New EMRR Virtual Contest

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I wasn't going to enter this contest, since my son Ben entered a design that I helped him with. He now knows how to use RockSim as good as I do. Ben told me today that there were only six entries as of last night. So I submitted number seven; I guess Ben wants to see if I can top his design; I only had a few hours to put something together since we planned a trip out of town for this weekend.

Bruce S. Levison, NAR #69055
 
Quick Questions

1.) how many events can the timer have? Airstarts and Chute Eject?

2.) is there a Minimum cargo mass for Event 2?

(I finally gotten around to finishing my rocksim entry, Just need to set the events)
 
I have a previous ruling from Claude allowing a single timer (2-ounce) to control airstarts and deployment.

I can't imagine there would be a MINIMUM payload for event 2, but do the math--if you go zero, you get no score. I would think this would be considered self-penalizing, meaning there is no minimum, but you should load as much as you can carry for a decent time.

Ideally, you'd want to plot some type of graph charting payload and duration, and load your payload up to the point where one more ounce results in only 1 second less duration. That's your optimum payload. I didn't plot the graph, but ran about 50 sims before finding one that worked out just about right. Just pick one that's not quite as good as me, but better than Bob Cox...

--Chan Stevens:D
 
Originally posted by chanstevens
Just pick one that's not quite as good as me, but better than Bob Cox...

--Chan Stevens:D

LMAO :D
 
Hey! I used two different 2 ounce electronics packages! The rules seemed very clear that the electronics had to be seperate!
 
Originally posted by n3tjm
Quick Questions

1.) how many events can the timer have? Airstarts and Chute Eject?

2.) is there a Minimum cargo mass for Event 2?


1) We did not set a maximum number of events for the timer. So airstarts and chute are OK from the same timer.

2) Nope.


CP
 
Originally posted by PunkRocketScience
Hey! I used two different 2 ounce electronics packages! The rules seemed very clear that the electronics had to be seperate!

Huh?

Is this the paragraph you are refering to?

"If you use more than one stage or want to do air-starts, you must include a mass of 2 ounces for electronics."

Pls send me an email if I said something different elsewhere.


CP
 
Can you post a list of those that have submitted an entry so far? (One reason being entry confirmation.) Usually this is on the contest page...
 
Originally posted by the freshman
Can you post a list of those that have submitted an entry so far? (One reason being entry confirmation.) Usually this is on the contest page...

Sure.

I know Nick is very busy these days and the last time I tried to email him an update the email bounced back. I'm sure he will catch up with his updates soon.

So far we have:

1) Phil Handley
2) Todd Mullen
3) Andy Peart
4) David Allen
5) Chan Stevens
6) Ben Levison
7) Bruce Levison
8) Dave Austerberry
9) Bill Cooke

Dave Austerberry and Bill Cooke submitted their entries today. I still have to check them out (which I will do first thing tomorrow).


CP
 
Originally posted by Afterburner
Huh?

Is this the paragraph you are refering to?

"If you use more than one stage or want to do air-starts, you must include a mass of 2 ounces for electronics."

Pls send me an email if I said something different elsewhere.


CP

E-mail sent.
 
I have pointed out where the potential conflict in the rules occured to Afterburner and after our discussion, the ruling stands. Only one electronic package is needed for air start/staging/deploy.

Just wanted to post the clarification as soon as possible for anyone that might still be working on their designs!
 
Originally posted by Afterburner
Sure.

I know Nick is very busy these days and the last time I tried to email him an update the email bounced back. I'm sure he will catch up with his updates soon.

So far we have:

1) Phil Handley
2) Todd Mullen
3) Andy Peart
4) David Allen
5) Chan Stevens
6) Ben Levison
7) Bruce Levison
8) Dave Austerberry
9) Bill Cooke

Dave Austerberry and Bill Cooke submitted their entries today. I still have to check them out (which I will do first thing tomorrow).


CP

My e-mail address changed... that's why. I'm also not getting TRF updates..... again!

Please e-mail me:
input AT
rocketreviews DOT
com

or use our feedback form.

Thanks,
Nick
 
I submitted my entry at 11:41 CDT. It's not exactly the last minute, but it's pretty darn close. I've really got to get started sooner next time. :(

BTW, my entry is not 51 pounds like Chan's, but it is over 50 feet tall. That's half of 100 feet, hence the name: The Semi-Centipede of Zeus.

I'm not going to talk any smack for this contest. I know I could have done a lot better on events 1 and 2 by increasing the parachute and cargo bay sizes and adding more engines. Either that or cutting the weight to do better on Events 3 and 4. Whatever. We'll see the results soon enough.
 
I posted mine last night... and a change was requested (something I missed in the rules)... but I got the e-mail after I went to bed. I made the changes before 3:30 am in the morning (hope I am not late to work)... I hope my judge requested changes would be honored...

Only thing I see about making changes in the rules is

* If we submit a design and it doesn't qualify for some reason, are we allowed to rework the design and resubmit or even submit a new design?
o Yes, either, both...we will review them and let you know.
 
Originally posted by BobCox
I submitted my entry at 11:41 CDT. It's not exactly the last minute, but it's pretty darn close. I've really got to get started sooner next time. :(

BTW, my entry is not 51 pounds like Chan's, but it is over 50 feet tall. That's half of 100 feet, hence the name: The Semi-Centipede of Zeus.

I'm not going to talk any smack for this contest. I know I could have done a lot better on events 1 and 2 by increasing the parachute and cargo bay sizes and adding more engines. Either that or cutting the weight to do better on Events 3 and 4. Whatever. We'll see the results soon enough.

OK, smack-free...My 51 pound weight was legit, though only if you include the 275 ounce payload in event 2, where my sim score was something obscene like 200,000,000 points. I went short and fat, with a cargo bay of 11.4 ID x 48, total rocket length something like 8-9 feet.

Anybody got "decent" drag race scores? I don't know what constitutes decent in this, but think I'm getting creamed--I think it took me 0.25 to leave the rod, and I think I was under 600 on the speed. This fat and heavy, I simply had no concept of what's good/bad.

I did at least get bored after submission, and added graphics this time---the album cover (yes, VINYL, not CD) to one of my favorite records of all time, which is what i based my rocket name on.

--Chan Stevens
 
Gang:

Two tricks I used in this one, worth considering for future rules now that I've slipped in as legal :rolleyes:

1) Chute limits--I wound up going with 4 chutes, which don't take up any more space than 1. They did add weight, and there is a diminishing performance return (chute #2 does not halve the decent rate). Still, I got what I thought were decent hang times for very little chute space.

2) Motor selection/gentle deployment--I'll probably still get creamed in #3, but this one looked too easy to nail 500 feet and low deploy speed. I specifically chose a 38mm upper stage so that I could take advantage of the downsizing rule to go with 29mm where practical. There's a HUGE impulse range in the 29-38mm classes. For event 3, I chose an upper stage that basically just spit out a token smoke trail while the rocket practically hovers (finishing the coast from stage 1). I think the "adaptor" rule should either be totally closed, or let us go wide open with any size adaptor.

For my EMRR challenge tip requirement, I'm probably going to put together some "virtual tips" covering basic no-brainer stuff that should help bring the newbies along the learning curve a bit faster, and challenge those of us who have been doing relatively well to come up with some new innovations if we want to stay on top.
 
Originally posted by n3tjm
I posted mine last night... and a change was requested (something I missed in the rules)... but I got the e-mail after I went to bed. I made the changes before 3:30 am in the morning (hope I am not late to work)... I hope my judge requested changes would be honored...

n3tjm,

I have decided to accept your entry, based on the following:

1) your original rocket design was submitted before the deadline.

2) I requested only one change, and that did not involve a complete re-design of the entry

3) No information on the other contestants' entries was made public before I received the revised entry.

If anyone has an issue with this ruling please let me know.

CP
 
Good morning eveyone.

Just to give you a quick status on the contest:

The window for entry submission is now closed. We have a total of eleven brave contestants who have submitted their entries. I am very pleased with the diversity and quality of the entries that were submitted. When I designed these rules I wanted the contestants to have a lot of options for their designs. Therefore I let you choose the size of the cargo area (only a minimum number was specified), select your own value for the payload in event #2, and allow for a large number of motor choices.

As a result, we have entries with diameters ranging from 4 inches to 11.4 inches. We also have 1-stage rockets and 2-stage rockets. We have motor selections going all the way from Micro-Maxx to (almost) full K, with some hybrids thrown in the mix.

And above all, we have cargo volumes going from the specified minimum of 555 cubic inches all the way to.... err, you wouldn't believe me if I told you ! :eek:

Anyway, I will need some more time today to finish my descriptions and send them to Nick. After that, the event results should be posted on a daily basis on EMRR.

Thank you to all participants. Special thanks to Nick for creating and maintaining EMRR (I can only imagine how much work this must be), and thank you to our generous sponsors.

May the best rocketeer win! :cool:
 
Yikes! (That seems to be something I've been saying a lot lately!)

51 pounds! 50 ft tall! I hope I can compete against these monsters!

I agree with Chan about the parachutes. I noticed this "glitch" in Rocsim as well and crammed 3 'chutes into my entry. Hopefully Apogee will adress this in future releases of Rocsim.

Good luck to you all! I can't wait to see the other entries!
 
Anybody got "decent" drag race scores? I don't know what constitutes decent in this, but think I'm getting creamed--I think it took me 0.25 to leave the rod, and I think I was under 600 on the speed. This fat and heavy, I simply had no concept of what's good/bad.

I'm getting the impression that this is all I did good in. My rocket cleared the rod in like, 0.1 seconds, with about 1200 fpm top speed I think.

51 pounds! 50 ft tall! I hope I can compete against these monsters!

My thoughts exactly. I think I'm going to get clobbered in the cargo event.

As a result, we have entries with diameters ranging from 4 inches to 11.4 inches. We also have 1-stage rockets and 2-stage rockets. We have motor selections going all the way from Micro-Maxx to (almost) full K, with some hybrids thrown in the mix.

That's me! I decided to go minimum diameter (as small as legal). I also reckoned that the more power I could pack in there, the better it would do. So I put in a 54mm K1050W for the drag race. Since the rules said we have to have at least three motors, I put in a pair of Micro-Maxxes to comply :p
 
Originally posted by Afterburner
We have motor selections going all the way from Micro-Maxx to (almost) full K, with some hybrids thrown in the mix.
And that's just my entry.:D I used a K1050W, MMX, and HyperTEK hybrids in mine.


Cargo: I think I got Chan beat in the cargo event. My score should be over 300 million. I had 21 pounds of cargo and 21 pounds of rocket + engine and a 4" x 45-foot long cargo bay. I ran out of time to do more tweaking, but every time I lengthened the cargo bay, my two cargo scores improved.

Originally posted by RaVen1357
My rocket cleared the rod in like, 0.1 seconds, with about 1200 fpm top speed I think.
YEOW! :eek: Even in my earlier shorter versions I never broke ******. Doubling my cargo bay really hurt, slowing my max speed down to about 720 ft/sec.

Re: RockSim glitches:
I found several glitches in RockSim this time (ver 8.0.1f12):

1) I cannot view the flight graphs on my desktop computer.

2) On my laptop, the landing speed in the report is always 0.00.
3) The new engine selector is smarter than version 7, but in some cases it is too smart. I had a heck of a time getting it to allow me to set the delay time on the K motors. It always wanted to choose "all" or "none". When I typed in a delay, it over-wrote it.

4) I didn't spot the multiple parachute bug. That would have helped me a lot. The best I could do instead was shove my 15-foot chute into the nose cone. When I did that, Claude's copy of RockSim showed that the chute was too big to fit, but my copy showed it fitting just fine. I enlarged my cone to avoid controversy.

5) The database has some flaws. The body tubes from Rogue Aerospace, Vaughn Brothers, and Totally Tubular claim to be made from 3/8" elastic. :eek: The mass of that tubing is about 50x lighter than paper or phenolic. If I had used this tubing I could have met the 500-foot altitude requirement without ever leaving the pad :D
 
My rocket cleared the rod in like, 0.1 seconds, with about 1200 fpm top speed I think.

Ok, I'll confirm those numbers. I just ran a simulation with 2x MMaxx motors, and 1x K1050W and cleared the rod in 0.103 seconds, top speed 2147.777 FPS (not FPM). That comes out to 1464 MPH, Mach ~2.09. :D :cool:
 
Originally posted by RaVen1357
Since the rules said we have to have at least three motors, I put in a pair of Micro-Maxxes to comply :p [/B]

Whew! I just double checked and the rule was actually a minimum of two motors! You had me sweating there for a second! Nothing like getting DQ'd right out of the gate for something silly like not having enough motors!

I think my drag results were a little slower off the pad, but almost 1400 fps top speed... Gotta love that J800!
 
Oops. I meant two motors were needed. I put in a pair so the rocket wouldn't be off balance.
 
Yeah, those MicroMaxxes pack a heck of a wallop! You wouldn't want to have them off-center.

I put three of them on mine for symmetry. The only function they serve is to smudge up the paint on the lower body tube.
 
Back
Top