the new video quality standard isn't Clickspring, but it's telling a story or documenting in your case far better. And this is what matters. Uphold some quality standards, but don't take it too far on yourself.
The profile of these fins is designed for supersonic flight, I think that if you put a symmetrical wing profile, naca0012 type will be more effective because the profile will not get stalled easily and deflect the air better.
The exit velocity of the gases is even hypersonic, so yeah, I think hypersonic fins are not an option and are the ideal here. The flight might not be supersonic but that's really not the point, they have to sustain the supersonic flux of the engine and create lift in some direction in order to "move" the exit flux in a direction, so thrust vectoring
@@DarkQwerzar But what he is going to use is not a rocket engine , it is a propeller attached to a tube n EDF. That at most the gases are going to have an output speed of 300 or 400kmh . (100m/s)
@@CuervoRC Oh, my bad didn't know he planned to use that with a simple propeller. Why is that? I must have missed some videos. Well in that case you are absolutely right, a supersonic fin would be bad, but I think for a subsonic fin it would need some aerodynamic calculus, the stall problem is indeed real and a low thicness like the NACA model you proposed Is indeed good to obtain an higher angle of attach before reaching stall
@@DarkQwerzar It's because this is a test hopper for him to use while working out the kinks of guidance and automated control in a faster, less expensive, and more controlled method than burning through engines. The plan is still to use these collected data for future rockets.
ew video quality standard isn't Clickspring, but it's telling a story or documenting in your case far better. And this is what matters. Uphold some quality standards, but don't take it too far on yourself.
ew video quality standard isn't Clickspring, but it's telling a story or documenting in your case far better. And this is what matters. Uphold some quality standards, but don't take it too far on yourself.
I love the new posting format. More frequent posting will typically lead to faster channel growth. Plus, most people watching are here for the content not the editing of the video itself, so a more frequent and therefore more detailed build log is much more entertaining to watch.
@@moonshot9056 Ya I work with the education departments of NASA and other local aerospace corporations; it's not. Acting like "rocket science" is the pinnical of engineering and over-engineering is also highly damaging to student's belief they can achieve it in case you were wondering. Get actual experience in the engineering industry and then come tell me it's a "thing".
@@NatoNathan Calling it rocket science doesn't tell you anything. You're either dealing with propulsion, aerospace, electrical, mechanical, physicists, or computer scientists. These are separate entities with separate degree fields. There is no such thing as "rocket science".
ew video quality standard isn't Clickspring, but it's telling a story or documenting in your case far better. And this is what matters. Uphold some quality standards, but don't take it too far on yourself.
I wasnt't into science or be good at math, I'm just a fan who followed you before you became a nerd (in a good way) You are so talented, an amazing musician and photographer (video making) Now you combien all this skills and knowleged and put togheter to create actually a master piece, keep sharing your music I love hearing it in the background. By the way, you make science more intersting than it was in my college or high-school.
For your alignment jig I have an idea, you could use laser pointers and a chart at a distance away (set it as far away as you need for resolution). Should be cheap, easy and quite accurate. Could just print caps for the fins that have the laser mounted to them long as the fit is snug the results should be repeatable and chart placement can be done with an additional laser mounted either in the nozzle or on the frame. I mean it's essentially just a basic alignment jig for a car but those can be accurate to a hundredth of a degree. I'm guessing that's probably good enough for this application.
That’s pretty cool! Definitely gotta say I personally enjoy this uploading style. I feel like you don’t need it to be super showy, this is like a documentary and I enjoy it.
Thanks for the video...I was just confused what 'exhaust vanes' looked and like and where they were located....Your project is super cool and I was able to understand vanes much better from your video than those boring wikipedia paragraphs :P
For a lower drag profile, try a tangent line for the vanes, 4 total, forming tangent ogive nose cone profiles. It has pretty low drag, and I’m pretty sure the only way to get a lower drag is to have a Sears Hasck profile, and that’s based on calculus.
Liking the joey b posts whatever he wants whenever he wants expirement. vid quality not quite as good but still has all of the interesting stuff that I came to this channel for. Keep it up joe
Hey Joe, I really liked the video. And I don't know if this is the right place or not, but I might have a question. I am currently building a scale Falcon heavy (Without TVC). I was wondering how about how much total voltage you used to launch your Falcon heavy's three engines. If you have time to get to this question that would be very appreciated. If I should go somewhere else, could someone point me to there? ps. love your vids.
Same total voltage as you would fire a single one of the engines. Each E-match should be connected in parallel, not in series. In series, it will only ever ignite one engine since whichever E-match lights first will break the circuit. The specific voltage is dictated by the choice of E-match/igniter rather than the engine itself.
I'm kind of curious if you get more moment by refining the shape of the vanes while preserving thrust. ie, Which is better; diamond, flat-plate, or symmetrical airfoil. Does maintaining good boundary layer adhesion matter? If a vane "stalls" does it still give good control moment, or just more drag. What are the relative critical angles on the different types of vanes? Just a reminder from an old RC guy, and I only mention this because it is so often overlooked: Once you find the best center angle for each van, remember to center the *servo* under that angle so that you have equal throw in both directions from center. You probably already know this, but like I said, it's something a lot of guys overlook with newer computerized systems that allow the center to be reset in software, then hit a mechanical limit in flight. Great post, BTW, really enjoying these.
If you want after burner. Have a small amount of butane to light a flame and then inject kerosene. Way hotter and stronger flame for very small amount of weight.
Could you do a video explaining your state space control system? Did state space in an intro level control systems course this semester and not sure I really get it 100%. Would be cool to see how it fits in to a real world project like this! Loving the new format by the way.
As far as my knowledge goes, I’m pretty sure sla player adhesion is laughable compared to fdm. (I heard that somewhere but I’m not sure if it’s actually that bad) so that could be a pretty big drawback for this type of usecase for it
@@1231legomaniac SLA has better layer adhesion than FDM actually. Here's a source for coroberation (skip to the section titled "FDM vs SLA: Precision and Smoothness"): m.all3dp.com/fdm-vs-sla/
Aluminum is not a high temperature metal. You may see it burn away pretty quickly. Steel or stainless steel sheet metal would be better. Much lower risk of failure. Thanks, John
ew video quality standard isn't Clickspring, but it's telling a story or documenting in your case far better. And this is what matters. Uphold some quality standards, but don't take it too far on yourself.
Joe, the vanes should be airfoils. You want the air stream to flow over the vane with min turbulence. With diamonds or flat that is not going to happen.
