98mm Min-Diameter Composite Mach 3 Build

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Nose cone implosions were pretty common on flights like these before FWFG nosecones became readily available. I'd advise you to buy COTS instead of making your own.
 
Nose cone implosions were pretty common on flights like these before FWFG nosecones became readily available. I'd advise you to buy COTS instead of making your own.
I absolutely agree, and we have a contingency plan to purchase one. We’re still prototyping nosecones in the hope that we can learn more about the manufacturing process. Even if we don’t make a nose cone that we’re confident will withstand the forces of this flight, we’ll have gained the knowledge to make just about any nosecone for regular rockets that we want. It’s more of a learning experience than a guarantee that we’ll use it for this rocket.
 
This might be an unusual request, but would anyone be willing to loan us their Cesaroni 75mm 6XL-grain casing hardware? (We will obviously compensate you if any damage is incurred) We are more than happy to host you at our launch in April. I'm happy to discuss details via PM.
 
One thing about that av-bay co figuration that causes problems is the location of your static port.

When the port is way forward on the nose one, it's angled into the relative wind, causing it to act as a pitot tube, not a static port while the rocket is in motion.

This causes the baro sensor to show an increase in pressure while on ascent, while the accelerometer is in disagreement with that.

Certain altimeters aren't bothered by this, others definitely are. I think the general consensus when I looked into it a while back was anything that uses a Kalman filter would have a bad time.

There are other options, like running accel-only, but that's not ideal either.

Depending on your static port location, if get with Keith and Bdale and see what they have to say about the Megas.

W/r/t the kalman filter, not necessarily. My experience with kalman filtered baro altitude and accelerometer data to determine altitude/velocity/acceleration is that it's been quite resilient to baro oddities due to static port placement and supersonic flight.

I have several flights now with your altimeter-and-static-ports-in-the-nose configuration, all running the kalman filter described above on my homebrew altimeter, and they've all been solid. I don't have plots handy on me atm, but I'll try putting something up later this week comparing accelerometer integrated altitude/raw baro altitude/kalman filtered altitude with the latest 54mm flight I had. For reference, I basically implemented what's in this paper: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjEpcb1tp37AhVJjIkEHQp9D8QQFnoECBQQAQ&url=https://aws1.discourse-cdn.com/arduino/original/3X/a/3/a37bb6242fc5a9ada7025bd1ef64440a9d1c19f0.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2Bv9PXvB4JT8GNSV9ittPg

Having said that, I haven't looked very closely at source code from other open source commercial products; I assume their implmentation is similar but YMMV. And I'd never hook up charges first shot without having a solid understanding of what the altimeter is doing and how it will react to a certain placement.

Hopefully this isn't too off topic for this thread, but I think it's relevant here considering the electronics location. Day late and a dollar short on my post above, but here's some altitude data I finally gathered showing a 54mm flight I did last fall. A few notes:
  • Rocket went through mach approximately 1 second into flight and drops below mach at about 14.5 seconds. Max speed was mach 2.3
  • Raw baro altitude data is trash going through mach (it even goes negative!) Good illustration of why straight baro based altimeters use a mach lock out.
  • Accelerometer data would have given a good apogee signal, albeit a bit late compared to barometric or kalman filter
  • Kalman filter is data calculated in situ and is ultimately used with fairly simple logic to determine on board flight events (for example, burnout when acceleration < 0, apogee when velocity < 0 etc.). It seems fairly unphased by the wonky baro data. I do more heavily weight the gains on input accelerometer data while the rocket is supersonic.
Data:
altitude_comparison.png
Location of static(sort of?) pressure holes in nosecone
IMG_3199.jpg
 
Hopefully this isn't too off topic for this thread
Thanks for the note. Haven't posted about it, but we adjusted the ebay location slightly so that we can have static ports on a flat surface of the rocket anyway.

I'd like to apologize for the absence of content. I've been leading a lot of other projects and outreach programs, and with midterms swamping me right now, this build has been put on the back burner. I'll do my best to post a solid update soon. Just to summarize:
  • Upper body tube has been laid up and polished
  • Lower body has been laid up but not cleaned up yet
  • Fins have been cut (currently experimenting with bevels on test pieces)
    • @robopup did you make those bevels in your last comment by hand? I noticed them in the background and got curious about how you did them. We're bouncing between a router or a belt sander with a sanding jig.
  • Wildman 3" High Temp NC purchased
  • Ebay sled design being adjusted a bit
 
It obviously escaped my mind for awhile, but I thought I would put a cap on this thread if anyone was coming back and wondering what happened.

Due to some unfortunate circumstances towards the end of last semester, I decided to part ways with the team this project was affiliated with. Sadly, I don't have any updates on the status of this project, but I suspect it's being archived due to some consequent realignment of leadership and goals.

I doubt this is relevant for people anymore, but it seemed important to clarify.
 
It obviously escaped my mind for awhile, but I thought I would put a cap on this thread if anyone was coming back and wondering what happened.

Due to some unfortunate circumstances towards the end of last semester, I decided to part ways with the team this project was affiliated with. Sadly, I don't have any updates on the status of this project, but I suspect it's being archived due to some consequent realignment of leadership and goals.

I doubt this is relevant for people anymore, but it seemed important to clarify.
The fact that you thought / remembered to give an update speaks volumes for the career I assume you are heading into based on the most recent semester comment. I didn’t go back to reread but I did feel a sense of closure and appreciation with the update and wanted to share.

…. I’ll likely reread all of this for fun later because if it was worth me turning on email updates for it’s worth the reread (for me). Thanks again and I wish you the best on your next thing.

Also, there are 8 billion people in the world. You would be surprised how many people care, esp when you’re willing to put yourself out there.
 
@TheBru Thank you for that. This thread was my first attempt at trying to communicate my engineering ideas/questions/knowledge in a written public avenue, so to speak. It's nowhere near as in-depth as the other high-quality projects on this forum, but I've enjoyed trying my hand at it. I look forward to learning more in the classroom and ultimately being able to back up my hands-on approach with some actual science that people love reading about on TRF.

Not sure what the next page in my rocketry journey is. Everything's kind of on hold right now, and not sure if/when I can get launching again. I thought I would succinctly share my last project here, since a lot of the techniques I learned and practiced in this thread came in handy. Looking back, I wish I had taken the time to make a full build thread following the whole project, but juggling school and passion projects like this gets tricky sometimes.

I spent last November - March building a custom 4in. fiberglass payload rocket featuring dual-redundant computers and, my favorite, an onboard GoPro Hero 6. I used the project as a fundraiser with a local elementary school's PTA to "fly kids' artwork to space" in both digital and hardcopy form.

Sled.JPGDSC_7068a_1100336772.jpgIMG_4909.JPGOnboard.png

Not going to spam with build photos, but my pride and joy of the project was the custom 3D-printed ebay sled above (logos blurred, sorry for the blobs). Two 9V batteries are hidden behind the removable blue cover, and a compartment for a thumb drive with some of the artwork serves as the mounting point for an aluminum GoPro mount JB welded to the sled. The Telemega and Easymega are mounted on the back of the sled with custom standoffs. The fins are 1/8-in. G10 sheets that were tabbed and beveled, and the window for the GoPro was 1/8-in. plexiglass I formed with a blowtorch.


Dubbed "Aether," the rocket was just over 7 ft. tall and weighed close to 25 lbs. It flew successfully in April on a CTI L1355 to ~12,500 ft. Above is a still from the onboard video, but unfortunately the RSO said I can't share it publicly because I flew into the clouds at his discretion. Launch video from the ground should be attached too.

Sorry for taking this thread off the rails, but now you have some proof that some of my projects actually make it off the workbench :cool:
 

Attachments

  • Launch.mp4
    6.1 MB
Landon,

I was heavily involved in rocketry before and into college, but my jr and sr year, and after graduating life got real busy, and funds got real tight, so I took a ~10 year break (while keeping my membership/certifications active). I am back into rockets now, and a lot of the skills that I learned from my early rocket construction and testing have helped me in my mechanical engineering career.

I hope that wherever you end up, you will be able to look back at these activities, and what you've learned, and benefit from it. Who knows, you may end up building your own min diameter 98mm mach 3.5+ rocket in a decade, just for fun.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top