Help Support RocketryForum by donating using the link above or becoming a Supporting Member.


Results 1 to 20 of 20
  1. #1
    Join Date
    25th June 2012
    Posts
    24

    Raven- accelerometer only deployment

    Would like to use a Raven in a stubby two stage rocket to airstart the second stage and execute the apogee chute deployment in the second stage. Due to space limitations, the location of the Raven would have to be in the nosecone. As such, the barometer-based deployment function would probably be unreliable. Do you see any problem with relying on the accelerometer function detection of apogee for chute deployment? Could use the timer function also I suppose.

    BD
    NAR #61527 - Level 3

  2. #2
    Join Date
    27th July 2014
    Location
    south beloit, IL
    Posts
    2,091
    Why not put some holes in the nose cone to give it access to air sampling?

    NAR# 99285
    Tripoli# 16283
    L1- 4/26/2015 Madcow Cowabunga- H123SK
    L2- 11/1/2015 Wildman Darkstar 2.6- J355RL
    L3- 11/3/2017 Wildman V2 6" - M1780NT
    Woosh
    QCRS

  3. #3
    Join Date
    9th May 2009
    Posts
    1,567
    Quote Originally Posted by bobdog View Post
    Do you see any problem with relying on the accelerometer function detection of apogee for chute deployment?
    I've done this fairly often and it's worked well. Some Ravens have accelerometer scale errors that cause apogee detection to be off -- the degree of error is related to the time and duration of thrust. You might try a single-stage test flight on your Raven first to see how closely it detects apogee.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    25th June 2012
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by djs View Post
    Why not put some holes in the nose cone to give it access to air sampling?
    Am afraid that the nose cone curvature would affect the pressure readings.
    BD
    NAR #61527 - Level 3

  5. #5
    Join Date
    27th July 2014
    Location
    south beloit, IL
    Posts
    2,091
    Depends on the nose cone shape. I've used the av bays from APE-RC with good results.
    NAR# 99285
    Tripoli# 16283
    L1- 4/26/2015 Madcow Cowabunga- H123SK
    L2- 11/1/2015 Wildman Darkstar 2.6- J355RL
    L3- 11/3/2017 Wildman V2 6" - M1780NT
    Woosh
    QCRS

  6. #6
    Join Date
    25th June 2012
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by mikec View Post
    I've done this fairly often and it's worked well. Some Ravens have accelerometer scale errors that cause apogee detection to be off -- the degree of error is related to the time and duration of thrust. You might try a single-stage test flight on your Raven first to see how closely it detects apogee.
    Good to know that it has worked well in the past. Will try the single stage test.
    BD
    NAR #61527 - Level 3

  7. #7
    Join Date
    23rd July 2011
    Location
    Butte, MT
    Posts
    1,997
    Quote Originally Posted by bobdog View Post
    Am afraid that the nose cone curvature would affect the pressure readings.
    Only at high velocities. As the rocket reaches apogee and approaches its lowest vertical velocity the pressure readings should be nearly accurate, especially if there's little horizontal velocity.
    Be sure Mach inhibit is on.
    Steve Shannon
    L3CC, TAP, Director, Tripoli Rocketry Association

  8. #8
    Join Date
    3rd February 2012
    Location
    So Cal (ROC, TRASD, SCRA)
    Posts
    2,508
    If you drill the holes just ahead of the break, or in the switch band if you're going HED, it shouldn't be an issue any more than it would be one for any other location. Modern altimeters filter out bad pressure readings and/or have algorithms to delay deployment until the rocket is near apogee, so the pressure hole location doesn't matter as much as it used to back in the day.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    10th July 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    1,137
    What about venting the NC through the base, and putting the static ports in the airframe lower down?
    TRA 13430, Level 3

    "Everybody's simulation model is guilty until proven innocent" (Thomas H. Lawrence 1994)

  10. #10
    Join Date
    6th September 2009
    Posts
    1,576
    Quote Originally Posted by bobdog View Post
    ...Do you see any problem with relying on the accelerometer function detection of apogee for chute deployment?....
    Yes, I do! I had very unexpected deployment events using accel deployment in a Raven (and a MARSA, for that matter). I now only use baro for ejection events.

    http://www.rocketryforum.com/showthr...en3-accel-data

    Your baro altimeter, even in a nose cone, will handle apogee detection more reliably. (assuming you are operating in the proper range for baros, ~40K ft MSL, I think)

  11. #11
    Join Date
    25th June 2012
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Buckeye View Post
    Yes, I do! I had very unexpected deployment events using accel deployment in a Raven (and a MARSA, for that matter). I now only use baro for ejection events.

    http://www.rocketryforum.com/showthr...en3-accel-data

    Your baro altimeter, even in a nose cone, will handle apogee detection more reliably. (assuming you are operating in the proper range for baros, ~40K ft MSL, I think)
    Thank you for the thread link - very interesting discussion. Now leaning toward a single stage test with the barometer for apogee detection.
    BD
    NAR #61527 - Level 3

  12. #12
    Join Date
    25th August 2009
    Location
    Carol Stream
    Posts
    2,999
    I fly Many Ravens in head end deployment rocket. My sampling holes are located on the switch band the is just aft of the cone. No issues what so ever.

    I wouldn't rely on accelerometer for apogee detection. I've looked at some of my data and the accelerometer detection of apogee isn't very accurate.
    L3-TRA 12636
    QCRS BOD/Prefect. Princeton, IL
    TWA Bong, WI
    Chicago Rocket Mafia "The Hot Tub"
    Public Enemy Aerospace
    Beep-Beep-Boop-Boop

  13. #13
    Join Date
    18th January 2009
    Posts
    1,804
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Shannon View Post
    Only at high velocities. As the rocket reaches apogee and approaches its lowest vertical velocity the pressure readings should be nearly accurate, especially if there's little horizontal velocity.
    Be sure Mach inhibit is on.
    There are Raven's where the accelerometer isn't accurate. You can't fix this by calibrating the unit. In most of the cases I've seen, apogee is detected too early (because the thrust it measures is low compared to the decelleration after burnout). If you do a test flight, you can see how the predicted apogee (calculated zero velocity) compares against the actual apogee. It's usually pretty easy to tell if you have a good or bad accelerometer. Roughly, you might see a predicted apogee that is about three-quarters of the way to actual apogee.

    One thing to watch out for, though, is that if the accelerometer is bad, then calculations based on it have to be reviewed carefully. An example is the use of "velocity lower than" as the mack lockout, which is the normal way that Raven's do mach lockout. With a bad accelerometer, the calculated velocity value will be lower than the actual velocity at any given time, so you might be below the set mach lockout velocity based on the calculated velocity, but actually still be above mach. This is mainly an issue for long or higher velocity flights. But, it's always good to know if the calculated velocity is accurate so that you're not asking the Raven to do something that it can't.

    Jim

  14. #14
    Join Date
    3rd February 2012
    Location
    So Cal (ROC, TRASD, SCRA)
    Posts
    2,508
    Quote Originally Posted by OverTheTop View Post
    What about venting the NC through the base, and putting the static ports in the airframe lower down?
    The problem with that scenario is that when the ejection charge blows it's going to pressurize the AV bay too. Generally, you don't want to do that.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    10th July 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    1,137
    The problem with that scenario is that when the ejection charge blows it's going to pressurize the AV bay too. Generally, you don't want to do that.
    True. Not insurmountable though. I have heard of it being done, but I don't remember the rest of the details of how everything went together.
    TRA 13430, Level 3

    "Everybody's simulation model is guilty until proven innocent" (Thomas H. Lawrence 1994)

  16. #16
    Join Date
    19th January 2009
    Posts
    3,375
    Quote Originally Posted by cerving View Post
    The problem with that scenario is that when the ejection charge blows it's going to pressurize the AV bay too. Generally, you don't want to do that.
    My Goblin is built this way. I've used Missileworks and Perfectflite barometric altimeters with no problems. They don't react to a pressure spike lasting less than the sampling interval. A plot of altitude shows the pressure reaching zero or lower altitude.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    21st December 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    444
    You can put a vent on the NC shoulder (near the bottom) with a matching hole in the body. The only issue with this is that the NC could spin blocking the hole, so you need to add an alignment pin to prevent rotation or use shear pins (or do both). You can also oversize the vent on the NC so alignment does not need to be perfect. If not using shear pins make sure you have ample friction to prevent the NC sliding forward after burnout.
    QRS: 124
    AMRS: 32 L2
    Highest Altitude: 10,849 feet
    Largest Motor: CTI 1115J530 IM
    Current Projects:
    Purple Parrot, X Wing


  18. #18
    Join Date
    22nd January 2009
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA
    Posts
    2,034
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Shannon View Post
    Only at high velocities. As the rocket reaches apogee and approaches its lowest vertical velocity the pressure readings should be nearly accurate, especially if there's little horizontal velocity.
    Be sure Mach inhibit is on.
    Exactly. The Raven's accelerometer is good enough to make sure the rocket is going slower than transonic speeds, but it won't detect apogee as accurately as the baro will, even for a non-optimal vent hole placement.
    Adrian Adamson
    Featherweight Altimeters LLC
    www.featherweightaltimeters.com

  19. #19
    Join Date
    25th June 2012
    Posts
    24
    Just an update to bring closure to this thread.

    Placed the altimeter vent holes just in front of the nose cone shoulder and programmed the Raven for barometric apogee detection. Finally flight tested it yesterday. Apogee detected accurately and apogee chute deployed as programmed.

    Thanks for all the advice that lead to a successful result.
    BD
    NAR #61527 - Level 3

  20. #20
    Join Date
    6th September 2009
    Posts
    1,576


Similar Threads

  1. [Trade] FT: Raven 2 70g + extra ISO: Raven 2 250g
    By patelldp in forum Yard Sale / Wanted
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 21st December 2016, 11:36 PM
  2. Pre-flight testing for Raven 3 dual deployment
    By k3td in forum Rocketry Electronics and Software
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 28th October 2015, 11:27 PM
  3. Featherweight Raven Main Deployment Behavior
    By enderw88 in forum Rocketry Electronics and Software
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 26th November 2014, 07:36 PM
  4. [For Sale] Want to Trade: Raven 29mm Av Bay for Raven Power Perch
    By patelldp in forum Yard Sale / Wanted
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 25th May 2014, 11:21 PM
  5. Accelerometer-based apogee deployment?
    By TWRackers in forum Recovery
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 6th December 2007, 06:38 AM

Posting Permissions

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