Rocket Lab Report

Camille Jones
Academy of Math, Engineering, and Science
Mr. Hendricks A2
Honors Physics




ABSTRACT:
This lab was intended to find the elevation of different rockets when launched. Mr.
Hendricks honors physics classed formed a series of labs, and then combined them to form
predictions as a class. The predictions were then compared to the experiments (actual) data
recorded. The theoretical numbers from the predictions werent exact when compared to the
actual heights for various reasons; such as wind and direction. The math and overall concepts
were useful techniques for understanding and applying physics to everyday life.

INTRODUCTION:
The launching of rockets was created to experimentally test the accuracy of numerical
values hypothesized by a class of honors physics students. It is composed of theories in physics
such as kinematics, dynamics, impulse, and momentum. Kinematics is a branch of mechanics
that studies the motion of a body or system of bodies without consideration given to its mass or
the forces acting on it. In order to hypothesize, a smaller scaled scenario it thought up, where the
variables, that under normal circumstances would affect the rocket, are controlled. For example,
the class used numerical iteration, assuming a constant speed was kept between two points in
time, to predict what the heights would be. Where the height in reality is dynamic and changing
in every moment, but the assumption of constant force for one-tenth of a second is such a small
interval that it wouldnt impact the calculations immensely.
For the calculations it was necessary to derive the impulse momentum theory; which is
based on the rockets forward movement based on force and speed. Since impulse (J) is correlated
to force (F) and time (T), a relationship can be determined as F*T=J. Where force is equivalent
to the mass (m) of an object by its acceleration (a). Therefore when mass and acceleration are
substituted for force in the previous equation it becomes (m*a)*T=J. Acceleration is a derivative
of velocity, so a change in velocity over time is its equivalent changing the equation to
(mv/T)*T=J. Then you would cancel the Ts to get (mv) =J which is m (v
final
-v
initial
)=J.






Momentum has a positive correlation between the mass of an object and its velocity,
P=mV, so in the equation its possible to substitute the mV
f
-mV
i
with P to get P
f
-P
i
making it P.
That would be the derivation of the impulse momentum theory which gives the relationship
between the force necessary for forward movement of the rocket, J=P. The force of the rocket
being launched is determined by the type of engine it has. The engines used, therefore being
discussed varied from A, B, and C engines all with different impulse powers. As less than a Bs
and Bs less than a Cs, then specified even more by each letter getting different assigned forces
(C6 having a stronger force then a C5).

THRUST LAB:
This section of the lab was to determine which engine was used in each model rocket that
was launched, and to find out exactly how much thrust the engine gives at each interval of a
tenth of a second. The latter is necessary to determine how high the rocket will fly later.
First it is important to understand how the engines are ranked, each one is given a letter
grade that represents its impulse, and then the first number represents the average force; there is
also a second number that represents delay time of the parachute. The impulse doubles as each
letter grade increases (A=2.5, B=5, C=10, D=20 and so on. . . .). For this lab, the parachute delay
time was left out of the calculations because it would not have a strong influence on the data;
however it was still needed to calculate the engine forces.
The next step was launching the rocket. The rocket was taped to a car placed on a car
track, with a force gauge attached to the ramp; also with tape. There was a calculator attached to
the force gauge to record a time vs. force graph on the set interval of every one-tenth of a second.




The decreasing threshold of the gauge caused the trigger to go off at -1 Newtons. It
began recording and storing data 10% before and after the initial start and stop of the rocket.

The rocket engine was then lighted by an igniter, a twisted metal wire that has
phosphorous on it which will react to the electricity, attached to a plug that is used for standing
support. Once the wire heats up it produces a chemical reaction that will start the engine. One
hundred test samples were taken within the ten second interval, and since the gauge was not
zeroed prior to starting 0.32 seconds had to be subtracted from each recording.
The data graphed showed the impulse by measuring the area under the curve, which in
calc is known as an integral. Right and left end-point rectangles were made on the graph and then
averaged to find the most accurate area. The left end-point value was 6.65 and the right end-point
value was 6.67. Once averaged to 6, then it is safe to say that the engine used was a B engine.









In conclusion, with the delay time unaccounted for the rocket launched was using a B3
engine.

DRAG FORCE (AIR RESISTANCE)
Air resistance, another way to say drag force, has to be taken into consideration when
launching rockets. When a rocket is released, air resistance will be pushing on it from the
opposing direction. How does this apply to an honors physics class?
The class as a whole was required to calculate the drag force before the rocket was
successfully released. In order to do that, an equation was necessary for taking the relationship of
multiple things; speed, cross-sectional area, and shape, into account. Since force is a function of
those variables and is proportional to them, its commonly thought to be fairly simple to create
an accurate equation. However, as a class it was necessary to rely on a creation of a constant (k)
to represent the cross-sections and shape; since the physics behind the actual variables is to
complex.

Honeycomb material for wind tunnel
In order to find the value for k, the drag force constant, the class created a simulation
using a wind tunnel with a model rocket placed inside. Wind enters a honeycomb material
creating a laminar flow, meaning non-turbulent flow of wind in layer, to propel the rocket
located in the middle chamber. Within this chamber is a fan, which continuously sucks in the
laminar air and releases it as turbulence at the end of the wind tunnel. The latter, unlike laminar
air, comes out in various, random directions. This wind tunnel provides a simulation for what a
real rocket would experience during a lunch.
To measure the angle of the rocket there is a protractor attached to the rocket and a string
as well; and by knowing the mass of the rocket it is then possible to calculate the magnitude of
the force. By using Newtons Second Law and drawing a full body diagram it is clearly seen the
different forces acting upon it.






Once the experiment is done, it is evident that Fd (the force of the rocket) was equal to
[mgsin()]/[cos()], also written as mgtan(). Then it becomes simple by just plugging in the
numbers . for g, rockets mass for m, 0 for the angle of the protractor on the wind tunnel, .
By plugging in the value for Fd and using the given speed, which the teacher provided, in this
case 15m/s, the value of k can then be found. The only issue with the certain values found for k
and Fd in comparison to those of the actual rocket is that the latter will be slightly smaller. The
reason for this is that the rocket will have a larger mass, and must be taken into consideration
when launching the rocket.

NUMERICAL METHOD:
Once the drag co-efficient (k) is determined along with the rocket engines mass, it is
possible to make an accurate determination of the heights. This spreadsheet will be used to talk
about the Sparkle Rocket. The Sparkle Rocket with the addition of a C engine having a mass of
0.089kg. The constant (k) was roughly 0.002, but the Sparkle Rocket, in comparison to the
model rocket used for the calculations, is slightly larger in direct surface area so the drag co-
efficient would also have to be a larger number. The purpose of this lab k is assumed to be 0.003.
In the spreadsheet, the thrust values were given for every second determined by the type of
rocket.

Between each second, the average thrust can be calculated by taking (thrust
1
+ thrust
2
)/2.
The second column is the drag force which, KV
2
as determined in the Drag Force section of this
report. For the first calculation of Drag Force, the velocity is equal to 0 because the rocket has
yet to exceed the forces threshold that will cause it to move but in all of the other calculations the
velocity will be equal to the previous velocity. The average net force column is derived from
subtracting the force of gravity (mg) and the Drag Force from the average Thrust. The average
net impulse however is also the fill force of the rocket over a time (F
NET
)*(T). The initial
velocity is the speed of the rocket before the thrust. The final velocity (V
f
) is the velocity of the
rocket at the end of that second, and can be found by taking the initial velocity (V
i
) plus the
average net impulse divided by the mass of the rocket (F
NET
T/m), this is because of the basic
laws of motion in physics. By adding both V
i
and V
f
then dividing by two, average velocity is
calculated. The height of the rocket is then the initial height at the beginning of the interval (hi)
plus the average velocity (V
AVG
) multiplied by (T). The rockets height changes as the velocity
increased or decreased over time.
In the spreadsheet the farthest right column will give the segmented heights of the rocket
for every second. Once the rocket reaches its highest point and begins to fall, the numbers begin
to decrease. Therefore the largest number will be the determined height of the launch.
Hypothetically if there wasnt air resistance to be considered, and the was a 0 for the constant
(k), the heights would increase to up to four times the predicted height; because the net force
would not be impacted by the drag coefficient from the air resistance.
In this particular rocket launch, multiple rockets were launched but the students only
calculated two of them. However each of those two rockets could have used a C6, B6, or an A8
engine; all of which would impact the mass of the spreadsheet and leading to six possibilities
between the two rockets.











FLIGHT RESULTS:
To begin with, three separate people were distributed at equidistance from the launch
pad; each with protractors to calculate the angle at which the rocket would be at its highest point.
By having three students do this, it reduced the chances of large human error on miscalculating
the rockets curve. The following image demonstrates the height calculations based on the
separate protractors.







Finally, the launching of the rocket!!!!! If the experiment was successful the rocket
propels straight up into the air and its actual value should match he theoretical calculations.
However; human error must always be taken into account within experimentation therefore the
values wont always correspond exactly.





CONCLUSION:
ROCKET ENGINE PREDICTED
HEIGHT
ACTUAL HEIGHT
Big White C 63m 63m
Read and Silver C 63m 85m
Baby Rocket A 23m 45m
Red and Yellow C 97m 91m
Red and Black C 62m Too curved

In conclusion two of the five rocket predictions were quite accurate as opposed to the
other three. This could be, in turn, because of the wind, weather, or even simply just human
error. The rockets also did not move in a direct vertical motion, but curved also affecting the
actual height. If done again, the rocket experiment could use smaller rockets in an area where
there were less outside independent variables and then could be more controlled.

REFLECTION:

This project was a very eye opening experience. This was my first time launching a
model rocket and applying physics to a tangible activity. It was very exciting learning experience
for me. Hypothesizing and testing them made the launch a very interactive moment for me, Im
sure it has no comparison to those who work at NASA, and actual rockets, but personally it was
equally as satisfying. If I were to do it again, I would have enjoyed taking into account other
factoring circumstances such as crashing or the falling rate in order to use some of the
momentum equations we also learned earlier in the class.