Do you have the non bonus jig. I am aware that a bonus jig is more optimal but I want to try using the non bonus design. If you have have the non bonus jig design could you please share it. Thanks
How much space is required at the top for the loading block to fit, having as little extra gaps as possible? What is the smallest triangular sidelining we could aim for to have the chain and loading block just perfectly go through???
I'm not sure what the exact minimum size at the top would be. My design here has a pretty small top, I wouldn't want to go too much smaller. Remember, you have to thread the eyebolt and chain through during testing and you don't want to risk breaking it.
3:11 Would it be more optimal for the three legs to cover as much area as possible on the loading block (longer length of the triangle), or as little as possible? I'm trying to model my own jig based off of yours, in case if I want to change the design in the future, and was wondering which part of the design is the extrusion angle of 7.17 degrees that led you to a length of ~4 cm. Was it the angle between the base and the sides of the jig? Thanks for your immense help with helping others get started in this tough event, and being so quick to respond to questions!
There is no one right answer here as there is a trade-off on the size of the top. From a loading standpoint, you'd want it as large as possible as the angle would be steeper and there would be less induced torque in the legs. On the other hand, making it smaller allows for smaller cross members which get stronger in buckling proportional to the square of the length. I picked a size generally in the middle. Feel free to experiment with both options if you have the time and resources.
@@balsaengineering6686 hey thanks for the stl files but i am confused because when i go to slice this file or even print the other files it wont fit my slicer i have adjusted the settings for the baseplate in my slicer . Even this seems to be a bit bigger is this years jig bigger then last years jig? I have access to a ultimaker printer that has a base plate of 12 inch by 12 and should be able to print the whole thing in one go
@@arjavjain3279 A 12x12 baseplate should be plenty big enough. The bottom part of the jig is only ~257mm in the largest dimension. You shouldn't need to scale anything to be able to print the piece. You might need to rotate it 90 degrees so it's flat on the plate, but that shouldn't change the size.
How would you recommend 3d printing the jig if my printer isn't big enough? Should I just use software to cut it in half and then print it? Or would that cause inaccuracy?
The best option is to find a printer that can print it in one piece, but if that is not an option, I have had success with Microsoft's free tool 3D Builder to cut up STL files.
No, there is no modifying the jig after it's printed. There are also no grooves for the legs this year as they aren't square. Stay tuned for the next video to learn about how I go about creating the legs we'll use for this build.
@@Guthhhiii Correct! The next video released will show how I use 3/16 x 3/16 square source sticks to make the 60/60/60 triangular ones that will work on this jig (with tape)
Thanks! Everything but the triangular leg sanding jig STL is scaled ready to print. You'll need to scale the sanding jig the way I show in that video if you want to try that approach: th-cam.com/video/MTHygxUS3YU/w-d-xo.html
Is there a advantage/disadvantage to using a modified square vertical member (with two sides sanded to 60 degrees) as opposed to equilateral triangles?
I might not be understanding your question properly, if you sand 2 angles to 60 degrees, doesn't that make the 3rd angle also 60 degrees and thus an equilateral triangle? In general, we want these leg cross-sections to be as symmetric as possible to resist buckling equally in multiple directions. My entire next Div C video is all about creating these triangular legs. I found a solution that made it fairly easy to accomplish. Stay tuned!
@@timchristensen5548 Ahh, something like that might work to some degree, but wouldn't that still give you issues with perfectly flat sides on all 3 faces? Unless you mean not making an equilateral triangle tower. There are definitely different shaped towers that could work, and perhaps some non-symmetric ones could do very well, but I choose to just focus on the simplest option for now. As soon as your tower isn't symmetric, you'll have to optimize legs and cross members on a per-side basis. Not impossible, but definitely more work. Thanks!!
@@balsaengineering6686 thanks for your patience! yes it would still be a overall tower that is a equilateral triangle. Each of the verticals would be a 60-105-90-105 quadrilateral. Doing this would allow the jig (if each vertical groove had a 90 degree surface) to act as a sanding guide to create the 60 and 105 angles.
@@timchristensen5548 Hmmm, maybe. Definitely something to try! I don't like the idea of sanding the legs on the assembly jig though. I think I came up with a better solution :) Stay tuned for the next video!
I think the best solution to achieving equilateral triangular members is simply to custom order them from balsa manufacturers. This is the route I will be exploring.
You will want to wait and see my next video. If you have access to a 3d printer, I will show you how to make perfect 60/60/60 legs from square source sticks in < 5 min (and possibly < 2 min)
@@emilyclarke7842 My next video will be out on Saturday morning (9/14), then Tues 9/17, then the following Saturday 9/21. Good luck this season! Thanks!!
Some other people have mentioned that browsers can tag the downloads as insecure and block them. It seems the way around that is to right-click on the link and paste it into a new blank browser tab and tell it explicitly to download it. These files download almost instantly because they are so small, so also check your downloads folder to see if it did download properly and you didn't notice it
@@balsaengineering6686 I tried it on safari and also link tester. It shows up as 404 not found. Safari popped up a message saying "The resource requested could not be found on this server" when I forced it to download.
I haven't given any real thought to a good non-bonus design. The best non-bonus design might be some crazy non-symmetric tower. I'm pretty sure the best choice, at least to start with, is the bonus. But feel free to see if you can come up with a non-bonus version that can beat the benchmark score! That's basically the whole point of publishing the benchmark results. If you can create a non-bonus version that can beat it, or come very close, use that. Otherwise it's best to stick with the bonus.
For my dry boxes, I just use super-cheap ones from Amazon that do the trick. It's not important that they are incredibly accurate, just to know that your box is working properly compared to ambient humidity: www.amazon.com/Thermometer-Hygrometer-Temperature-Fahrenheit-DWEPTU/dp/B08M3P74N3/
I have access to a copy of SolidWorks I've been using to create these jigs, although they aren't complex designs, so just about anything you're comfortable with should work fine.
Is it just me or are the STL files not working? Does it automatically download as soon as I press it or am I supposed to be directed to another website?
Do you have the non bonus jig. I am aware that a bonus jig is more optimal but I want to try using the non bonus design. If you have have the non bonus jig design could you please share it. Thanks
Hi! I didn't even bother make a non-bonus jig. I encourage you to try it, but you'll have to make your own jig. Good luck this season!
How much space is required at the top for the loading block to fit, having as little extra gaps as possible? What is the smallest triangular sidelining we could aim for to have the chain and loading block just perfectly go through???
I'm not sure what the exact minimum size at the top would be. My design here has a pretty small top, I wouldn't want to go too much smaller. Remember, you have to thread the eyebolt and chain through during testing and you don't want to risk breaking it.
3:11 Would it be more optimal for the three legs to cover as much area as possible on the loading block (longer length of the triangle), or as little as possible? I'm trying to model my own jig based off of yours, in case if I want to change the design in the future, and was wondering which part of the design is the extrusion angle of 7.17 degrees that led you to a length of ~4 cm. Was it the angle between the base and the sides of the jig? Thanks for your immense help with helping others get started in this tough event, and being so quick to respond to questions!
There is no one right answer here as there is a trade-off on the size of the top. From a loading standpoint, you'd want it as large as possible as the angle would be steeper and there would be less induced torque in the legs. On the other hand, making it smaller allows for smaller cross members which get stronger in buckling proportional to the square of the length. I picked a size generally in the middle. Feel free to experiment with both options if you have the time and resources.
Hey i am having some troubles sizing the sliced files you have attatched in the description can you attatch the unsliced stl files. Thank you
Here is the complete jig before I cut it into 3 pieces: klingerphotography.com/BalsaEngineering/2025/2025_DivC_Tower_Complete.STL
@@balsaengineering6686 hey thanks for the stl files but i am confused because when i go to slice this file or even print the other files it wont fit my slicer i have adjusted the settings for the baseplate in my slicer . Even this seems to be a bit bigger is this years jig bigger then last years jig? I have access to a ultimaker printer that has a base plate of 12 inch by 12 and should be able to print the whole thing in one go
@@arjavjain3279 A 12x12 baseplate should be plenty big enough. The bottom part of the jig is only ~257mm in the largest dimension. You shouldn't need to scale anything to be able to print the piece. You might need to rotate it 90 degrees so it's flat on the plate, but that shouldn't change the size.
@@balsaengineering6686 it ends up being 257 cm not mm
@@arjavjain3279 The file is definitely 257mm, so if your program brings it in as 257cm, just scale it down by 10x
How would you recommend 3d printing the jig if my printer isn't big enough? Should I just use software to cut it in half and then print it? Or would that cause inaccuracy?
The best option is to find a printer that can print it in one piece, but if that is not an option, I have had success with Microsoft's free tool 3D Builder to cut up STL files.
You trim corners AFTER jig is printed? How did you do that and what size leg then are you using to fit in grove? Thanks
He’s going to release a video on how to make the leg the size is 3/16 in
No, there is no modifying the jig after it's printed. There are also no grooves for the legs this year as they aren't square. Stay tuned for the next video to learn about how I go about creating the legs we'll use for this build.
@@Guthhhiii Correct! The next video released will show how I use 3/16 x 3/16 square source sticks to make the 60/60/60 triangular ones that will work on this jig (with tape)
Are the STL files already scaled? (The video are really helpful! Thanks!)
Thanks! Everything but the triangular leg sanding jig STL is scaled ready to print. You'll need to scale the sanding jig the way I show in that video if you want to try that approach: th-cam.com/video/MTHygxUS3YU/w-d-xo.html
@@balsaengineering6686 I will defiently check that out! Quick question though, what unit was used for the measurements for the tower prints?
@@KayLe0521 All the STL files should be in units of mm
Is there a advantage/disadvantage to using a modified square vertical member (with two sides sanded to 60 degrees) as opposed to equilateral triangles?
I might not be understanding your question properly, if you sand 2 angles to 60 degrees, doesn't that make the 3rd angle also 60 degrees and thus an equilateral triangle? In general, we want these leg cross-sections to be as symmetric as possible to resist buckling equally in multiple directions. My entire next Div C video is all about creating these triangular legs. I found a solution that made it fairly easy to accomplish. Stay tuned!
@@balsaengineering6686 sorry I meant one edge of a square with the opposite side remaining 90 degrees. Thanks for all you do!
@@timchristensen5548 Ahh, something like that might work to some degree, but wouldn't that still give you issues with perfectly flat sides on all 3 faces? Unless you mean not making an equilateral triangle tower. There are definitely different shaped towers that could work, and perhaps some non-symmetric ones could do very well, but I choose to just focus on the simplest option for now. As soon as your tower isn't symmetric, you'll have to optimize legs and cross members on a per-side basis. Not impossible, but definitely more work. Thanks!!
@@balsaengineering6686 thanks for your patience! yes it would still be a overall tower that is a equilateral triangle. Each of the verticals would be a 60-105-90-105 quadrilateral. Doing this would allow the jig (if each vertical groove had a 90 degree surface) to act as a sanding guide to create the 60 and 105 angles.
@@timchristensen5548 Hmmm, maybe. Definitely something to try! I don't like the idea of sanding the legs on the assembly jig though. I think I came up with a better solution :) Stay tuned for the next video!
I think the best solution to achieving equilateral triangular members is simply to custom order them from balsa manufacturers. This is the route I will be exploring.
You will want to wait and see my next video. If you have access to a 3d printer, I will show you how to make perfect 60/60/60 legs from square source sticks in < 5 min (and possibly < 2 min)
@@balsaengineering6686 When will your next video be out? We were hoping to start soon. Thank you for all of your help with this event!
@@emilyclarke7842 My next video will be out on Saturday morning (9/14), then Tues 9/17, then the following Saturday 9/21. Good luck this season! Thanks!!
I don't think the STL files are working properly. Is there another way to download it for refrence?
Some other people have mentioned that browsers can tag the downloads as insecure and block them. It seems the way around that is to right-click on the link and paste it into a new blank browser tab and tell it explicitly to download it. These files download almost instantly because they are so small, so also check your downloads folder to see if it did download properly and you didn't notice it
@@balsaengineering6686 I tried it on safari and also link tester. It shows up as 404 not found. Safari popped up a message saying "The resource requested could not be found on this server" when I forced it to download.
Will you also be releasing the non bonus tower jig?
I haven't given any real thought to a good non-bonus design. The best non-bonus design might be some crazy non-symmetric tower. I'm pretty sure the best choice, at least to start with, is the bonus. But feel free to see if you can come up with a non-bonus version that can beat the benchmark score! That's basically the whole point of publishing the benchmark results. If you can create a non-bonus version that can beat it, or come very close, use that. Otherwise it's best to stick with the bonus.
Hey what humidity tester do you recommend
For my dry boxes, I just use super-cheap ones from Amazon that do the trick. It's not important that they are incredibly accurate, just to know that your box is working properly compared to ambient humidity: www.amazon.com/Thermometer-Hygrometer-Temperature-Fahrenheit-DWEPTU/dp/B08M3P74N3/
What website do you use to cad these jigs?
I have access to a copy of SolidWorks I've been using to create these jigs, although they aren't complex designs, so just about anything you're comfortable with should work fine.
Is it just me or are the STL files not working? Does it automatically download as soon as I press it or am I supposed to be directed to another website?
If you click on the link, it should download the file to your local machine. The files are stored on my server on a different website.
@@balsaengineering6686 They don't download, the tab opens and immediately closes
@@balsaengineering6686 They dont work, the tab opens and immediately closes
@@balsaengineering6686 Thanks! I think my mac was just broken, had to open it in some other way
@@iQber I have an iPad 😭, I can share it with you through google drive just send me ur email
Thanks