longitudinal alignment. (think rifle vs. pistol sights) I'll post more pics once I've fabricated the two piece rails.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1380.jpg 
Views:	80 
Size:	298.3 KB 
ID:	297193   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1382.jpg 
Views:	83 
Size:	305.7 KB 
ID:	297194  
    http://www.macklinmissileworks.com/

    Making Guillotines Great Again

  27. #27
    Join Date
    1st February 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,219
    Quote Originally Posted by dhbarr View Post
    Might be just me, but I very much dislike operating tools at the extreme end of their stops.

    OD of the MMX motor, .236 would be the number I'd like. Why would I want to hold an MMX wrapped in parchment or .75oz glass, no idea.

    Would I ever want to attach fins directly to an MMX casing? Maybe for a dummy upper stage.

    Disclaimer : I have less experience at this scale than almost anyone.

    PS: This thing could probably ship as a single 8.5x11 mostly-routed sheet plus a tube of hardware.

    PPS: Put me down for the first production run, whatever you decide :-)

    Your concerns are well founded and will be taken into account. At this juncture, I'm pretty sure the range of the tool will be from 0.221" to 1.414" which will accommodate body tubes from T2+ to BT-56.
    I have created prototype fin alignment rails which I will photograph and then post pictures later today. As for "price points" they remain to emerge.

    Thanks for your interest.
    http://www.macklinmissileworks.com/

    Making Guillotines Great Again

  28. #28
    Join Date
    1st February 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,219
    And the pics:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1384.jpg 
Views:	67 
Size:	364.0 KB 
ID:	297324Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1385.jpg 
Views:	67 
Size:	38.7 KB 
ID:	297325Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1386.jpg 
Views:	67 
Size:	333.8 KB 
ID:	297326Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1387.jpg 
Views:	76 
Size:	384.8 KB 
ID:	297327

    The fin material/gauge shims shown here were made from 1/32" aircraft birch. The fin shown is a clipped delta and measures 1 inch from root to tip with a 1 inch root length and a 0.50 inch tip length. The closthes pins are used to clamp the various parts together in lieu of screws and nuts, and would not be part of the finished product. In the last photo, you can see a 1/4" ID launch lug having an OD of 9/32 inch (0.281") that I slipped over the 1/4 inch aluminum tube. The T2+ tube is 0.281" OD.

    A microscope will NOT be part of the final package!
    Last edited by tmacklin; 19th July 2016 at 08:15 PM.
    http://www.macklinmissileworks.com/

    Making Guillotines Great Again

  29. #29
    Join Date
    30th January 2016
    Location
    US > OK > NE
    Posts
    3,484
    Very nice!

  30. #30
    Join Date
    1st February 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,219
    Quote Originally Posted by dhbarr View Post
    Very nice!
    Thanks! There are some minor things that need to be worked out and I am in contact with Nat Kinsey about these items. I realize that these diminutive models are most often short in length and this presents a problem that is best remedied by the use of a tube coupler, extension tube and removable tape. Having the support/gauge points further apart tends to minimize any longitudinal error and I suspect that most of you micro-builders are also scratch builders as well..yes, yes?

    http://www.macklinmissileworks.com/

    Making Guillotines Great Again

Similar Threads

  1. Frequently Asked Question FAQ
    By wclune in forum Announcements
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 2nd February 2015, 03:41 AM
  2. My wife asked me.....
    By Scotty Dog in forum Oddrocs
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 5th March 2010, 01:19 PM
  3. OK, I know this has been asked a thousand times.....
    By Bravo52 in forum Low Power Rocketry (LPR)
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 31st January 2008, 07:40 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •