ANNOUNCEMENT: OpenRocket version 22.02 Final is now available for download

[Tractionengines]

OK. Here is what I did. Open the Example Tube Fin Rocket.
[ Shows apogee at 1175ft with the D12-7 in the example file.]

1) Open the "fin set" and un-check the automatic calculations.
2) Set OD to .976in and leave ID at .95 & Wall at .013

3) Change Number of fins to 3
---- Apogee changes to 784ft.
---- In the plot of Drag vs Mach. CD=2.3 @ Mach.25

4) Change Number of fins to 4
---- Apogee changes to 876ft.
---- In the plot of Drag vs Mach. CD=1.9 @ Mach.25

5) Change Number of fins to 5
---- Apogee changes to 999ft.
---- In the plot of Drag vs Mach. CD=1.55 @ Mach.25

6) Change Number of fins back to 6
---- Apogee changes back to original 1175ft.
---- In the plot of Drag vs Mach. CD=1.12 @ Mach.25

____________________________________________________________________
2nd issue

If I wanted to show 3 fins as red and 3 as black in the image. I made 2 sets of 3 fins. (File attached.) The design file looks exactly like the original and should be the same simulation. (ie 1175ft.)
View attachment 563349
BUT
---- Apogee drops to 573ft
---- In the Plot of Drag vs Mach. CD=4.0 @ almost Mach.25

Any Ideas..... ?

Yeah: if you add enough additional tube fins it looks like you could go to the moon.

We will investigate.

Did this get looked into? Any chance of a fix. (There were issues in early Bata's, then fixed and working well in later Bata, but official release has a significant issue.)

 

[neil_w]

Did this get looked into? Any chance of a fix. (There were issues in early Bata's, then fixed and working well in later Bata, but official release has a significant issue.)

@JoePfeiffer is working on it. It is not a simple fix, apparently.

 

[Winston]

That's a root edge point, locked at Y=0.

If you're hanging off the back of the body, a better way to do it is to move that point left until it's right at the back of the body, and then add another point to create the desired profile, e.g.:
View attachment 576073

Yep, that did it. Thanks.

 

[Tractionengines]

Thanks for update.

 

[OzHybrid]

Mass and CG override treating nosecone and bodytube separately.
When I overdide mass and cg for nosecone and all subcomponents, it does not do it for the bodytube and subcomponents even with the bodytube being ticked as being diam set automatically to nosecone.
Have to override nosecone mass and cg of nosecone AND set bodytube and all subcomponents to mass=0.
If I override the stage it works.

 

[neil_w]

The body tube is not a subcomponent of the nose cone. Sub components are indicated as such in the tree view by being indented underneath.

Overriding the stage is the correct approach.

 

[OzHybrid]

Sooooo. I can scale the entire rocket from an individual component selection through the drop down menu( Entire rocket, component and subcomponents or this component only) But cannot do something similar for the mass override. Have to just do it at the stage selection only or go to the component where I can select component or component and subcomponents. But not entire rocket.
Next update?

 

[Charles_McG]

Sooooo. I can scale the entire rocket from an individual component selection through the drop down menu( Entire rocket, component and subcomponents or this component only) But cannot do something similar for the mass override. Have to just do it at the stage selection only or go to the component where I can select component or component and subcomponents. But not entire rocket.
Next update?

If there are multiple stages, then mass override of the entire stack (rocket level) doesn't really make sense. All the next level down (stages) will fly separately at some point in the flight. And OR has to generalize multiple -and- multi stage rockets.

It sounds like your mental map of how a rocket in OR is built up out of the components doesn't quite match what OR actually does.

 

[OzHybrid]

If there are multiple stages, then mass override of the entire stack (rocket level) doesn't really make sense. All the next level down (stages) will fly separately at some point in the flight. And OR has to generalize multiple -and- multi stage rockets.

It sounds like your mental map of how a rocket in OR is built up out of the components doesn't quite match what OR actually does.

I think my view of the world frequently differs from reality.

To be consistent in the application of some sort of methodology, then either

1 Scaling by selecting a part and being able to apply the scaling to part or part and subcomponents or entire rocket should be changed so that scaling of the entire stage or rocket can only be done by selecting the stage...not through selecting the component ( this would be my consistency preference) or

2 The ability to override the mass and cg should have a dropdown menu to allow applying to the entire rocket, just the stage, component and subcomponent or just the component.

But I can also live with no change... I regularly drink beer and sometimes even good cider to help me through these OCD moments.
Norm

 

[thzero]

Sooooo. I can scale the entire rocket from an individual component selection through the drop down menu( Entire rocket, component and subcomponents or this component only) But cannot do something similar for the mass override. Have to just do it at the stage selection only or go to the component where I can select component or component and subcomponents. But not entire rocket.
Next update?

Can always submit a pull request!

 

[Charles_McG]

I think my view of the world frequently differs from reality.

To be consistent in the application of some sort of methodology, then either

1 Scaling by selecting a part and being able to apply the scaling to part or part and subcomponents or entire rocket should be changed so that scaling of the entire stage or rocket can only be done by selecting the stage...not through selecting the component ( this would be my consistency preference) or

2 The ability to override the mass and cg should have a dropdown menu to allow applying to the entire rocket, just the stage, component and subcomponent or just the component.

But I can also live with no change... I regularly drink beer and sometimes even good cider to help me through these OCD moments.
Norm

I almost never use scaling, so I would be blind to an inconsistency like that. If it is one - I’m not sure the operations are supposed to be symmetrical to begin with.

I wish I could suggest a good cider for you - but the only antipodean cider maker I know is an En Zedder.

 

[neil_w]

Just posted a poll: https://www.rocketryforum.com/threa...sted-in-openrocket-range-box-stickers.179587/

 

[neil_w]

https://www.rocketryforum.com/threads/come-join-us-on-the-openrocket-discord-server.179695/

 

[Dane Ronnow]

This is strange, not sure if it's a computer issue, or an OR issue. When I launched OR this morning, it opened with the 'What's new' window (I had disabled this after the initial install). I usually open rocket designs from File>Open recent. But none of my designs were listed there. When I opened the design I've been working on, the motors were gone. And OR had reverted to default Units, Launch prefs, etc.

I haven't moved any design folders from their original location. And I haven't done any software updates (computer or OR).

This is OR v 22.02, on a Toshiba Satellite laptop running Windows 8.1.

 

[SiboVG]

This is strange, not sure if it's a computer issue, or an OR issue. When I launched OR this morning, it opened with the 'What's new' window (I had disabled this after the initial install). I usually open rocket designs from File>Open recent. But none of my designs were listed there. When I opened the design I've been working on, the motors were gone. And OR had reverted to default Units, Launch prefs, etc.

I haven't moved any design folders from their original location. And I haven't done any software updates (computer or OR).

This is OR v 22.02, on a Toshiba Satellite laptop running Windows 8.1.

Looks like your cached preferences were deleted. Did you by any chance click the "Reset all preferences" button in the preferences dialog?

 

[Dane Ronnow]

Looks like your cached preferences were deleted. Did you by any chance click the "Reset all preferences" button in the preferences dialog?

No. Also, I opened a previous version of OR—15.03 jar—and it's doing the same thing.

 

[Tobor]

....as is the "Use separate appearances for left and right sides(s)" capability.

Hm,mmm,
I cannot seem to find that option/setting anywhere. Can someone enlighten?

 

[Tobor]

This is strange, not sure if it's a computer issue, or an OR issue. When I launched OR this morning, it opened with the 'What's new' window (I had disabled this after the initial install). I usually open rocket designs from File>Open recent. But none of my designs were listed there. When I opened the design I've been working on, the motors were gone. And OR had reverted to default Units, Launch prefs, etc.

I haven't moved any design folders from their original location. And I haven't done any software updates (computer or OR).

This is OR v 22.02, on a Toshiba Satellite laptop running Windows 8.1.

Just so you know, one of the reasons Windows 8.1 was not well received in the corporate world after it's release, was do the the fact it would randomly do bad things like delete files it should not touch. IIRC, part of issue centered around Windows defrag and Windows disk cleanup services. It is quite possible your data was a victim of these rouge services.

 

[Dane Ronnow]

Just so you know, one of the reasons Windows 8.1 was not well received in the corporate world after it's release, was do the the fact it would randomly do bad things like delete files it should not touch. IIRC, part of issue centered around Windows defrag and Windows disk cleanup services. It is quite possible your data was a victim of these rouge services.

I wonder if that's why my laptop display quit working. I've been using the HDMI to connect to a flat panel TV for almost a year.

Anyway, the OR issue is not a serious problem. I reopened all my rockets so OR could find them through File>Open recent, then reset all the prefs.

Interestingly, the default Atmospheric Conditions in Launch prefs had the mbar pressure below 1—something like 0.03. I didn't notice it until I simulated a launch, and the apogee was 1200 feet higher, and the ground hit velocity was 100 feet/sec. Like flying in a vacuum.

 

[SiboVG]

Hm,mmm,
I cannot seem to find that option/setting anywhere. Can someone enlighten?

 

[SiboVG]

Interestingly, the default Atmospheric Conditions in Launch prefs had the mbar pressure below 1—something like 0.03. I didn't notice it until I simulated a launch, and the apogee was 1200 feet higher, and the ground hit velocity was 100 feet/sec. Like flying in a vacuum.

Yup, this issue has been fixed a couple of months ago and will be resolved in the next release.

 

[kjhambrick]

Yup, this issue has been fixed a couple of months ago and will be resolved in the next release.

Speaking of OR Development ...

I would be happy to Alpha / Beta Test for y'all if intermediate updates are available for Download from the git site ( without having to rebuild OR locally )

Thanks.

-- kjh

 

[SiboVG]

Speaking of OR Development ...

I would be happy to Alpha / Beta Test for y'all if intermediate updates are available for Download from the git site ( without having to rebuild OR locally )

Thanks.

-- kjh

Thanks. Once we start rolling out betas, we post it on TRF, so keep an eye out for when that happens.

 

[SolarYellow]

I have a feature request.

I like to look at the stability of my rockets in both calibers and percent of overall length. It's cumbersome to go through the preferences menu to select the units preference every time I want to switch. It would be awesome if the main model screen where the stability factor is displayed above the CG and CP could either display the stability in both percent and calibers (two lines) or have a drop-down toggle to change back and forth immediately, like when entering dimensions in the component editing dialogue.

 

[neil_w]

I have a feature request.

I like to look at the stability of my rockets in both calibers and percent of overall length. It's cumbersome to go through the preferences menu to select the units preference every time I want to switch. It would be awesome if the main model screen where the stability factor is displayed above the CG and CP could either display the stability in both percent and calibers (two lines) or have a drop-down toggle to change back and forth immediately, like when entering dimensions in the component editing dialogue.

I agree, it should be able to show both. There may already be an issue for this; if not I will file it.

[edit] Yup, someone already filed this: https://github.com/openrocket/openrocket/issues/2079

 

[bad_idea]

I have a feature request.

I like to look at the stability of my rockets in both calibers and percent of overall length. It's cumbersome to go through the preferences menu to select the units preference every time I want to switch. It would be awesome if the main model screen where the stability factor is displayed above the CG and CP could either display the stability in both percent and calibers (two lines) or have a drop-down toggle to change back and forth immediately, like when entering dimensions in the component editing dialogue.

I have been wanting the same thing. I ordinarily look at percent, but I find caliber useful too. I can calculate it mentally, but it would be better to have it displayed along with percentage.

I agree, it should be able to show both. There may already be an issue for this; if not I will file it.

[edit] Yup, someone already filed this: https://github.com/openrocket/openrocket/issues/2079

Thanks, Neil. I had been waiting until after the 22.02 release to file a feature request, and later I just didn't get around to it. Glad to see that someone else already did.

 

[SolarYellow]

I agree, it should be able to show both. There may already be an issue for this; if not I will file it.

[edit] Yup, someone already filed this: https://github.com/openrocket/openrocket/issues/2079

It would also be cool if there was an option to export stability margin in percent, not just calibers, when exporting sim results into .csv file. I like to do that to get detailed about rod departure sometimes. Easy enough to convert, since I look at the .csv in Excel, but would be easier if I could just select the item from the export menu.

 

[neil_w]

It would also be cool if there was an option to export stability margin in percent, not just calibers, when exporting sim results into .csv file. I like to do that to get detailed about rod departure sometimes. Easy enough to convert, since I look at the .csv in Excel, but would be easier if I could just select the item from the export menu.

You'll get that. Stability margin will offer two different units: calibers and %.

I'm inclined to have the UI *always* show both calibers and % (rather than have it be preference-configurable). Something like this:


Would anyone out there find this to be objectionable?

 

[SolarYellow]

I think it would be perfect.

 

[bad_idea]

You'll get that. Stability margin will offer two different units: calibers and %.

I'm inclined to have the UI *always* show both calibers and % (rather than have it be preference-configurable). Something like this:
View attachment 582213

Would anyone out there find this to be objectionable?

I like that, but I note that the units options also allow for displaying stability as a length in meters, centimeters, millimeters, or inches. I have no idea if anyone actually uses those options, but in case there are users who prefer to see length, would it make sense in your example to show stability as "5.15 cal / 15% / 644mm," with the unit depending whether the user chose metric or imperial?

Personally I'd find that distracting, but I hate to see options removed from software. Perhaps display in calibers and % but also allow users to add length via the units preferences? edit to add: It could use the existing dialog drop down but remove caliber and percent and add "none" as the default, then if someone wants to see mm, they'd see "5.15 cal / 15% / 644mm," but users who didn't select away from none would see "5.15 cal / 15%."