 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / General / Rockets / December 2003Full-length paper coupler tubes??
Does anyone know of a source for full-length paper coupler tubing, to fit standard 2.56" airframe tubes? I used to get it from Rocket R&D but apparently they are out of business due to health problems. > Does anyone know of a source for full-length paper coupler tubing, to fit > standard 2.56" airframe tubes? I used to get it from Rocket R&D but apparently > they are out of business due to health problems. PML (phenolic) CTF-2.5-36, near the bottom of the 'Airframe' page. https://secure.consumersinterest.com/pml/ Totally Tubular (paper) CPL-80-34: http://www.wooshrocketry.org/misc/TT-6-2-03.htm  SignatureAndrew MacMillen NAR/TRA L2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Remove "-REMOVE-THIS-" to reply Giant Leap Rocketry http://www.giantleaprocketry.com click on High Power (rightmost button) click on Products on top frame click on airframes in left frame scroll down to Phenolic Coupler tubes 5" length for $2.09 36.5" length for $10.49 while your on that page, scroll down and check out the fiberglass and kevlar "socks", for seamless tube layups Ed is a great guy to do business with, order fulfillment is very prompt and customer service is excellent. He has real pride in his work. - iz >> Does anyone know of a source for full-length paper coupler tubing, to fit >> standard 2.56" airframe tubes? I used to get it from Rocket R&D but [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > PML (phenolic) CTF-2.5-36, near the bottom of the 'Airframe' page. > https://secure.consumersinterest.com/pml/ 5" length for $2.15 36" length for $10.95 > Totally Tubular (paper) CPL-80-34: > http://www.wooshrocketry.org/misc/TT-6-2-03.htm kraft only 4" for $1.00 34" for $9.00 << Phenolic Coupler tubes >> I may use them but prefer paper. Even the "flexible" phenolic is too brittle for my needs, and I always have to slit a cardboard tube and glue it into the phenolic tube to make it durable enough. from Giant Leap Rocketry, HPR -> airframes page at http://www.giantleaprocketry.com --- Non-brittle phenolic airframe tubes Why is NONBRITTLE PHENOLIC better? Nonbrittle phenolic is strong, like the old standard phenolic But nonbrittle phenolic is much less prone to crack or shatter. Unlike paper tubes, it won’t easily crimp or buckle. Unlike plastics, will readily absorb CA’s and epoxies. The solution.... 4 foot long tubes for 3" & 3.9 " diameter! Like all our bodytubes, these long tubes are nonbrittle phenolic -- like the old standard phenolic -- but less prone to crack, chip or shatter, and unlike paper, don't easily crimp or buckle. Check 'em out below! --- just fyi - iz > << Phenolic Coupler tubes >> > > I may use them but prefer paper. Even the "flexible" phenolic is too brittle > for my needs, and I always have to slit a cardboard tube and glue it into the > phenolic tube to make it durable enough. << Non-brittle phenolic airframe tubes >> They may call it "non-brittle" but in my experience it's only a little less brittle than the regular stuff, and still far more brittle than paper tubes. I agree. Don't believe everything you read just because its on a website ;-) I'm moving away from phenolic of any type and back to LOC tubes with a wrap or two of fiberglass. I've found that phenolic (from Giant Leap) will delaminate at the seams under stress. Isn't this exactly what the HPR strength of material test showed? That said... I sure wish I knew where to get full length paper couplers. I'm pretty sure the Red Arrow full length liners are phenolic. > << Non-brittle phenolic airframe tubes >> > > They may call it "non-brittle" but in my experience it's only a little less > brittle than the regular stuff, and still far more brittle than paper tubes. SignatureAlex Mericas > I agree. Don't believe everything you read just because its on a website ;-) > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > That said... I sure wish I knew where to get full length paper couplers. I'm > pretty sure the Red Arrow full length liners are phenolic. I'm thinking that LOC/Barry should take note and start offering the couplers and stiffys full length! SignatureJason Andersen CAR S576 L3 BMS, www.BalsaMachining.com has 34 inch length coupler stock, from BT-5 to BT-80, including 24mm & 29mm. Totally Tubular may have better prices, but BMS is likely to get it there sooner, plus you could pick some cones, rings, & maybe an Edmonds kit at the same time. -- Richard Hickok << I'm thinking that LOC/Barry should take note and start offering the couplers and stiffys full length! >> I've suggested it to them a couple of times. > << I'm thinking that LOC/Barry should take note and start offering the > couplers > and stiffys full length! >> > > I've suggested it to them a couple of times. Sounds like an expensive thing for a small market. That's always a problem. Jerry SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate at iKobo.com c/o my email. >><< I'm thinking that LOC/Barry should take note and start offering the >>couplers [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Jerry I've heard this reply before and I am puzzled by it. You, the seller, are buying the tubing from a vendor cut to length. A length you specify. Why can't you specify a longer length for a batch of tubes? Is is a minimum order per cut length? I would like it if the carried coupler tubes in longer lengths especially 36" or 48" to use as mandrills for Carbon fiber or fiberglass lay up tubes. True this would be a small market, but it would be a market. Bill Richardson >Why can't you specify a longer length for a batch of tubes? Is is a minimum >order per cut length? Yes, usually 1,000 qty. minimum plus a set up charge. Most people don't understand how many that is, until the semi truck pulls up to deliver them. The trucking usually costs 1/3 to 1/2 as much as the tubing. Sure, there is a market, but you'd have to store them for years until they were used up. Mike Fisher Binder Design > >Why can't you specify a longer length for a batch of tubes? Is is a minimum > >order per cut length? > > Yes, usually 1,000 qty. minimum plus a set up charge. Most people don't > understand how many that is, until the semi truck pulls up to deliver them. P E R S I Z E > The trucking usually costs 1/3 to 1/2 as much as the tubing. Sure, there is a > market, but you'd have to store them for years until they were used up. > > Mike Fisher > Binder Design SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate at iKobo.com c/o my email. > >><< I'm thinking that LOC/Barry should take note and start offering the > >>couplers [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > buying the tubing from a vendor cut to length. A length you specify. > Why can't you specify a longer length for a batch of tubes? The "popular" length is the standard coupler length. In our case two lengths. Typically 3 and 6 inches or 2 and 4 inches. By adding a third size (length) the mill chartges a new set-up charge, but more to the point, longer tubes have higher minumum shipping cost. So long couplers have very low demand AND about double the cost to the manufacturer. Not necessarily a deal breeaker but if I were to go into the long coupler business I would start-up with a proposed customer list so I could recoup my costs as quickly as practical. I look for 2 year breakevens and smaller vendors look for breakevens measured in weeks or months so it is even less likely a small vendor would do it. Wanna start a long coupler customer list grouped by tube diameter? I will be glad to order them and have them added to my next shipment. >Is is a minimum > order per cut length? I would like it if the carried coupler tubes in > longer lengths especially 36" or 48" to use as mandrills for Carbon > fiber or fiberglass lay up tubes. True this would be a small market, > but it would be a market. > Bill Richardson Good plan on the mandrel. I use standard tubes as a mandrel, lay it up and have custom fiberglass cones made to the slightly thicker wall now. Neither plan can use stock cones unless you remove the paper from the lay-up which I never do for insulation and fit of standard parts. Jerry SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate at iKobo.com c/o my email. <Snip> BRich asked: I've heard this reply before and I am puzzled by it. You, the seller, are buying the tubing from a vendor cut to length. A length you specify. Why can't you specify a longer length for a batch of tubes? The "popular" length is the standard coupler length. In our case two lengths. Typically 3 and 6 inches or 2 and 4 inches. By adding a third size (length) the mill charges a new set-up charge, but more to the point, longer tubes have higher minimum shipping cost. So long couplers have very low demand AND about double the cost to the manufacturer. Not necessarily a deal breaker but if I were to go into the long coupler business I would start-up with a proposed customer list so I could recoup my costs as quickly as practical. I look for 2 year break evens and smaller vendors look for break evens measured in weeks or months so it is even less likely a small vendor would do it. Wanner start a long coupler customer list grouped by tube diameter? I will be glad to order them and have them added to my next shipment. Is is a minimum order per cut length? I would like it if the carried coupler tubes in longer lengths especially 36" or 48" to use as mandrills for Carbon fiber or fiberglass lay up tubes. True this would be a small market, but it would be a market. Bill Richardson Good plan on the mandrel. I use standard tubes as a mandrel, lay it up and have custom fiberglass cones made to the slightly thicker wall now. Neither plan can use stock cones unless you remove the paper from the lay-up which I never do for insulation and fit of standard parts. Jerry Jerry & Mike thanks for the reply. That is what i thought as my friend and I have contacted tube makers and they had a $100.00 minimum order for any size. They really would not say how many tubes they would make per size, just that it would cost $100.00. To make minimum dia 54 mm tubes I use 3 foot mailing tubes from McMaster- Carr. I then cover them with 3M packaging tape and coat them with release compound. When the fiberglass or Carbon fiber is cured I just soak the tube out in the bath tub. Thanks for the info. Bill Richardson On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 15:06:28 -0800, Jerry Irvine <01rocket@gte.net> wrote:it is even less likely a small vendor would do it. >Wanna start a long coupler customer list grouped by tube diameter? I >will be glad to order them and have them added to my next shipment. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >Jerry I want to buy coupler tubes to use as sacrificial mandrels for rolling my own carbon fiber tubes. Add me to the list but I am going to be a small consumer. I want 38 54 75 and 98mm for starters. But I don't imagine I need more than 10 of each. I would buy more if I *had* to. I am alternately looking for a good mandrel material. If you end up ever doing this, please email me. lennyb at telus dot net. Thanks! Len B > I want to buy coupler tubes to use as sacrificial mandrels for rolling > my own carbon fiber tubes. Add me to the list but I am going to be a [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Len B I don't know anything about rolling Carbon Fiber tubes, but is there a reason that phenolic coupler tube won't work? Just trying to learn something here. -- Joe Michel NAR 82797 L1 > > I want to buy coupler tubes to use as sacrificial mandrels for rolling > > my own carbon fiber tubes. Add me to the list but I am going to be a > > small consumer. I want 38 54 75 and 98mm for starters. But I don't > > imagine I need more than 10 of each. I would buy more if I *had* to. I > > am alternately looking for a good mandrel material. If you end up ever > > doing this, please email me. lennyb at telus dot net. ditto 4 me ...count me in as well > I don't know anything about rolling Carbon Fiber tubes, but is there a > reason that phenolic coupler tube won't work? Just trying to learn > something here. They are much harder to dissolve out and remove than thinner walled simple kraft paper tubes and would cost more. Koen > > > I want to buy coupler tubes to use as sacrificial mandrels for rolling > > > my own carbon fiber tubes. Add me to the list but I am going to be a [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > ditto 4 me ...count me in as well May I at least have a priority list ie: 54 75 38 98 ? And a preferred clearance presumably 38mm which is 1.52" airframe and 1.50" motor, you want a 1.50" coupler (typical) or a 1.52" coupler SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate at iKobo.com c/o my email. >May I at least have a priority list ie: >54 [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >And a preferred clearance presumably 38mm which is 1.52" airframe and >1.50" motor, you want a 1.50" coupler (typical) or a 1.52" coupler Hi Jerry, Thanks for the reply. My priority would be as follows: 54, 38, 98, 75. I can work with either size for the coupler. You are correct in your assumption that I am looking at minimum diameter airframe building primarily. My own preference is that the coupler tube would be motor mount size for that reason. However, one of the other goals is to be able to either buy or duplicate of the shelf nose cones. Adjusting to the small differences in size is no problem. I've been doing that already for some rockets that I reinforce internally with carbon fiber. Len B > >May I at least have a priority list ie: > >54 [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > Len B So say a matching mandrel tube and a cast nose cone set would be a "feature"? SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate at iKobo.com c/o my email. >So say a matching mandrel tube and a cast nose cone set would be a >"feature"? Perhaps. One of the things I wanted to "play with" (at least in 54mm) is to try a few different nose cone shapes. Having a common shape as part of the "set" would eliminate one of the shapes I would have to make. I'm worried a bit that the custom nature of this exercise may make this undesirable. Anyway, sure, that would be a feature. Thanks, Len B > I don't know anything about rolling Carbon Fiber tubes, but is there a > reason that phenolic coupler tube won't work? Just trying to learn > something here. Depending on how you make the tube, you may end up sacraficing the tube you wrap the carbon fiber around to get the tube off the mandrel. Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/LeadingEdge/Phantom4000.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org Save Model Rocketry from the HSA! http://www.space-rockets.com/congress.html > > I don't know anything about rolling Carbon Fiber tubes, but is there a > > reason that phenolic coupler tube won't work? Just trying to learn > > something here. > > Depending on how you make the tube, you may end up sacraficing the tube you > wrap the carbon fiber around to get the tube off the mandrel. Some day I'd like to try the method that I heard about from the Gossamer Condor project: wind/wrap fiber/resin around thin wall aluminum tube, then use alkali solution to eat away the aluminum from inside. -dave w >> > I don't know anything about rolling Carbon Fiber tubes, but is there a >> > reason that phenolic coupler tube won't work? Just trying to learn [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > around thin wall aluminum tube, then use alkali solution > to eat away the aluminum from inside. IIRC the Deadalus project did likewise... Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/LeadingEdge/Phantom4000.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org Save Model Rocketry from the HSA! http://www.space-rockets.com/congress.html > > I want to buy coupler tubes to use as sacrificial mandrels for rolling > > my own carbon fiber tubes. Add me to the list but I am going to be a [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Joe Michel > NAR 82797 L1 Usually people using this process are going for absolute minimal weight. Which makes NO SENSE considering optimum weights of typical HPR + motors. SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate at iKobo.com c/o my email. > Usually people using this process are going for absolute minimal weight. > Which makes NO SENSE considering optimum weights of typical HPR + motors. Another good point from Jerry. Minimal diameter HPR rockets are likely under optimum weight. Especially if they use high thrust motors. Any one got an M100? Besides Jerry :-) Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/LeadingEdge/Phantom4000.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org Save Model Rocketry from the HSA! http://www.space-rockets.com/congress.html > > Usually people using this process are going for absolute minimal weight. > > Which makes NO SENSE considering optimum weights of typical HPR + motors. > > Another good point from Jerry. Minimal diameter HPR rockets are likely under > optimum weight. Especially if they use high thrust motors. Any one got an > M100? Besides Jerry :-) Who are you and what have you done with Bob Kaplow? SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate at iKobo.com c/o my email. >>Usually people using this process are going for absolute minimal weight. >>Which makes NO SENSE considering optimum weights of typical HPR + motors. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" Other than hybrids, which start with such a mass fraction penalty that RockSim always says the optimum weight for minimum diameter hybrids is 1 oz. :) SignatureAndrew MacMillen NAR/TRA L2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Remove "-REMOVE-THIS-" to reply not when there is a 8.5 pound bowling ball on top of it ;-) > > Usually people using this process are going for absolute minimal weight. > > Which makes NO SENSE considering optimum weights of typical HPR + motors. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Save Model Rocketry from the HSA! http://www.space-rockets.com/congress.html just fyi, Dave Triano does an excellent job IMO of demonstrating introductory composite techniques in the ShadowAero videos at http://www.shadowaero.com/VIDEOS.htm I highly recommend them to anyone thinking about getting into composites (fibergalss, kevlar or carbon fiber layups) and vacumn bagging - iz >>I want to buy coupler tubes to use as sacrificial mandrels for rolling >>my own carbon fiber tubes. Add me to the list but I am going to be a [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > reason that phenolic coupler tube won't work? Just trying to learn > something here. > just fyi, Dave Triano does an excellent job IMO of demonstrating > introductory composite techniques in the ShadowAero videos > at http://www.shadowaero.com/VIDEOS.htm > > I highly recommend them to anyone thinking about getting into composites > (fibergalss, kevlar or carbon fiber layups) and vacumn bagging Just ignore the boats going by in the background! Joel. phx > - iz > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > reason that phenolic coupler tube won't work? Just trying to learn > > something here. yeah, I kept thinking, "gee, wouldn't it be nice to live over there!" - iz "in New Yoik Siddy" >>just fyi, Dave Triano does an excellent job IMO of demonstrating >>introductory composite techniques in the ShadowAero videos [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Just ignore the boats going by in the background! >just fyi, Dave Triano does an excellent job IMO of demonstrating >introductory composite techniques in the ShadowAero videos [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >- iz I agree. I got the video set last year for Christmas and I find them very useful. I'm in the process of building the curing oven now. A friend of mine built a Shock Value kit and that is a beauty. Since they aren't being made, I want to build something similar myself. Len B What I meant was is there any technical reason that a full length phenolic coupler tube would not work as a sacrificial mandrel for rolling CF tubes as opposed to a non-phenolic one? PML makes full-length couplers. -- Joe Michel NAR 82797 L1 > > I want to buy coupler tubes to use as sacrificial mandrels for rolling > > my own carbon fiber tubes. Add me to the list but I am going to be a [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Joe Michel > NAR 82797 L1 > What I meant was is there any technical reason that a full length phenolic > coupler tube would not work as a sacrificial mandrel for rolling CF tubes as > opposed to a non-phenolic one? PML makes full-length couplers. The phenolic is relatively waterproof, so you can't easily make it get soggy to make it easier to remove when the time comes to "sacrifice" it. -dave w > What I meant was is there any technical reason that a full length phenolic > coupler tube would not work as a sacrificial mandrel for rolling CF tubes as > opposed to a non-phenolic one? PML makes full-length couplers. Paper tubes can be peeled or water soaked to remove them. Doesn't work too well with either phenolic or Quantum tube... Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/LeadingEdge/Phantom4000.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org Save Model Rocketry from the HSA! http://www.space-rockets.com/congress.html > What I meant was is there any technical reason that a full length phenolic > coupler tube would not work as a sacrificial mandrel for rolling CF tubes as > opposed to a non-phenolic one? PML makes full-length couplers. IF you have an extraction method. The paper tube method involves dissolving the tube to remove the mandrel thus leaving a cylindrical case without draft. Jerry > -- > Joe Michel [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Joe Michel > > NAR 82797 L1 SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate at iKobo.com c/o my email. I thought that might be the reason. :-) Thanks for the replies. -- Joe Michel NAR 82797 L1 > > What I meant was is there any technical reason that a full length phenolic > > coupler tube would not work as a sacrificial mandrel for rolling CF tubes as [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com > My articles valuable? Donate at iKobo.com c/o my email. I was just reading an online article on rolling tubes from full length coupler tubes. The author wraps the mandrel with mylar before rolling and then the tube just slides off the mandrel no soaking and it's reuseable. http://www.geocities.com/rdh82000/Tips/fiberglasstubes.htm I recently had a mandrel turned from steel pipe for making 38mm motor tubes from fiberglass. At first I was just going to wax the steel and slide the tube off but it was difficult work to get it off so I now use a layer of wax paper on the mandrel and that works great. Layne > On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 15:06:28 -0800, Jerry Irvine <01rocket@gte.net> > wrote:it is even less likely a small vendor would do it. [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > Len B > I was just reading an online article on rolling tubes from full length > coupler tubes. The author wraps the mandrel with mylar before rolling and > then the tube just slides off the mandrel no soaking and it's reuseable. > http://www.geocities.com/rdh82000/Tips/fiberglasstubes.htm R.I.P. Was about this time in 2001, no? Joel. phx > I recently had a mandrel turned from steel pipe for making 38mm motor tubes > from fiberglass. At first I was just going to wax the steel and slide the > tube off but it was difficult work to get it off so I now use a layer of wax > paper on the mandrel and that works great. > Layne >> << I'm thinking that LOC/Barry should take note and start offering the >> couplers [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Sounds like an expensive thing for a small market. That's always a > problem. May not be that bad. They already make the exact product. It's just a question of what lengths it's cut to by the tube manufacturer. Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/LeadingEdge/Phantom4000.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org Save Model Rocketry from the HSA! http://www.space-rockets.com/congress.html > I agree. Don't believe everything you read just because its on a website ;-) > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > That said... I sure wish I knew where to get full length paper couplers. I'm > pretty sure the Red Arrow full length liners are phenolic. Do you really want a full length coupler or do you really want a THICKER TUBE? > > << Non-brittle phenolic airframe tubes >> > > > > They may call it "non-brittle" but in my experience it's only a little less > > brittle than the regular stuff, and still far more brittle than paper > > tubes. SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate at iKobo.com c/o my email. Actually I want longer couplers, particularly for altimeter bays. A foot would be fine. Most of what is available is 6-8" long. I like 4 inches or so exposed on either end and then a couple of inches extra for mounting switches, etc.. Barry suggested butting two together with a body tube over the joint, but that doesn't seem too strong to me. >> That said... I sure wish I knew where to get full length paper couplers. I'm >> pretty sure the Red Arrow full length liners are phenolic. > > Do you really want a full length coupler or do you really want a THICKER > TUBE? SignatureAlex Mericas > Actually I want longer couplers, particularly for altimeter bays. A foot > would be fine. Most of what is available is 6-8" long. I like 4 inches or so > exposed on either end and then a couple of inches extra for mounting > switches, etc.. Barry suggested butting two together with a body tube over > the joint, but that doesn't seem too strong to me. You know what does work well? Butting them together as he says, wrap a masking tape seal around the external joint. Use 30+ minute epoxy at and near the joint. This type of butt-joint is VERY strong. Tech Jerry > >> That said... I sure wish I knew where to get full length paper couplers. > >> I'm > >> pretty sure the Red Arrow full length liners are phenolic. > > > > Do you really want a full length coupler or do you really want a THICKER > > TUBE? SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate at iKobo.com c/o my email. > You know what does work well? Butting them together as he says, wrap a > masking tape seal around the external joint. Use 30+ minute epoxy at and > near the joint. This type of butt-joint is VERY strong. I'm surprised at you Jerry! Given paper couplers, I'd think that titebond would do just as well as epoxy here. Maybe better, since it will actually penetrate the paper where epoxy will likely just grap the surface. Unless you use a real thin epoxy like System3, West, etc. Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/LeadingEdge/Phantom4000.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org Save Model Rocketry from the HSA! http://www.space-rockets.com/congress.html > > You know what does work well? Butting them together as he says, wrap a > > masking tape seal around the external joint. Use 30+ minute epoxy at and [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > penetrate the paper where epoxy will likely just grap the surface. Unless > you use a real thin epoxy like System3, West, etc. I find that on butt joints in particular the epoxy works better. Time for a real test! I think the problem is the thin layer of Titebond cracks easier than the layer of epoxy. Jerry SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate at iKobo.com c/o my email. Perhaps Doc will test that! >> Actually I want longer couplers, particularly for altimeter bays. A foot >> would be fine. Most of what is available is 6-8" long. I like 4 inches or so [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >> > Do you really want a full length coupler or do you really want a THICKER >> > TUBE? SignatureAlex Mericas > Perhaps Doc will test that! Gee I wonder who is going to spend the money to send him the samples since according to some here on rmr I am less than useless? Hmmm? And I wonder who is going to spend the money for several megabytes of storage space accessable freely forever? Hmmm? Us useless people want to know. Jerry > >> Actually I want longer couplers, particularly for altimeter bays. A foot > >> would be fine. Most of what is available is 6-8" long. I like 4 inches or [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > >> > Do you really want a full length coupler or do you really want a THICKER > >> > TUBE? SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate at iKobo.com c/o my email. Jerry wrote: << Do you really want a full length coupler or do you really want a THICKER TUBE? >> Full length coupler -- very useful for payload and electronics bay construction. >Barry suggested butting two together with a body tube over >the joint, but that doesn't seem too strong to me. It is. That's how my altimeter bay kits go together. The section of body tube is the perfect place to put your vent holes and arming switch. I've never seen one fold up, even at speeds approaching mach 2. Mike Fisher Binder Design > Does anyone know of a source for full-length paper coupler tubing, to fit > standard 2.56" airframe tubes? I used to get it from Rocket R&D but apparently > they are out of business due to health problems. Isn't there an AT 2.5" OD tube that could serve the purpose? Jerry SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate at iKobo.com c/o my email. jhijack > jhijack What useful purpose does this message serve? Jerry made decent suggestions about the supply of full length coupler tubes. I seldom plonk people but you are now plonked. You don't even offer a hint of useful data as part of your message. Len B |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.