Model rocket question (MY LAST RESORT) (and this is NOT a homework question)

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around analyzing the flight of a model rocket using video analysis software. Participants explore how to calculate the rocket's acceleration from a position vs. time graph, and subsequently use SUVAT equations to estimate the maximum height of the rocket. The conversation includes considerations of the rocket's mass, engine type, and the effects of gravity and air resistance.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses difficulty in calculating acceleration due to a lack of calculus knowledge and seeks alternative methods using SUVAT equations.
  • Another participant suggests that the acceleration can be derived from the graph, indicating that the parameter 'a' corresponds to half the acceleration in the equation of motion.
  • A different participant questions the graph's orientation and notes that the points may not fit the expected curve well, raising concerns about the accuracy of the analysis.
  • Concerns are raised about horizontal movement during launch potentially skewing vertical calculations, suggesting that the SUVAT model assumes constant acceleration which may not apply here.
  • One participant proposes using a piece-wise partial differential equation to account for changing mass and air drag, indicating that this approach is more complex than first-year calculus.
  • Another participant mentions that if the graph fits a parabola, it could imply constant acceleration, though they acknowledge limitations in assessing the graph's fit due to its presentation.
  • One participant lists assumptions that could simplify calculations, such as assuming the rocket motor dies at a specific point and that air resistance is negligible.
  • A later reply humorously critiques the initial speed indicated by the graph as unrealistic, despite acknowledging statistical considerations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints on the validity of the graph and the assumptions necessary for calculations. There is no consensus on the best method to analyze the rocket's flight or the implications of the graph's characteristics.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations such as the lack of data regarding the rocket's flight after leaving the camera view, which affects the ability to determine when thrust ceases and gravity takes over. Additionally, the discussion highlights the complexities introduced by changing mass and air resistance, which are not easily addressed with basic equations.

xxADTRxx
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Alright everybody, I REALLY need help on this and I only have a limited time. So I took a video of a model rocket and using the video analysis software, Tracker, I have a graph of position vs. time. Now I don't know calculus yet (only in pre-calc as of now), so the derivation of the graph won't work for me. How can I calculate the acceleration of this rocket, and then, based on that acceleration, use SUVAT equations to find the maximum height. I used an Estes C6-5 engine and the rocket has a mass of 0.0598kg (59.8g). I've also attached a picture of the graph.
 

Attachments

  • Physics.PNG
    Physics.PNG
    18.2 KB · Views: 622
Physics news on Phys.org
xxADTRxx said:
Alright everybody, I REALLY need help on this and I only have a limited time. So I took a video of a model rocket and using the video analysis software, Tracker, I have a graph of position vs. time. Now I don't know calculus yet (only in pre-calc as of now), so the derivation of the graph won't work for me. How can I calculate the acceleration of this rocket, and then, based on that acceleration, use SUVAT equations to find the maximum height. I used an Estes C6-5 engine and the rocket has a mass of 0.0598kg (59.8g). I've also attached a picture of the graph.
If x the position then 2a is the acceleration based on your fit.
 
That was an interesting way to analyse the flight. Though it's not exactly the graph I'd have expected to see. Why upside down? :confused:

It's a poor scale for humans, we can't see how well the points fit the curve, though the computer isn't handicapped by this.

Regardless, as A.T. says, acceleration according to the general equation s=½At² + ut
means your parameter a corresponds to ½A, so Acceleration = 2a

Interpreting your equation of best fit, at t=0 the rocket starts from a height of 1.8 and a speed upwards of 5/sec, and accelerates downwards at 117/sec². The flight is over in 1/3 sec?

You mention the weight of the rocket, but won't it be continuously losing weight during flight?
 
Was there much horizontal movement in the launch? That will skew your (vertical-only based) calculations.

The SUVAT equation model is for constant acceleration, which you will not have in this case.
It would be an approximation, though it might still be sufficient for you.

You need a piece-wise partial differential equation to account for the changing mass during launch, and then constant mass during unpowered flight/freefall. (not first-year calculus either unfortunately).

There is also air drag to take into account, which usually requires a numerical method to solve.

Your best bet would likely be to set up an Excel spreadsheet to calculate the flight numerically (ie set up a spreadsheet with small timesteps [fraction of a second], and apply the equations of motion for each timestep). Have a column for your mass, height, velocity, acceleration, force..., and fill down the equations.
This is also handy for having all the values to graph out after however you need.

If you haven't, have a read on NASA's site - they have lots of good rocketry information:
http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/rktpow.html

Good luck
 
If OP's plot is a close fit for a parabola, then that meets the criterion for constant accⁿ, surely? Though we are unable to judge how well the fit is due to graphing shortcomings.
 
My thoughts are that:
1) Yes the graph is inverted (up is in direction of decreasing x).
2) The graph is from a video of only the launch, due to the 1/3 seconds & large # (units?) of acceleration.
3) The graph is a good fit for the points plotted (lower-left corner gives the calculated standard deviation).
4) There is not enough data. We do not know if the rocket left the camera view after this, or if there was more points afterward that were trimmed out. Therefore, we do not know for certain when the thrust kicks out & gravity takes over.

HOWEVER, if we assume:
a) The rocket motor dies at that point & gravity takes over,
b) The rocket flew perfectly vertically,
c) Air resistance will be negligable.

Then you can take the velocity at that the last point & gravity constant, feed it into the generic v=a*t (to calculate how long from motor cutout until apex of flight), then feed that time, the gravity constant, and the altitude & velocity @ motor cutout into y=1/2*a*t2 + vo*t + yo to calculate the estimated final altitude.
 
3) The graph is a good fit for the points plotted (lower-left corner gives the calculated standard deviation).
Stats are all well and good, but an initial speed of 5m/sec into the ground is not exactly a good fit to reality. :wink:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 84 ·
3
Replies
84
Views
8K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
7K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
19K