Altitude Record Project : New Series

[SuperNova-Rocketry]

Hi Guys,
I am currently starting a youtube series on my road to making an altitude record rocket. The journey will be over a year and I plan to post every week, or every 2 weeks.

Please watch the video in your time if you can, it’s the first of the series and it’s only 4 minutes long.

If you have any advice then please comment it on the video and I will be sure to take it into consideration for the rest of the series



You can also find the video by searching up ‘SuperNova Aerospace Mach 2’

Many Thanks

 

[OzHybrid]

Hi Guys,
I am currently starting a youtube series on my road to making an altitude record rocket. The journey will be over a year and I plan to post every week, or every 2 weeks.

Please watch the video in your time if you can, it’s the first of the series and it’s only 4 minutes long.

If you have any advice then please comment it on the video and I will be sure to take it into consideration for the rest of the series



You can also find the video by searching up ‘SuperNova Aerospace Mach 2’

Many Thanks

Your audio levels are all over the place throughout the video. Try to make the levels more consistent which makes it easier to listen to. People can always turn the volume down, but it's not always possible to turn the volume up further.
Good luck with your launch.

 

[SuperNova-Rocketry]

Your audio levels are all over the place throughout the video. Try to make the levels more consistent which makes it easier to listen to. People can always turn the volume down, but it's not always possible to turn the volume up further.
Good luck with your launch.

Yeah, I noticed it while playing the video for a friend. I will definetly make sure to fix my audio mixer in the editing software.

Thanks for the advice!

 

[lr64]

I don't think you're talking too fast, but you're close. Also, I think some of the bass made my eardrums touch each other.

You don't even have to go Mach 1 to get to a high altitude, allowing you to make the rocket lighter, assuming you can find a long burning motor. See this article:
https://www.nakka-rocketry.net/articles/EndBurnerRationale6.pdf

And check out this design I whipped up:

It could be slower if you could find or make a longer burning motor. That was the longest one I found at thrustcurve.org
Maybe a longer burning motor could actually be of a lower impulse class, though at some point you have to wonder if the rocket will keep going straight, I suppose.

 

[OzHybrid]

Only hybrids are allowed experimentally in the UK.

 

[lr64]

Any reason a long-burning hybrid couldn't be done?

The design I showed used a commercially available motor.

 

[OzHybrid]

Any reason a long-burning hybrid couldn't be done?

The design I showed used a commercially available motor.

Apart from the weight penalty of the extra length of pressure vessel required, it's doable. Launch sites in the UK tend to have lower altitude limits. That's also the reason the UK record is so low..... And of course, the selection of motors available in US are not the same in the UK, and may or may not be orderable.
Importing motors is a whole other set of obstacles for the OP.

 

[lr64]

I was just trying to show that such a rocket needn't be a HUGE project. Except maybe finding a place allowing that kind of altitude.

This outfit carries that brand, maybe they could get that particular motor.
https://wizardrockets.co.uk/

 

[OzHybrid]

I was just trying to show that such a rocket needn't be a HUGE project. Except maybe finding a place allowing that kind of altitude.

This outfit carries that brand, maybe they could get that particular motor.
https://wizardrockets.co.uk/

I'm surprised it's still so low a record. 36k ft. SARA (Scottish Aeronautics & Rocketry Association)
did have the highest waiver at a private estate in northern Scotland. 90k ft Not sure if they still have access there.
The last time I read the rules, the attempt just had to be by a British Citizen and UKRA member, not actually requiring the launch to be in Britain..... I've got a British passport, maybe..........
@PhilC Who has a high waiver?

 

[lr64]

Apart from the weight penalty of the extra length of pressure vessel required, it's doable. Launch sites in the UK tend to have lower altitude limits. That's also the reason the UK record is so low..... And of course, the selection of motors available in US are not the same in the UK, and may or may not be orderable.
Importing motors is a whole other set of obstacles for the OP.

The point isn't to burn more fuel and use more oxidizer, it's to burn the same amount more slowly, to keep air drag down. So the tank doesn't have to weigh any more. And the airframe can weight a little less, because it doesn't have to be quite as stiff or as strong at the lower speed. For instance, I ran Openrocket's simple model rocket example, but with an F32-5. It got up to 328 m/s, or about Mach 0.97. At that speed, drag force was about 28.4 N. At about half that speed, it was 5.4N! For comparison, sitting on the pad, before burning off any fuel, the weight was about 1.2 N. Put a bigger motor in and get it to 450 m/s, and the drag is something like 47 N.

Another example:
I went back to the design from post 4. In that post, I had it using a K62P. Total mass at takeoff was 1585g. Apogee was 7339 meters, but max velocity was only Mach 0.91 . Then I tried it with a K535, which had a total impulse of 1429 N-s vs 1406 for the other, with a slightly lower takeoff weight of 1572g. Max velocity was Mach 1.85! However, the apogee was at only 778 meters.
The first motor' burn time was 23.1 seconds, with an average thrust of only 62N, though max was 255. The second motor's burn time was 2.8 seconds, with an average thrust of 535N. If altitude was the criterion, most of that second motor's thrust was wasted.

A smaller nozzle might be required to do this efficiently with a hybrid that is usually operated at a higher thrust. Maybe the hybrid, if this is feasible, could be throttled up at liftoff and then throttled back once it gets to a reasonable speed.

 

[OzHybrid]

The point isn't to burn more fuel and use more oxidizer, it's to burn the same amount more slowly, to keep air drag down. So the tank doesn't have to weigh any more. And the airframe can weight a little less, because it doesn't have to be quite as stiff or as strong at the lower speed. For instance, I ran Openrocket's simple model rocket example, but with an F32-5. It got up to 328 m/s, or about Mach 0.97. At that speed, drag force was about 28.4 N. At about half that speed, it was 5.4N! For comparison, sitting on the pad, before burning off any fuel, the weight was about 1.2 N. Put a bigger motor in and get it to 450 m/s, and the drag is something like 47 N.

Another example:
I went back to the design from post 4. In that post, I had it using a K62P. Total mass at takeoff was 1585g. Apogee was 7339 meters, but max velocity was only Mach 0.91 . Then I tried it with a K535, which had a total impulse of 1429 N-s vs 1406 for the other, with a slightly lower takeoff weight of 1572g. Max velocity was Mach 1.85! However, the apogee was at only 778 meters.
The first motor' burn time was 23.1 seconds, with an average thrust of only 62N, though max was 255. The second motor's burn time was 2.8 seconds, with an average thrust of 535N. If altitude was the criterion, most of that second motor's thrust was wasted.

A smaller nozzle might be required to do this efficiently with a hybrid that is usually operated at a higher thrust. Maybe the hybrid, if this is feasible, could be throttled up at liftoff and then throttled back once it gets to a reasonable speed.

I'm not sure about the cardboard fins in your ork file. Are you sure the component weights are reasonable?

I spent a year doing the hamster dance on a rocket that's built. 70k expected altitude. Throttled hybrid. 64mm dia. 10kg GLOW. Throttled back after lift off through thick air then open up at 30k.

 

[SuperNova-Rocketry]

I don't think you're talking too fast, but you're close. Also, I think some of the bass made my eardrums touch each other.

You don't even have to go Mach 1 to get to a high altitude, allowing you to make the rocket lighter, assuming you can find a long burning motor. See this article:
https://www.nakka-rocketry.net/articles/EndBurnerRationale6.pdf

And check out this design I whipped up:
View attachment 662123
It could be slower if you could find or make a longer burning motor. That was the longest one I found at thrustcurve.org
Maybe a longer burning motor could actually be of a lower impulse class, though at some point you have to wonder if the rocket will keep going straight, I suppose.

It might be a better idea to go long-burn, and I’ll have to ask my mentor regarding it, however the 1 parachute design will definitely not work, and any motor I get my hands on is going to be a Cessaroni and requires almost 6-9 months notice to my supplier. The reason I'm using such advanced things for a project which could be done simpler is just to get experience. All my rockets till now have been done as thin, and pushing what I can do without making the rocket weak.

Doing this project I want to make it all something which I could also use in future, larger rockets.

Also, the launch site I am at is SARA, we will still need ATC approval to launch from there, but that is the site I proposed to the UKRA. I will need dual deployment to stay within the 2 nautical mile radius safely, and not have to walk for years through marsh. We also want camera footage, for social media purposes, and we need to run 2 electronic flight computers for redundancy, we also want to have a passive test of our custom flight computer without it actually controlling anything, so we can see what times it tried to deploy parachutes, etc. When you factor all these things in the rocket does have to be quite large.

I don't think you're talking too fast, but you're close. Also, I think some of the bass made my eardrums touch each other.

You don't even have to go Mach 1 to get to a high altitude, allowing you to make the rocket lighter, assuming you can find a long burning motor. See this article:
https://www.nakka-rocketry.net/articles/EndBurnerRationale6.pdf

And check out this design I whipped up:
View attachment 662123
It could be slower if you could find or make a longer burning motor. That was the longest one I found at thrustcurve.org

 

[SuperNova-Rocketry]

The point isn't to burn more fuel and use more oxidizer, it's to burn the same amount more slowly, to keep air drag down. So the tank doesn't have to weigh any more. And the airframe can weight a little less, because it doesn't have to be quite as stiff or as strong at the lower speed. For instance, I ran Openrocket's simple model rocket example, but with an F32-5. It got up to 328 m/s, or about Mach 0.97. At that speed, drag force was about 28.4 N. At about half that speed, it was 5.4N! For comparison, sitting on the pad, before burning off any fuel, the weight was about 1.2 N. Put a bigger motor in and get it to 450 m/s, and the drag is something like 47 N.

Another example:
I went back to the design from post 4. In that post, I had it using a K62P. Total mass at takeoff was 1585g. Apogee was 7339 meters, but max velocity was only Mach 0.91 . Then I tried it with a K535, which had a total impulse of 1429 N-s vs 1406 for the other, with a slightly lower takeoff weight of 1572g. Max velocity was Mach 1.85! However, the apogee was at only 778 meters.
The first motor' burn time was 23.1 seconds, with an average thrust of only 62N, though max was 255. The second motor's burn time was 2.8 seconds, with an average thrust of 535N. If altitude was the criterion, most of that second motor's thrust was wasted.

A smaller nozzle might be required to do this efficiently with a hybrid that is usually operated at a higher thrust. Maybe the hybrid, if this is feasible, could be throttled up at liftoff and then throttled back once it gets to a reasonable speed.

I am going to be speaking to my mentor in around 5 hours and I will propose an idea of a longburn to him. Thank you

 

[OzHybrid]

The main business of Cessaroni is war. They're not doing a lot of amateur rocketry motors at the moment due to global disturbances.... Make sure you will be able to obtain the motor you are planning to use......
Norm

 

[SuperNova-Rocketry]

The main business of Cessaroni is war. They're not doing a lot of amateur rocketry motors at the moment due to global disturbances.... Make sure you will be able to obtain the motor you are planning to use......
Norm

Yeah, supplier was telling me they only would be able to get certain motors. I will try to look into other available motor providers in the UK, however from next year on I do wish to try making my own engine after seeing other University teams doing so.

 

[OzHybrid]

Yeah, supplier was telling me they only would be able to get certain motors. I will try to look into other available motor providers in the UK, however from next year on I do wish to try making my own engine after seeing other University teams doing so.

Are the unis using APCP or hybrids?

 

[SuperNova-Rocketry]

Are the unis using APCP or hybrids?

Surprisingly, liquids. However I want to try using a propellant like Reliant Robin to begin with. Liquid's is definitely out of my budget, and I haven't seen any hybrids in the UK that much. Might research hybrids later down the line

 

[OzHybrid]

Surprisingly, liquids. However I want to try using a propellant like Reliant Robin to begin with. Liquid's is definitely out of my budget, and I haven't seen any hybrids in the UK that much. Might research hybrids later down the line

Probably because it's almost impossible to get a licence to mix solid propellant over there.

 

[SuperNova-Rocketry]

Probably because it's almost impossible to get a licence to mix solid propellant over there.

Most likely

 

[OzHybrid]

What happened to the posting every 2 weeks?

 

[SuperNova-Rocketry]

What happened to the posting every 2 weeks?

-Exams in June
-School mates found my account which demotivated me a bit
-Building a new workshop
And also some slacking if i’m honest

Thanks for asking though, I do hope to go back to this when exams finish, I’m just much busier than I thought I would be with exams than I initally planned