October 31, 2003
You can find the times and dates of the programs here.
Thanks to RocketForge for the pointer.
Posted by: Ted at
10:23 AM | category: Rocketry
Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 55 words, total size 1 kb.
October 30, 2003
This weekend's rocket launch, BattlePark 2003, in Culpeper, Virginia has been cancelled. The heavy rains of the last week prevented the farmer from getting his crops in on time, so we cannot use the field.
No word on when or if there will be a rain date.
Posted by: Ted at
04:08 AM | category: Rocketry
Comments (10)
| Add Comment
Post contains 57 words, total size 1 kb.
October 27, 2003
The fall BattlePark 2003 Rocket Launch is scheduled for the weekend of November 1-2. Located in Culpeper, Virginia, this is one of the premier events in the east, with rocketeers attending from all over the eastern U.S. and Canada. I'll be there both days, and Mookie usually makes at least one if not both. This launch features some of the most interesting projects and flights around. As usual, spectators are free, kids fly their rockets for free, and you'll never meet a friendlier group of people. Come on out, walk around, talk to folks, ask questions, and be prepared to say 'wow'. Oh yeah, they've already obtained an FAA waiver for flights to 15,000 feet.
You are invited and welcome. Contact me if you have any questions.
Victor and Nic, are you going to be able to make it? How about you Don, any interest?
Posted by: Ted at
10:53 PM | category: Rocketry
Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 155 words, total size 1 kb.
October 26, 2003
I previously posted some background links on aerospike engines.
Posted by: Ted at
11:55 PM | category: Rocketry
No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 54 words, total size 1 kb.
October 24, 2003
A week before her maiden flight, things are going smoothly. Literally. I’ve put the second coat of primer on, and have finished sanding with 400 grit sandpaper (which is slightly more coarse than Charmin). One more coat of primer tonight and I’ll start painting the color coats tomorrow. Decals will go on probably Wednesday – folks, I need to know what flags you want to fly! If you haven’t let me know yet, please do. Tiger, that’s you too (I’m assuming US, but you might prefer Texas – your call).
Posted by: Ted at
08:41 AM | category: Rocketry
Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 119 words, total size 1 kb.
October 20, 2003
Posted by: Ted at
05:18 AM | category: Rocketry Resources
Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 3368 words, total size 20 kb.
October 13, 2003
The back row, from left to right:
Quest MicroMaxx, about 1"x.25" diameter.
Estes mini-engine, 13mm diameter.
Estes standard engine, 18mm diameter.
Estes "D" engine, 24mm diameter. These first four can be purchased in a lot of Wal-Mart type stores, as well as some craft stores. They all use a kind of black powder for propellant.
AeroTech "E" engine, 24mm diameter.
AeroTech "F" engine, 29mm diameter.
AeroTech "G" engine, 29mm diameter. These three all use Ammonium Perchlorate based propellant. In general, each 'letter' is twice as powerful as the one before.
Second row:
Two Dr. Rocket Reloadable Motor Casings for "H" motors. For these, you buy reload kits that provide solid slugs of Ammonium Perchlorate propellant and all of the necessary parts to assemble the motor. The casing on the left holds one more slug than the one on the right, so it's the more powerful motor. The casing on the right is a fully assembled motor. There's no danger here, because the motors need to be electrically ignited to fire. These are both 29mm in diameter.
Front row:
This is the motor for the Air Munuviana. It's a RATT-works "H", again in 29mm diameter. The reason for the length is that this is a hybrid motor, and a tank for nitrous oxide is incorporated into the design. The fuel is a slug of PVC plastic. I've designed the Air Munuviana to handle up to "J" motors and the motor mount will accept motors up to 38mm in diameter.
A little about the diameters. Standard diameters for rocket motors are 10.5mm, 13mm, 18mm, 24mm, 29mm, 38mm, 54mm, 75mm, 98mm, 3 inch, 4 inch and 6 inch. As you can see, I still fly at the smaller end of the range, but I'm slowly working my way up. [insert Tim Allen grunting noises here] more...
Posted by: Ted at
01:48 PM | category: Rocketry Resources
Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 350 words, total size 2 kb.
October 04, 2003
See the link on the right side of the page (under "I'm involved") for the official word about the Team America Rocketry Challenge. One thing for sure is that the TARC is proof positive that kids will rise up to expectations.
The task for teams of high school students was that they had to plan, design, build and fly a rocket. Because you can buy kits in Wal-Mart to do that much, a lot of required complexity was added. The rocket had to fly as close as possible to 1500 feet, and since altitude measurement was a required, the team had to plan on using an electronic altimeter.
The next requirement was that the rocket had to have two stages. In other words, the first motor has to stop burning before the second motor fires. If you've seen pictures of the old Saturn V moon shots, that's how it worked. Three stages, each one dropping off as it was done.
The last requirement was that the rocket had to carry a payload. Two fresh hens eggs, to be brought back to earth unbroken.
Now that is a challenge!
The organizers expected a couple hundred teams to enter, and planned for twice that. Instead, almost 900 teams of students signed up.
Designing a rocket is like any other engineering project, it boils down to tradeoffs. Think about a car for example; designing for lots of people room means a larger body which means a heavier vehicle which means a bigger motor which means less room for people which meansÂ…
For the rocket design, the only set dimension was the size and weight of the eggs. The teams were provided with eggs that were weighed and measured to be within contest tolerances (and candled to make sure there were no unseen hairline cracks).
Other than that, the design was freeform. Each team was given a list of commercially available rocket motors that they could use for the flight. These motors ranged in size and power – the largest allowed motor was 256 times more powerful than the smallest. The teams had to come up with a combination of staged motors to meet the requirements. There were other considerations too, because some motors required additional electronics to ignite the upper stage.
There are photos of the teams accessable from the TARC page. In particular, look at the rockets they flew in the finals, and how teams devised different solutions to the same problem.
Each team consisted of high school students and a teacher. There were entries from every state and one from an American school overseas (APO address). Over 9000 students were participants. The teachers were there for adult supervision, but the students were required to do the actual design and construction work, and to fly the rockets themselves. Some teams were only a few students, while other teams comprised a whole class. Some schools entered more than one team. Looking at the team photos, youÂ’ll notice a fair number of young ladies involved, including a few all-female teams.
Each team received sophisticated rocket design and simulation software so that they could build and fly ‘virtual’ rockets before starting construction. Teams were not required to use the software, but I think the benefits far outweighed the time spent learning to use it well.
The team photos were taken at the Finals, held in Virginia in May. Many teams couldn’t afford to send the entire team, but I thought it interesting to see that the teams from small towns often had banners or shirts listing their sponsors and local businesses who donated money to help them meet expenses for the contest. For some, it looked like everyone on ‘Main Street, USA’ chipped in!
An unofficial member of many teams were the mentors, who were experienced rocketeers volunteering time to help. Few students and teachers had experience building and flying rockets, so the teams were encouraged to contact their closest rocket clubs for assistance.
And what is a contest without prizes, eh? From the AIA site:
A grand prize pool of $59,000 in cash and savings bonds was shared by the top five teams. In addition, the top ten teams will compete for three $2500 grants to design, build and launch an advanced rocket with NASA Marshall Space Flight Center. Each of the top 25 teams is being invited to send one of their teachers to an advanced NASA rocketry workshop.
This is real rocket science.
The TARC was originally concieved as a one-time event, but the response from students, teachers and industry was so overwhelmingly positive that the 2004 Challenge has already been announced.
A couple of good articles about the 2003 Challenge have been posted this month (.pdf files).
Posted by: Ted at
11:39 PM | category: Rocketry
No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 824 words, total size 5 kb.
October 02, 2003
"How come on real rockets they always have funnel like things on the back of the thruster thingo?"
To which Peter Alway* replied:
"Because the hot flamey stuff that comes out of the thruster thingo is accelleratized to the fastness of that noisy stuff you hear by passing through an other-way funnel-like thingy before it reaches the funnel-like things you see, and by going through the funnel-like things it embiggens, which acceleratizes it to several times faster than that noisy stuff you hear. The faster the flamey stuff leaves the thruster thingo, the faster the rocket travels when it runs out of the gunk it burns."
He's absolutely right you know.
*Peter Alway wrote Rockets of the World and its many supplements as well as historical reference and scale modelling data books. He also raises rabbits and teaches astronomy at a college in the midwest.
Posted by: Ted at
07:57 AM | category: Rocketry
Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 156 words, total size 1 kb.
74 queries taking 0.0772 seconds, 213 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
