LDRS 32 - Personal Launch Report - Jarvis

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

JimJarvis50

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2009
Messages
2,882
Reaction score
1,786
OK, here's my launch report from LDRS 32.

I had two flights. The first was my FourCarbYen two-stager. It's a 4x4 carbon fiber rocket, which I was flying on a CTI N-5800 to CTI N-1100 combination. It simulated to about 127K using RasAero (a modified approach for two-stage flights). Unfortunately, or perhaps fortunately, the tiltometer on board shut down the sustainer ignition. The device detected an angle of 16 degrees. I picked a maximum angle criteria of 15 degrees, so once that angle was exceeded, the flight was essentially over. More on the tiltometer later. With the sustainer not lighting, the sustainer drifted up to around 25K and all parts were recovered. Here is an on-board movie from the flight (with Stu as part of the recovery team):

https://tinyurl.com/kkts2kh

My second flight was my TooCarbYen two stager. It's a 4x3 carbon fiber rocket, which flew on a CTI
N-2500 to Gorilla M-745 combination. It simulated to 76K using RasAero. The flight went fine (with the tiltometer criteria increased to 25 degrees), and the gps-based altitude came out to 73,633 feet. The rocket had no significant damage, and I plan to submit for a Tripoli N-staged record for this flight. A pic of the liftoff (from Troj) is attached.

Here are some additional details, mainly from the electronics. Starting with the tiltometer, I've attached a picture showing the tiltometer angle readings for both flights. I have also included lines for both flights where the angles are calculated from the gps data. A comparison shows that the tiltometer tends to first read a bit high of the actual angle and then a bit low. However, it correctly shows that the angle for the FCY flight was greater than that for the TCY flight. For the FCY flight, the actual angle at the staging point was about 12 degrees, and I estimate that this rocket would have ended up at least 10 miles out had the sustainer lit (somewhere near the Black Rock I believe). So, it was a bit of a marginal flight. Since the instrument appears to read about 5 degrees high early in the flight, it looks like the correct criteria setting for my flights is either 15 or 20 degrees. Unfortunately, the device has been discontinued due to the non-availability of parts. That's too bad, because it is a useful device for tilt detection, and also for launch safety.

Also attached is the Raven graph of the TCY flight. From the data, it's clear that this isn't a particularly extreme flight. The rocket reached Mach 1.4 on the sustainer, slowed to Mach 0.66 for sustainer ignition, and reached a maximum speed of Mach 2.1. The sustainer lit at T=18 seconds after 12 seconds of coast, and the M-745 motor took 2.5 seconds to come up to pressure. The rocket was at an actual angle of about 7.5 degrees when the sustainer lit.

A google earth rendition of the flight is attached. One thing it shows is the eastward movement of the rocket when the rocket encountered the jet stream. Maximum winds were around 40 knots I believe at around 35K, but the movement was just enough to take the rocket to Old Razorback Mountain, about 3.5 miles from the launch point.

Recovery was fun. My wife and I were joined by Tony Alcocer and someone else (who's name has slipped my mind). Tony knew how to get over the tracks and to the general area where the rocket was. I knew from the gps that the rocket was about 600 feet above the playa, but we couldn't tell which side of the mountain it was on. Tony finally spotted the rocket on a cliff and started heading up the mountain on his cycle. After giving the situation a little thought, I grabbed as much water as I could carry and headed up after him. An attached pic shows where we were when Tony got to the rocket - WooHoo!. Tony was real glad that I brought along some water, and I was real glad he brought along my rocket. Tony's my hero - again.

Well, that's my launch report. As always, there are way too many folks to thank for making these launches possible, so if you loaned me equipment, or gave me technical advice, or helped me load or track the rocket, or searched for me, or rehydrated me, or took pics, or whatever, please know that I truly appreciate your help.

Jim

TCY Flight Pic 1.jpg

LDRS 2013 GPS Screen.jpg

Mountain.jpg

Raven LDRS 2013 TCY small.jpg

LDRS 2013 Tilt Results.gif
 
Last edited:
Jim thanks for the report, very impressive flight. The tiltometer seems like a great idea, I'm definitely concerned about an off axis boost to set a bad trajectory for the upper stage. I saw your email, thanks again for the info I hope my flight goes as well.
 
Congratulations, Jim. Glad the Two Carb Yen went off without a hitch, and it's cool that it matched the RASAero performance. Care to post the Raven and GPS data files?
 
jim confirm you received my emails on the photos from ldrs32 i sent over to you this morning, lots of pictures :)
 
jim confirm you received my emails on the photos from ldrs32 i sent over to you this morning, lots of pictures :)

Yep, lots of good pictures to look over. You managed to get the staging and the separation of the booster and sustainer for both flights. That's something I never get to see. It will also be fun to look at the angle of incidence relative to the tiltometer values (for the attached pic for example).

I've also attached the gps file. I had to delete a lot of what I think is "extra" data in this file in order to get something small enough to post. If the file has been corrupted, I'll try something else. The file is in meters by the way.

I'll post the Raven file later on (don't have it handy at the moment).

Jim

P.S. - I also re-simulated the flight using the "impulse" method for RasAero (thanks Adrian) incorporating the flight angle and other aspects of the actual data. The simulation gave 72K versus the actual 74K. Not bad!

IMG_3914 Crop.jpg

View attachment LDRS 2013 TCY Clipped.kml
 
Last edited:
Jim,

I got a video from the flight line of your N5800 boost. Too bad the sustainer didn't light, that thing would have been outta there!

It was nice meeting you breifly at LDRS.

[video=youtube;4LXeacQWQsE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LXeacQWQsE[/video]

Alex
 
P.S. - I also re-simulated the flight using the "impulse" method for RasAero (thanks Adrian) incorporating the flight angle and other aspects of the actual data. The simulation gave 72K versus the actual 74K. Not bad!

Jim, are you going to an atmosphere table and entering the temperature for the staging altitude? For your flight it looks to be around -12°F.
 
Last edited:
Jim, are you going to an atmosphere table and entering the temperature for the staging altitude? For your flight it looks to be a little less than -12°F.

I didn't do this in the re-simulation I mentioned. However, earlier today, I was relaying the method to someone else, and I realized that I needed to change the launch site temperature. When I do that, using -12F, it drops the simulation result to 68K. Still not all that bad.

Another interesting result from the simulation is that I only lost about 1200 feet due to the angle of the flight (I assumed a launch angle of 7.5 degrees). That surprised me given that the apogee location was three miles away from the launch location.

Jim
 
It's great to see your data! A few things that stand out for me:

You can really see the change in the descent rate as the atmosphere gets thicker.
Low temperatures are clearly not a problem. Both altimeters were still getting warmer from thermal soakback more than a minute after apogee, topping out over 125F. Neither one ever dropped below the landing temperature.

After burnout of the 2nd stage, at 30,000 feet, the rocket was going about 1400 mph but only had 2.5 Gs of drag. Nice low drag.




Nothing jumps out at me for deployment setup errors on the TCY flight, but I haven't compared it back with the plan.

Looks like you used a separate battery for the sustainer igniter?
The 4th channel that was used for stage separation was making intermittent contact through the rest of the coast up to apogee.

The acceleration transients during the separation are very mild, only about 1 G. The front half never accelerated forward during the separation, it just slowed down a little less slowly than the back half.

On the FCY flight, I noticed some significant vibration happening as the sustainer passed back through Mach 1. I haven't ever seen anything quite like that. The frequency looks like it's faster than the 200Hz lateral or 400 Hz axial sample rates. I'm surprised it wasn't audible in the on-board video.

Are you going to re-fly FCY at Balls?

What date and time was your TCY flight? I'm curious about weather balloon data around then.
 
Last edited:
It's great to see your data! A few things that stand out for me:

You can really see the change in the descent rate as the atmosphere gets thicker.
Low temperatures are clearly not a problem. Both altimeters were still getting warmer from thermal soakback more than a minute after apogee, topping out over 125F. Neither one ever dropped below the landing temperature.

After burnout of the 2nd stage, at 30,000 feet, the rocket was going about 1400 mph but only had 2.5 Gs of drag. Nice low drag.

Nothing jumps out at me for deployment setup errors on the TCY flight, but I haven't compared it back with the plan.

Looks like you used a separate battery for the sustainer igniter?
The 4th channel that was used for stage separation was making intermittent contact through the rest of the coast up to apogee.

The acceleration transients during the separation are very mild, only about 1 G. The front half never accelerated forward during the separation, it just slowed down a little less slowly than the back half.

On the FCY flight, I noticed some significant vibration happening as the sustainer passed back through Mach 1. I haven't ever seen anything quite like that. The frequency looks like it's faster than the 200Hz lateral or 400 Hz axial sample rates. I'm surprised it wasn't audible in the on-board video.

Are you going to re-fly FCY at Balls?

What date and time was your TCY flight? I'm curious about weather balloon data around then.

Regarding nice low drag ... This is one of the more streamlined rockets I've built. Good to see that in the data.

The Raven channel 3 output was connected to the tiltometer, which actually did the staging. I used Pins 1 and 2.

It's very likely that this 4" to 3" rocket drag separated. I'll check to see if there's any BP residue in the coupler this time, but usually there isn't.

Interesting on the vibration. I'll take a closer look at that.

The flight was on Sunday morning (the 21st) around 10 AM. There was supposed to be about 40 knot max winds out of the west, and that is apparent in the gps trace as the rocket passed through the jet stream.

I was planning to fly TO Balls, but not AT Balls. Two driving trips to Nevada ... not sure I can swing that (but I would sure like to).

Thanks for taking a look at the data. There is much more data to mine I think when combined with all of the other flight data.

Jim
 
Regarding the stage separation, Skippy caught the stage separation on the TCY, and based on the sequence, I think it drag separated (see the pic). On the FCY, the sequence indicates that the charge was required. I just have too much data to play with!

Jim

IMG_3926 Cropped.jpg
 
Here's the separation sequence for FCY at about 0.2 second intervals. The separation charge was at 0.5 seconds after burnout. I think burnout was prior to the second pic and separation was completed by the fourth pic. I guess it's possible this one might have drag separated. Opinions?

Jim

IMG_3428 Cropped.jpg

IMG_3429 Cropped.jpg

IMG_3430 Cropped.jpg

IMG_3431 Cropped.jpg

IMG_3432 Cropped.jpg
 
And the sequence for the TCY stage separation. I think burnout in the third and separation by the fourth, or maybe simultaneous burnout and separation. Hard to tell with a moonburner.

Jim

IMG_3923 Cropped.jpg

IMG_3924 Cropped.jpg

IMG_3925 Cropped.jpg

IMG_3927 Cropped.jpg
 

Attachments

  • IMG_3926 Cropped.jpg
    IMG_3926 Cropped.jpg
    19.7 KB · Views: 1
A drag separation and a separation charge at the detected burnout would have pretty much the same timing, I think. The little bump of acceleration at burnout is indicative of BP charge doing the trick, I think. But it looks like you could stand some more BP if you wanted to.
 
Last edited:
A drag separation and a separation charge at the detected burnout would have pretty much the same timing, I think. The little bump of acceleration at burnout is indicative of BP charge doing the trick, I think. But it looks like you could stand some more BP if you wanted to.

What do you conclude from the lateral acceleration on both rockets (a G or so) during the initial boost? That vibration thing on FCY is really weird. It did not do that in a previous flight under similar conditions.

Jim

PS - In FCY, the altimeters were arragned one above the other. in TCY, they are opposed (opposite sides of the board). Directionally, the altimeters agree with each other.
 
Last edited:
What do you conclude from the lateral acceleration on both rockets (a G or so) during the initial boost? That vibration thing on FCY is really weird. It did not do that in a previous flight under similar conditions.

Jim

I think it's just the airframe wobbling a bit under thrust. You might be getting a little bending at the stage interface from the combined aero/thrust loads, which is turning some of the axial force into lateral acclerations. You can see from the video that it's not spinning enough to be centripetal acceleration, which would be another way to get lateral Gs that increase with velocity.

I looked at the video again, thinking about that 1 second of vibration. The rocket was spinning up a little, but then the roll stops fairly suddenly right around when the vibration shows up in the accels. The rocket went subsonic right around then too. I don't have any good explanation for that vibration. If it were classic fin flutter, it would have been worse at higher velocity. There must have been something funny aerodynamics going on right at the transonic boundary, but I have no idea why it wouldn't have shown up in other flights with that rocket.
 
I only grabbed a video of FourCarbYen, but here it is:

[video=youtube;B1NGe44Jjhc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1NGe44Jjhc[/video]

Also, thanks for letting us use your launch control for Bare Necessities.
 
I only grabbed a video of FourCarbYen, but here it is:

Also, thanks for letting us use your launch control for Bare Necessities.

Thanks for the video Chris (and Alex too). Looks like it started turning pretty early on. Probably just as well it didn't light.

And you're welcome on the launch controller. Worked a bit better than the last N5800 MD I launched.

By the way, I checked both staging couplers for residue, and there was none. Both drag separated.

Jim
 
I got curious about the drag separation aspect of these flights. Both seemed to drag separate, but I wouldn't have guessed that they would. So, I calculated the separation force using the equation below, where everything is evaluated at burnout of the booster motor:

Sep force, N = (Mass Booster / Mass Total x Drag Sust) - (Mass Sust / Mass Total x Drag Booster)

This equation is essentially the same as the one Mikec has posted on TRF previously.

The results are in the attached picture. If the Sep force is positive, the parts will not separate, if negative, they will. I also did the calculations using both RockSim and RasAero. The conclusions are similar, although the drag forces calculated by the two progams aren't always close. I was surprised to find that the FCY (4" x 4") is more likely to drag separate than the TCY (4" x 3").

Jim

Drag Sep Chart.png
 
James Donald got a nice video of the flight. That's Stu tracking the booster. Enjoy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BsewRvzMxGc

I wonder why my flights turn early on? Both were in the 2-2.5 caliber range.

Jim

Edit. If you look closely at the end of the video, you can see the booster following the sustainer, and you can see the booster apogee event. The tracker was in the drogue section, so it is right after that that Stu got the tracker tone. Kind of nice to hear that tone when it happens :)
 
Last edited:
Jim,

Finally taking a bit of a break and reading this thread. Thank you for sharing the results of the flights; lots to be learned for sure!

-Eric-
 
My unfinished business from LDRS ...... has been finished at Balls.

118,600. Stay tuned.

Jim
 
I don't have the ability to send out much information from here in Gerlach, so it will be a while before I can get much information posted, but in a nutshell ....

I had a chance to repeat the N5800/N1100 flight from LDRS where the sustainer didn't light. I really hadn't expected to be able to do it, but things just kind of lined up.

The weather here is not too good, but Friday was OK until up to about 2 PM. Then, the high winds kicked in. Knowing that the wind was coming, I planned to launch as early as I could Friday morning. As it turned out, I was first out of the box, and the wind was calm and the sky blue. Perfect conditions. The flight was fine. The staging delay seemed a bit long, but I won't know exactly until I download the Ravens. The rocket angled a bit to the west, but the gps indicates that it wasn't quite as much angle as it looked like from the ground. I had gps all of the way. The booster came down about 2 miles out to the northwest. Fortunately, someone turned in the coordinates or we would have been looking for a long time (it has a tracker, but the range is limited). It was laid out perfectly with no damage.

The sustainer came down 9 miles out, which isn't that bad all things considered. Apogee was about 6 miles out and then it drifted a few miles further. As you might expect, it landed on a mountain, and Tony was no where to be seen. So, my wife and I trudged about 1.5 miles up the hill to retrieve it. When the winds kicked in, we almost got blown off the hill. No damage to the sustainer either, other than some rock nicks.

I was able to download the gps data and the result was 118,600 AGL It's a bit below the simulation, but with the angle, not a bad match. I'll have quite a bit of gps data, so I should be able to calculate the flight angles through most all of the flight.

I also got a nice on-board video of the entire flight. I was hoping that the camera would work as planned, and it did.

Overall, I'm very happy with the flight. I've been trying it for a while, and it's nice to get one where everything worked. Like I said, it will take a while to get back home and get everything digested, but I'll post everything at some point.

Jim
 
I'm curious to know what you used to sense apogee on the sustainer. Can't wait to see that data!
 
Back
Top