(Yet Another) Der Big Red Max build

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I’m really enjoying this build thread, especially the parts about increasing strength while keeping weight down.
 
DISCUSSION ON CENTERING RINGS
If you want to know why I can use paper centering rings with G and H motors, here is my answer. Centering rings do multiple things: they bear the loads for rocket motor thrust and parachute deployment. They also seal the compartment for ejection gases to pressurize the airframe and separate the rocket. However, when you have TTW fins, most (if not all) of the motor thrust and deployment loads are borne by the TTW fin joints. In this rocket, there are two centering rings that are glued around their perimeter for a surface of about 19 lineal inches (2 rings x 9.5 inches/ring). By applying TTW fillets, there are 36 lineal inches of surface area. (3 fins x 4 fillets x 3 inches per fillet)- that is 90% more surface area for flight stress. I intend to remove the aft centering ring and apply internal reinforcements to the fins so they will carry the thrust/deployment load. I will omit the middle centering ring--I will re-purpose it for my baffle.

Once thrust/deployment loads are transferred to the TTW fins, the centering rings are needed only for sealing the gasses, so I can go with lighter rings. If it weren't for my intent to install a baffle I could get away with only a forward centering ring for flight. BTW, if you have not read Tim Van Milligan's article on making stronger paper centering rings, it is worth the read because there are many times you can strengthen cardboard rings to do amazing things with some good engineering practices.
Apogee newsletters that discuss reinforcement and using paper for light and strong centering rings:
https://www.apogeerockets.com/education/downloads/Newsletter126.pdfhttps://www.apogeerockets.com/education/downloads/Newsletter63.pdf
 
PAINT AND FINISH
As I mentioned earlier, my approach is to fill spirals in the airframe, and get most of the fin imperfections out before I start assembling. It is just easier to sand down the parts when they can be laid out and flattened. I usually do 2 coats of sanding sealer on MPR/HPR kits followed by sanding it all off. This normally gets everything ready for a final primer coat, then on to final paint. If I find a deeper spot, my usual approach is to fill with spot putty, sand it down and hit it with primer to see if it needs more work. Switching sandable primer colors between coats (e.g. gray, then brick red) can be helpful to see how the finish is progressing. I fly most of my kits so I want it to look nice, but I am not obsessing over it. If I am not happy with something after 2 coats, I just repeat the process once more and that usually fixes it.

I wet sanded the nosecone with 600 grit at the sink, dried it off and painted it with a coat of Duplicolor self-etching primer. I had a couple of spots that needed some spot putty. They were filled, the entire cone was dry sanded with 400 grit and coated again with self-etching primer. Looks good, so on to the black paint.

For the rocket body, I decided to go with Duplicolor Ceramic paint (Chrysler Red). I used Duplicolor Ceramic gloss black on the nosecone. Once the decals and paint touch-up were done, I finished the paint with Duplicolor 1K Clearcoat High Gloss paint. These are all rattle can paints from the local auto parts store. For all paints, I spray a light coat to cover the surfaces, wait 10 minutes then hit it with a heavier second coat that gets the paint to flow and level (without getting runs).

After the Red coat dried for two days, I did a light wet sanding of the red with 800 grit wet sandpaper, followed with wiping down the surfaces and applying decals.

I did not like the small red gap at the top of the airframe so I touched it up with a gloss black paint pen I had. It looks bad against the flatter finish of the decal, but I knew the clear coat would make them have a uniform look at the finish, so I didn't worry about it. Turned out fine.

I hand painted the aft end of airframe with flat black before I used JB Weld to attach the motor retainer. The aft end always gets a burned look after 3-4 flights so the black just starts it where it will end up anyway.

I scuffed up the bottoms of the rail guides, cleaned them with acetone and glued them down with epoxy.
 

Attachments

  • P1030056.JPG
    P1030056.JPG
    8.5 MB · Views: 0
  • P1030057.JPG
    P1030057.JPG
    1.5 MB · Views: 0
  • P1030058.JPG
    P1030058.JPG
    1.7 MB · Views: 0
  • P1030069.JPG
    P1030069.JPG
    1.8 MB · Views: 0
  • P1030070.JPG
    P1030070.JPG
    7.8 MB · Views: 0
  • P1030072.JPG
    P1030072.JPG
    1.8 MB · Views: 0
  • P1030073.JPG
    P1030073.JPG
    1.7 MB · Views: 0
  • P1030074.JPG
    P1030074.JPG
    7.1 MB · Views: 0
  • P1030076.JPG
    P1030076.JPG
    1.7 MB · Views: 0
  • P1030081.JPG
    P1030081.JPG
    7.5 MB · Views: 0
  • P1030083.JPG
    P1030083.JPG
    1.8 MB · Views: 0
RECOVERY SYSTEM

I used a 15 ft piece of woven Kevlar I had in my box for the recovery train. I used a small SS quick link to attach both Kevlar shock cord and parachute to the nosecone Kevlar loop I created. I decided to abandon the provided parachute and go with a 30 inch X-form from Top Flite. I'm a fan of X-forms because they have less opening force than flat round chutes. I have an old PML Tethys I flew several times without issue using a homemade 54" X-form; the first time I used a flat round chute, I got a zipper, so it's back to the X-form for me. BTW, Rocketman-style chute are just X-forms with tucked in gore ends. X-forms have a lower drag coefficient so you will need a larger one. Anyway, that completes this rocket. I'll probably break it in with an F motor, then try a G80 to see what it will do.
 
PAINT AND FINISH
As I mentioned earlier, my approach is to fill spirals in the airframe, and get most of the fin imperfections out before I start assembling. It is just easier to sand down the parts when they can be laid out and flattened. I usually do 2 coats of sanding sealer on MPR/HPR kits followed by sanding it all off. This normally gets everything ready for a final primer coat, then on to final paint. If I find a deeper spot, my usual approach is to fill with spot putty, sand it down and hit it with primer to see if it needs more work. Switching sandable primer colors between coats (e.g. gray, then brick red) can be helpful to see how the finish is progressing. I fly most of my kits so I want it to look nice, but I am not obsessing over it. If I am not happy with something after 2 coats, I just repeat the process once more and that usually fixes it.

I wet sanded the nosecone with 600 grit at the sink, dried it off and painted it with a coat of Duplicolor self-etching primer. I had a couple of spots that needed some spot putty. They were filled, the entire cone was dry sanded with 400 grit and coated again with self-etching primer. Looks good, so on to the black paint.

For the rocket body, I decided to go with Duplicolor Ceramic paint (Chrysler Red). I used Duplicolor Ceramic gloss black on the nosecone. Once the decals and paint touch-up were done, I finished the paint with Duplicolor 1K Clearcoat High Gloss paint. These are all rattle can paints from the local auto parts store. For all paints, I spray a light coat to cover the surfaces, wait 10 minutes then hit it with a heavier second coat that gets the paint to flow and level (without getting runs).

After the Red coat dried for two days, I did a light wet sanding of the red with 800 grit wet sandpaper, followed with wiping down the surfaces and applying decals.

I did not like the small red gap at the top of the airframe so I touched it up with a gloss black paint pen I had. It looks bad against the flatter finish of the decal, but I knew the clear coat would make them have a uniform look at the finish, so I didn't worry about it. Turned out fine.

I hand painted the aft end of airframe with flat black before I used JB Weld to attach the motor retainer. The aft end always gets a burned look after 3-4 flights so the black just starts it where it will end up anyway.

I scuffed up the bottoms of the rail guides, cleaned them with acetone and glued them down with epoxy.

That looks amazing. Duplicolor is about the best paint I've found over the counter without going to a custom mixed and filled can from an auto paint distributor.
 
I've sprayed a lot of Duplicolor in the very conditions that they tell you not to. I just now sprayed a red nose cone, a body tube with a few coats of primer, and another tube gloss black.

It's 40deg out, and raining. Everything came out perfect.

Hans.
 
Looks fantastic! What’s the final weight?
With recovery system it is 18.25oz. : Airframe w/o nosecone or recovery = 9.75oz, Nosecone = 5.75oz (mostly epoxy/coupler in the tip), recovery system (Kevlar+chute) = 2.75oz. There's probably 4-5 oz of paint on there. Can't wait for some nice weather to put a large G/baby H motor in it. Those fins are rigid and I believe the kit can handle it. By adding the coupler in the nose I have the ability to screw in additional weight or a GPS unit. The kit provides clay weight for the nose--I just replaced it with a 1/4" coupler set in epoxy. I put a coupler in just about all my MPR/HPR kits anymore. Just build a normal av bay, add a bolt at the front and it can be added and removed quickly.
 
With recovery system it is 18.25oz. : Airframe w/o nosecone or recovery = 9.75oz, Nosecone = 5.75oz (mostly epoxy/coupler in the tip), recovery system (Kevlar+chute) = 2.75oz. There's probably 4-5 oz of paint on there. Can't wait for some nice weather to put a large G/baby H motor in it. Those fins are rigid and I believe the kit can handle it. By adding the coupler in the nose I have the ability to screw in additional weight or a GPS unit. The kit provides clay weight for the nose--I just replaced it with a 1/4" coupler set in epoxy. I put a coupler in just about all my MPR/HPR kits anymore. Just build a normal av bay, add a bolt at the front and it can be added and removed quickly.
Part of my intent for my build was moving the CG forward by my building choices, rather than just throwing clay weight in the nose. If you are going to take on additional weight, get something for it. The reinforced balsa fins came in lighter than plywood while giving me the added stiffness for larger motors and lighter fins keep the CG from moving rearward. I used a longer motor mount and used the middle centering ring as a baffle. The longer mount move CG forward by keeping the recovery system closer to the nose during flight. I could have moved it forward to the place that the nosecone shoulder sat flush on the top centering ring and the recovery system was inside the nosecone. That would have moved CG forward even more. My decision to use a plywood plug to cap the motor tube and be the recovery system attachment point also added more weight. That's the one part where I could have saved weight with a different recovery attachment design (such as Kevlar attachment to fin roots). The added weight of that plug/screw eye helped to move CG forward. And the coupler epoxied into the nose added about 3oz of weight, but adds the ability to screw av bays or weights into the nose and remove them, rather than just add nose weight.
 
Back
Top