will this rocket cone?

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

T-Rex

Ordinary Average Guy
TRF Supporter
Joined
Jul 22, 2011
Messages
3,045
Reaction score
74
You asked the wrong question. You want to know if it is stable. In theory, yes, but things change as it goes trans-sonic. I have never studied the phenomenon, so I am the wrong person to provide you with the information.
 

TRFfan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2015
Messages
1,211
Reaction score
2
You asked the wrong question. You want to know if it is stable. In theory, yes, but things change as it goes trans-sonic. I have never studied the phenomenon, so I am the wrong person to provide you with the information.
Oh ok.
 

Nytrunner

Pop lugs, not drugs
TRF Supporter
Joined
Oct 15, 2016
Messages
8,001
Reaction score
3,719
Location
Huntsville AL
I want to say I recall that 3-fins have more risk of coning than 4 due to lateral asymmetry. Its a great example of reducing one negative and introducing a different one. Welcome to real optimization.

Got into a discussion about coning/spiral behavior and "trajectory damping" with a guy once. Apparently Rocksim has some damping simulation that OpenR doesn't.
[damping related to the angle-of-attack oscillations]

The OP is likely trying to mitigate anything he can think of before flight (usually by asking the forum).
 

DavidMcCann

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 15, 2016
Messages
2,656
Reaction score
171
The OP is likely trying to mitigate anything he can think of before flight (usually by asking the forum).
He's being VERY thorough

I was told it would cone because of the small fins.
Small fins are only one component required for coning. Typically, you'll see it with small fins, an over stable rocket, low thrust, and some wind. It's not as simple as small fins = coning. You may even see it at times on a rocket with normal sized fins....
 

GregGleason

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2009
Messages
4,655
Reaction score
7
Regardless of the reason of your concern (from loss of altitude to destruction of rocket), you can learn more about coning from this publication (link below). Their damping solutions are beyond the scope of this forum, but it may help you visualize the issues.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...C_IJRGwFQ&sig2=J1Urv9dDxTQGc4MqBMDdrw&cad=rja

You may need a math professor and an aerospace engineer (or both) to explain it in detail (I know I would). :eyepop:

BTW, IMHO this stuff is at the deeper end of the pool of rocket science.

I think this phenomena is somewhat related to coupling dynamics, here is a link to a NASA publication in the subject:

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88484main_H-2106.pdf

Greg
 

TRFfan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2015
Messages
1,211
Reaction score
2
I want to say I recall that 3-fins have more risk of coning than 4 due to lateral asymmetry. Its a great example of reducing one negative and introducing a different one. Welcome to real optimization.

Got into a discussion about coning/spiral behavior and "trajectory damping" with a guy once. Apparently Rocksim has some damping simulation that OpenR doesn't.
[damping related to the angle-of-attack oscillations]

The OP is likely trying to mitigate anything he can think of before flight (usually by asking the forum).
I did use 4 fins for the rocket. I used OR and RASAero for the sim.

Why is coning a concern to you?

Greg
He didn't ask "why will it cone?" He asked, "Why are you concerned?" IOW, so what? What's the worry?
Well i thought either coning would reduce the altitude by alot or the rockt would go off-course.

He's being VERY thorough



Small fins are only one component required for coning. Typically, you'll see it with small fins, an over stable rocket, low thrust, and some wind. It's not as simple as small fins = coning. You may even see it at times on a rocket with normal sized fins....
Oh ok. I do have small fins but my stability is only around 2 cal. My thrust to weight ratio is about 50:1.

Regardless of the reason of your concern (from loss of altitude to destruction of rocket), you can learn more about coning from this publication (link below). Their damping solutions are beyond the scope of this forum, but it may help you visualize the issues.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...C_IJRGwFQ&sig2=J1Urv9dDxTQGc4MqBMDdrw&cad=rja

You may need a math professor and an aerospace engineer (or both) to explain it in detail (I know I would). :eyepop:

BTW, IMHO this stuff is at the deeper end of the pool of rocket science.

I think this phenomena is somewhat related to coupling dynamics, here is a link to a NASA publication in the subject:

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88484main_H-2106.pdf

Greg
More information on coning here at Richard Nakka's website (near the bottom of the page):

https://www.nakka-rocketry.net/ep_lr7.html

This is a better "cookies on the bottom shelf" description of coning applied to hobby/amateur rocketry.

Greg
The first two link were a bit too advanced for me, so i checked out the last one, which helped shed some light on the issue. Thanks!
 

GregGleason

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2009
Messages
4,655
Reaction score
7
IMHO, the fins are too small. But I noticed the length to diameter ratio is similar to the Nike Smoke (which is about 13.8 for the Nike).

The fin span (and perhaps area, but not necessarily the fin plan form) for this rocket should be something like the Nike Smoke with regard to fin span to airframe ratio (which is in 1.31). You might cut the fin span down some off that ratio, but I'm not sure I would go less than 90%.

This is the where you have to decide is stability more important or is drag. This is the trade-off. Too much drag hurts altitude, whereas too little stability hurts you getting it back in one piece.

NikeSmokeT-Back4.jpg

My :2:

Greg
 

TRFfan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2015
Messages
1,211
Reaction score
2
IMHO, the fins are too small. But I noticed the length to diameter ration is similar to the Nike Smoke (which is about 13.8 for the Nike).

The fin span (and perhaps area, but not necessarily the fin plan form) for this rocket should be something like the Nike Smoke with regard to fin span to airframe ratio (which is in 1.31). You might cut the fin span down some off that ratio, but I'm not sure I would go less than 90%.

This is the where you have to decide is stability more important or is drag. This is the trade-off. Too much drag hurts altitude, whereas too little stability hurts you getting it back in one piece.

View attachment 315892

My :2:

Greg
I agree. I'll check it out.
 

Forever_Metal

JustAnotherBAR
Joined
May 21, 2016
Messages
493
Reaction score
38
Location
Madison, AL
:2::2:

[sniff][sniff]...

Can you smell that? :confused2:

What could it be... :duck:

Oh I know I know!
:point:

science... :clap::clap:

Nice! :cool:

fm
 

T-Rex

Ordinary Average Guy
TRF Supporter
Joined
Jul 22, 2011
Messages
3,045
Reaction score
74
I stand corrected, maybe he did ask the right question, but it was so far above my head that I didn't recognize it.
I will say that I have a small Estes WAC Corporal (clone). It is straight as an arrow until it starts to coast, then it corkscrews. Every time. I don't know why, but at the speeds it flies, it is not a problem.
In the case of the OP, I can see where coning or corkscrewing could be a concern at the velocity.
I'll shut up now, as I realize this discussion is beyond my knowledge.
 

ksaves2

Lifetime Supporter
TRF Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2009
Messages
6,261
Reaction score
489
Location
Central Illinois
I stand corrected, maybe he did ask the right question, but it was so far above my head that I didn't recognize it.
I will say that I have a small Estes WAC Corporal (clone). It is straight as an arrow until it starts to coast, then it corkscrews. Every time. I don't know why, but at the speeds it flies, it is not a problem.
In the case of the OP, I can see where coning or corkscrewing could be a concern at the velocity.
I'll shut up now, as I realize this discussion is beyond my knowledge.
I have an ASP Scale WAC I fly on 38mm two grain motors, commercial and research and have never seen the rocket cone. I have skins on the fins that are supposed to make it more "scale-like". I got another one to build as my second one, stupidhead here forgot the charge size to use with the MAD apogee
deployment and I didn't get the nosecone off! It was my "better looking" WAC with the white and black paint job. My yellow and black WAC is looking pretty
ratty after like 8 years. It's still in good shape to fly too. Kurt
 
Last edited:
Top