38mm MD Design Opinions

Discussion in 'High Power Rocketry (HPR)' started by RAHagen, Jan 13, 2016.

Help Support The Rocketry Forum by donating:

  1. Jan 13, 2016 #1

    RAHagen

    RAHagen

    RAHagen

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2014
    Messages:
    639
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hey Everyone! After all this time I'm finally jumping in and building a 38mm MD. For a while there, It seemed like everyone was building one of these and being the self proclaimed hipster/oblivious person I am I've decided to start one after that hype has dropped off some. :p So without further adieu here is my design for a 38mm MD. I've had this design bouncing around in my hard drive for at least a year now and I'm finally getting close to building it. Before I started though I wanted to run it by you guys first. Nothing super special but I'm exited to start building it!

    Airframe: I'm planning to use the cardboard-composite method that I've used quite a bit and found to be very reliable. This time my plan is to make the tube out of a 38mm motor mount tube with two wraps of carbon fiber.

    Fins: These will be made from 1/16" Carbon fiber plate. I'll be making these from scratch as well. I used the same thickness on my recent 29mm MD and I believe the same thickness should work. This is an area where my skill is quite limited so any help is greatly appreciated.

    E-bay and Recovery: Due to the airframe being carbon fiber I'll be putting the electronics in the nose cone. For tracking and dual-deploy I'll be using my telemetrum flight computer with a cable cutter for drogue and main. One thing's for sure, I'll have much more space to "stretch out" so to speak in this E-bay than in my 29mm MD. :p

    Motor Retention: friction fit

    Planned Motors: The rocket is designed around Loki's 38/1200 case, so it'll be able to launch on pretty much anything.

    Predicted Altitude: My current design is simmed to reach an altitude of around 12700 feet with the Loki 38mm K


    38mm MD.jpg 38mm MD 2.jpg

    View attachment minimum diameter blue tube V.3.rkt
    So what do you guys think? Questions? Comments? Concerns?

    P.S. Oh! And a name! I'm about the worst you can get when it comes to naming rockets. If you need proof, go look at the first few posts on my "Querty" thread. :p :facepalm:
     
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2016
  2. Jan 13, 2016 #2

    SinfulDarkLord

    SinfulDarkLord

    SinfulDarkLord

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,525
    Likes Received:
    5
    Great design,

    I'll be subscribed
     
  3. Jan 13, 2016 #3

    bill2654

    bill2654

    bill2654

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2010
    Messages:
    2,458
    Likes Received:
    3
  4. Jan 13, 2016 #4

    Cl(VII)

    Cl(VII)

    Cl(VII)

    Chris Bender, Lab Rat TRF Sponsor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2013
    Messages:
    4,015
    Likes Received:
    131
    I would move the aft fins forward about 1-1.5 cal for a few reasons:

    1) protect them on landing
    2) CP versus CG isn't going to be a problem because anything over about 3 grains will start placing weight in front of the CP
    3) Since you are friction fitting it would be nice (and some RSOs may require) a wrap of aluminum tape also, and this would be way easier with some uninterupted airframe at the aft end.
    4) This is hearsay, but it sounds correct. You will reduce the overall drag by allowing the air disturbed by the fins to return to laminar flow before the aft end...or something like that, basically: smooth air=good, turbulent air=bad.

    Also, fin thickness sounds on the minimal end to me, but I do not possess good mind-fin-sim. Someone more experienced will have to weigh in.

    I very much like you use of CC for DD. This is a good plan, and I wish I had done mine that way.
     
  5. Jan 14, 2016 #5

    RAHagen

    RAHagen

    RAHagen

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2014
    Messages:
    639
    Likes Received:
    0
    SO something like this? I'd be uncomfortable moving the fins any further forward than .5". That leaves the the worst case stability margin at .41 calibers.
    View attachment minimum diameter blue tube V.3.rkt

    And thanks, I think I got that from Conman's MD thread or something. Really saves space. :) BTW how'd you MD fly? I don't think I was there to see it.
     
  6. Jan 16, 2016 #6

    T34zac

    T34zac

    T34zac

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2014
    Messages:
    836
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    Everything looks good to me so far although the fin thickness may be too think for a 38mm K. I wouldn't quite go 1/8" but 3/32" should suffice.
     
  7. Jan 17, 2016 #7

    RAHagen

    RAHagen

    RAHagen

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2014
    Messages:
    639
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks Tzac, yeah I was thinking that 1/8" would be a little too much too. I agree though with Chris that 1/16" is probably pushing it so I'll probably go jump through the hoops to get fin sim on my computer. The problem is that my CF was a gift from a friend and he didn't know what thickness it was so all I know is that a six sheet layup cured in a press is just over 1/16". I was thinking I'd probably do a 7-8 sheet layup so it'd hopefully be around 3/16"

    I also started thinking about ways to make this rocket a little more than just a MD. What If I inserted flex sensors into the fins and ran the data to a recording device. I could overlay the data with my flight stats from my Telemetrum and see where the fins produce the most flutter. What do you guys think? I'm pretty sure someone has done it before but I think it might be a way to make the build a little more interesting.
     
  8. Jan 17, 2016 #8

    SinfulDarkLord

    SinfulDarkLord

    SinfulDarkLord

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,525
    Likes Received:
    5
    You probably have 7oz fabric. 8 layers should get you to 0.1" thickness.

    Having a sensor would be nice to determine such effects. I say give it a shot.
     
  9. Jan 19, 2016 #9

    RAHagen

    RAHagen

    RAHagen

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2014
    Messages:
    639
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks! Yeah I think ill be doing that. Just to make this rocket a little more unique. :)
     
  10. Jan 19, 2016 #10

    bobkrech

    bobkrech

    bobkrech

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2009
    Messages:
    8,351
    Likes Received:
    12
  11. Jan 20, 2016 #11

    kcobbva

    kcobbva

    kcobbva

    Lifetime Supporter TRF Lifetime Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2015
    Messages:
    1,364
    Likes Received:
    56
    Wow subscribed. looking forward to see your progression!
     
  12. Jan 20, 2016 #12

    RAHagen

    RAHagen

    RAHagen

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2014
    Messages:
    639
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks! I have a digital caliper but I wasn't sure if measuring the cloth straight like that would give an accurate reading.
     
  13. Jan 21, 2016 #13

    cls

    cls

    cls

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2009
    Messages:
    2,216
    Likes Received:
    0
    what about options for tracking it, to recover it? doesn't matter how high it went if we can't hear the beeps of the altimeter.
     
  14. Jan 21, 2016 #14

    RAHagen

    RAHagen

    RAHagen

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2014
    Messages:
    639
    Likes Received:
    0
    I believe I posted originally that the av-bay will be equipped with a Telemetrum flight computer that will transmit flight/location data, and control the rockets parachute deployment.
     

Share This Page