View Poll Results: Who's Option would work better (note: Launch must happen by May 19th)?

Voters
7. You may not vote on this poll
  • My Option

    0 0%
  • Bryce's Option

    5 71.43%
  • Either will work

    2 28.57%
Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: Difference of Opinions, Suggestions Needed

  1. #1
    Join Date
    17th September 2010
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    1,796

    Difference of Opinions, Suggestions Needed

    I have a conundrum for the community. Bandman444(Bryce), Tominator79(Tom), and all came together to help Bryce design and assemble the fins for his High School's project.

    The project is a 3" MD rocket aiming towards mach 3 to measure aerodynamic heating curves and compare against acceleration.

    We attached the fins without much issue, and we T-T'd one side fairly well, but there was a hiccup. Before I left, I attached the coupler to the body, but I neglected to make a major note of it, and we could not put the rocket in the curing oven due to time constraints with the vacuum bag supplier. When they applied the vacuum, the coupler slid into the body tube and cured there.

    As I understand it, the epoxy that was pushed into the tube is "gummy", which leads me to believe that the bond is not impossibly strong and will not damage the body to break, though I do not want to test my luck with this.

    Now, we have two different options on the table that may or may not work.

    Options:

    (My option): We use a saw blade and carefully cut out a small section of the coupler (length-wise) so we can delaminate the two pieces of tubing.

    (Bryce's Option): We carefully cut the 4.5"-5" section of body tube, and remove the tube so the coupler is clear of the tube, and can be used.

    Issues:
    (My Option):We could saw into the body tube, which would lower strength. We would also need to buy a new coupler tube, probably out of FG because CF is incredibly expensive and the part will need to be rush ordered.

    (Bryce's Option):We could confidently saw into the coupler which would lower the coupler's strength and cause a failure.

    Notes:
    (My Option): Allows for use of the longest motors, but said motors will not be used for this test. Also, new coupler will need to be ordered.

    (Bryce's Option): Will not allow for longest motors, but said motors will not be used regardless. No new parts need to be ordered. The cut will likely not be perfect, so finishing will need to be done to square the edge.

    These options will only be considered once less invasive options are tried.


    Edit: Please post the reasoning behind your answer, it will give us more insight on how to proceed.
    Last edited by edwinshap1; 9th April 2012 at 01:02 AM.
    2011 motor usage: 3696 Ns; 44.3% L
    2012 motor usage: 36186 Ns; 80% O

    NAR #91919
    Level 1: 06/10/11 Level 2: 10/08/11

    Rockets: Flown 2x STOP; Level Three Build 11.5" Squat

  2. #2
    Join Date
    7th August 2011
    Location
    Penfield, NY
    Posts
    452
    How about a 3rd option. if you can control the depth of your cut, cut the BT about a half-inch down and remove it, exposing a half inch of the coupler. That would give you something to grab hold so you can try to pull it out.
    Endeavour.jpg

    Evan Brown, NAR# 92851,
    Level 1, July 23, 2011
    Level 2, May 27, 2012

    History doesn't repeat itself, but it does have a tendency to rhyme. - Mark Twain

    Visit my YouTube Page...Google "EeeebeeeE rocket"

  3. #3
    Join Date
    13th February 2012
    Posts
    2,672
    Could you elaborate on the situation? Was this intended to be a zipperless design? How long is the body tube, the intended motor, and the length of the coupler inside of the body tube? What equipment is available for you to use?

    Pictures would be nice. Until I find out more, I cannot form an opinion on this issue.
    2013 impulse burned: 5205.1 Ns
    2013 impulse lined up to burn: ~56,445 Ns

  4. #4
    troj's Avatar
    troj is offline Wielder Of the Skillet Of Harsh Discipline, Potentate of Perilous Pans
    Join Date
    19th January 2009
    Location
    In a house
    Posts
    11,334
    Since you're bagging it, I'd say it's pretty safe to say the coupler is either cardboard or phenolic, meaning there's little or no need to try to cut the coupler.

    Instead, slip a hobby knife under the corner of the inner wrap, and start peeling it up and out. You'll have to keep working through layers, but you should be able to remove it with little or no damage to the tube.

    -Kevin
    Rocketry Online - Your Global Rocketry Resource
    Info-Central Rocketry Tips & Techniques
    Rocketry Ramblings

  5. #5
    Join Date
    20th February 2009
    Location
    Cayuga, Indiana
    Posts
    5,271
    Quote Originally Posted by troj View Post
    Instead, slip a hobby knife under the corner of the inner wrap, and start peeling it up and out. You'll have to keep working through layers, but you should be able to remove it with little or no damage to the tube.
    I agree. Do it now (the poll is wasting time and allowing it to cure longer).
    L3, TRA #11847
    Tripoli Indiana #132
    Tripoli Central Illinois #59
    Central Illinois Aerospace (NAR) #527
    Chicago Rocket Mafia, "Big Bucks" Dixon
    ___________________________________

    Gravity always wins. -- Radiohead

  6. #6
    Join Date
    23rd January 2009
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    205
    It's a Filament wound CF coupler.
    And I like Bryce's idea.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    17th September 2010
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    1,796
    Sorry, it's a 9" CF coupler in a CF tube. The entire coupler is inside the tube, and it's recessed from the lip by about 1".
    2011 motor usage: 3696 Ns; 44.3% L
    2012 motor usage: 36186 Ns; 80% O

    NAR #91919
    Level 1: 06/10/11 Level 2: 10/08/11

    Rockets: Flown 2x STOP; Level Three Build 11.5" Squat

  8. #8
    Join Date
    20th February 2009
    Location
    Cayuga, Indiana
    Posts
    5,271
    Quote Originally Posted by edwinshap1 View Post
    Sorry, it's a 9" CF coupler in a CF tube. The entire coupler is inside the tube, and it's recessed from the lip by about 1".
    L3, TRA #11847
    Tripoli Indiana #132
    Tripoli Central Illinois #59
    Central Illinois Aerospace (NAR) #527
    Chicago Rocket Mafia, "Big Bucks" Dixon
    ___________________________________

    Gravity always wins. -- Radiohead

  9. #9
    Join Date
    17th September 2010
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    1,796
    Quote Originally Posted by dixontj93060 View Post
    Thats what I said when I found out about it :P
    2011 motor usage: 3696 Ns; 44.3% L
    2012 motor usage: 36186 Ns; 80% O

    NAR #91919
    Level 1: 06/10/11 Level 2: 10/08/11

    Rockets: Flown 2x STOP; Level Three Build 11.5" Squat

  10. #10
    Join Date
    18th January 2009
    Location
    SW Michigan
    Posts
    1,865
    Yeesh...sounds like it is either time to start over or completely change the design. I assume it's a md design so what are the prospects of cutting it off below the coupler and using the motor itself as the coupler? Or am I not quite understanding the situation?

    Dave Brunsting | NAR 85879 | TRA 12369
    L1 - 11/04/07, Three Oaks, MI | L2 - 7/25/09, Muskegon, MI
    Prefect | Michiana Rocketry
    ND SLP 2012 Mentor

  11. #11
    troj's Avatar
    troj is offline Wielder Of the Skillet Of Harsh Discipline, Potentate of Perilous Pans
    Join Date
    19th January 2009
    Location
    In a house
    Posts
    11,334
    It's likely too late, now that it's been a few hours.

    Knowing now that it's CF in CF, the answer (if you have a motor tube long enough) would be to use the motor casing to force it out.

    At this point, you'd be better off cutting the airframe off. With the extra time it's now had to set up, trying to cut and peel would be problematic, at best.

    When the vaccuum was being pulled, someone should've noticed the coupler getting sucked in (hindsight is a glorious thing).

    -Kevin
    Rocketry Online - Your Global Rocketry Resource
    Info-Central Rocketry Tips & Techniques
    Rocketry Ramblings

  12. #12
    Join Date
    6th February 2010
    Location
    Camarillo, CA
    Posts
    1,828
    We plan to attempt to pound it out tomorrow.

    But heres a picture for those to understand.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	546507_3424532625739_1642961940_2870953_1927468890_n.jpg 
Views:	34 
Size:	57.6 KB 
ID:	78125

    It sucks, I get it.

    I will post tomorrow the results of our pounding...
    Bryce
    KJ6TEC
    NAR L2
    TRA L2
    Current Projects: 5x Madcow Squat (L3).

    Flying: 75mm Min Dia Research Project, BaddAzz Rocketry Das Blitzkrieg, The Mega Mean Machine!,"Size Matters", HPR Pemtech King Kraken,

    2011: 14,773Ns (44% N)
    2012: 38,670Ns (89% O) (Goal is 44%O, Goal met!)

    Read about our College rocket project www.Project60k.com

  13. #13
    Join Date
    19th November 2009
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    846
    Pounding it out = sledge hammer. Not sure if she will survive that.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    16th August 2011
    Location
    Edmonton, CANADA
    Posts
    1,888
    Hydraulic press, Lots of WD-40, and some prayer?
    Plays with wood, cardboard, and carpenters glue at home.

    L1 will have to wait until 2013. Oh well.......patience is a lost virtue any-ways...

  15. #15
    Join Date
    18th January 2009
    Posts
    308
    What kind of epoxy did you use on the coupler?

    Jim

  16. #16
    Join Date
    6th February 2010
    Location
    Camarillo, CA
    Posts
    1,828
    Quote Originally Posted by JimJarvis50 View Post
    What kind of epoxy did you use on the coupler?

    Jim
    Aeropoxy.
    Bryce
    KJ6TEC
    NAR L2
    TRA L2
    Current Projects: 5x Madcow Squat (L3).

    Flying: 75mm Min Dia Research Project, BaddAzz Rocketry Das Blitzkrieg, The Mega Mean Machine!,"Size Matters", HPR Pemtech King Kraken,

    2011: 14,773Ns (44% N)
    2012: 38,670Ns (89% O) (Goal is 44%O, Goal met!)

    Read about our College rocket project www.Project60k.com

  17. #17
    Join Date
    27th February 2012
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    242
    Here's a suggestion which may be a silly one but if your gona pound it out and risk destroying your good work would a bit (lot of heat ) from a heat gun to the side of the bt to use heat transfer through to the epoxy to try and soften it ?? Just a suggestion. I dont know the science curing affect of epoxy hence if it will even work like other glues !

    Good luck anyway

    Js

  18. #18
    troj's Avatar
    troj is offline Wielder Of the Skillet Of Harsh Discipline, Potentate of Perilous Pans
    Join Date
    19th January 2009
    Location
    In a house
    Posts
    11,334
    Quote Originally Posted by north boy View Post
    Here's a suggestion which may be a silly one but if your gona pound it out and risk destroying your good work would a bit (lot of heat ) from a heat gun to the side of the bt to use heat transfer through to the epoxy to try and soften it ?? Just a suggestion. I dont know the science curing affect of epoxy hence if it will even work like other glues !
    Since it's a carbon fiber tube and coupler, if sufficient heat is applied to soften the resin holding the coupler in, it'll likely soften the resin of the tube and coupler, as well.

    -Kevin
    Rocketry Online - Your Global Rocketry Resource
    Info-Central Rocketry Tips & Techniques
    Rocketry Ramblings

  19. #19
    Join Date
    5th January 2012
    Location
    Way too close to trees... lots of trees
    Posts
    515
    Quote Originally Posted by north boy View Post
    Here's a suggestion which may be a silly one but if your gona pound it out and risk destroying your good work would a bit (lot of heat ) from a heat gun to the side of the bt to use heat transfer through to the epoxy to try and soften it ?? Just a suggestion. I dont know the science curing affect of epoxy hence if it will even work like other glues !

    Good luck anyway

    Js
    Not with aeropoxy...
    2012 Neutons Burned: 6419 (66.6%M)
    2013 Neutons Burned: 7331 (71.6%M)
    2013 Motors: B:1 D:1 G:1 H:1 I:1 J:3 K:1 L:1

    "With enough power, anything can fly, it's just a matter of how it flies"

  20. #20
    Join Date
    29th December 2011
    Posts
    540
    I seriously doubt you'll be able to salvage this without damage. As for pounding/pressing it out, you have a contact surface area of about 85 in^2. Even a much weaker than normal bond is going to result in rediculously high shear force. A decent bond is on the order of 2000 lb/in^2 in shear IIRC. Unless your tubes can take end compressive force on the order of 8 tons or more I wouldn't even bother with the attempt. 8 tons force would be required to break an extremely weak bond of only about 100 lb/in^2 which is likely less than what you are dealing with from what you've posted (if I am interpreting it all correctly). A good bond would require 100+ tons but you are unlikely to have that, as the tubes weren't prepped for this undesired joint and not properly wet out.

    Can you instead chop below the embedded coupler to produce a fin can, and then just butt that onto a new tube, using the motor casing as a coupler? IOW, what DAllen also suggested?

    If you make that Plan B, then you can try one of the other methods that will probably damage the upper section. Just preserve the fin can area from damage, and don't crush it ...

    Ouch, you have my sympathies. Good luck!

    Gerald

  21. #21
    Join Date
    6th February 2010
    Location
    Camarillo, CA
    Posts
    1,828
    Thanks guy for your comments.

    Of course I (Bryce) chose to do my method.

    And....




    IT WORKED!!!

    Setup the router table with two stops and 1/128th of an inch at a time cranked her up. After about 15 passes it was clear we were just about there, so I made one final cut up the tube, and after a few minutes of prying, was able to pop the top chunk off and all was well. Even better yet was that the resulting shoulder is perfectly perpendicular with the tube.



    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	373984_3436906935089_1783527031_n.jpg 
Views:	32 
Size:	47.9 KB 
ID:	78377


    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	563104_3436961296448_1642961940_2876830_1951840910_n.jpg 
Views:	31 
Size:	51.0 KB 
ID:	78376
    Now we are all set to go, with a two week launch date and I will see you later!

    Thanks again
    Bryce
    KJ6TEC
    NAR L2
    TRA L2
    Current Projects: 5x Madcow Squat (L3).

    Flying: 75mm Min Dia Research Project, BaddAzz Rocketry Das Blitzkrieg, The Mega Mean Machine!,"Size Matters", HPR Pemtech King Kraken,

    2011: 14,773Ns (44% N)
    2012: 38,670Ns (89% O) (Goal is 44%O, Goal met!)

    Read about our College rocket project www.Project60k.com

Posting Permissions

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