TVC, how hard actually?

[Handeman]

I could release the code and the PCB you would just have to do some basic soldering and adjust the settings for your rocket. Edit and need a 3d printer!

Sure, "just". I haven't done any coding for embedded controllers in over 15 years. I haven't done coding of any sort in over 10 years so would have to "relearn" all of that. I also don't have a 3D printer which would require some sort of CAD program to generate custom parts and since I have no experience with 3D printers or CAD programs, that's another learning curve hill I really don't want to climb.

Besides, yours is TVC and I would want an aerodynamic controls so it works for the whole flight. Like I said, something commercially available, and I might be interested.

 

[NTP2]

Sure, "just". I haven't done any coding for embedded controllers in over 15 years. I haven't done coding of any sort in over 10 years so would have to "relearn" all of that. I also don't have a 3D printer which would require some sort of CAD program to generate custom parts and since I have no experience with 3D printers or CAD programs, that's another learning curve hill I really don't want to climb.

Besides, yours is TVC and I would want an aerodynamic controls so it works for the whole flight. Like I said, something commercially available, and I might be interested.

I would like to point out that I meant that you would not have to do CAD you would just print it and don’t make fun of me saying “just” what else could I say

 

[Spacedog49Krell]

Why is that? With that mentality we would still be living in caves.

As an advisor, rocket TVC projects have one of the lowest success rates coupled with the highest percentage of participants becoming discouraged and leaving rocketry completely.

For those dedicated in the pursuit of TVC, I recommend a ducted fan hover drone. They provide hours of test and flight time compared to seconds with rockets. The knowledge gained from drone flights can be transferred to rocket flight TVC systems.

 

[thzero]

As an advisor, rocket TVC projects have one of the lowest success rates coupled with the highest percentage of participants becoming discouraged and leaving rocketry completely.

Isn't not just rocketry. Many people think too highly of themselves, that they can do things faster/easier/whatever than others but they won't dedicate to it.

 

[neil_w]

I would like to point out that I meant that you would not have to do CAD you would just print it and don’t make fun of me saying “just” what else could I say

The word “just” is frequently used to falsely minimize the effort to do something hard. Overuse suggests the user doesn’t fully understand the problem they are discussing.

That is why people react somewhat harshly to the use of the word.

Which doesn’t mean that problem isn’t worth pursuing, or that it’s impossible to solve. It is simply an admonishment to have a realistic view of the scale or difficulty of the problem.

 

[kuririn]

The word “just” is frequently used to falsely minimize the effort to do something hard. Overuse suggests the user doesn’t fully understand the problem they are discussing.

That is why people react somewhat harshly to the use of the word.

Which doesn’t mean that problem isn’t worth pursuing, or that it’s impossible to solve. It is simply an admonishment to have a realistic view of the scale or difficulty of the problem.

Well said.

 

[Spacedog49Krell]

Sure, "just". I haven't done any coding for embedded controllers in over 15 years. I haven't done coding of any sort in over 10 years so would have to "relearn" all of that. I also don't have a 3D printer which would require some sort of CAD program to generate custom parts and since I have no experience with 3D printers or CAD programs, that's another learning curve hill I really don't want to climb.

Besides, yours is TVC and I would want an aerodynamic controls so it works for the whole flight. Like I said, something commercially available, and I might be interested.

Jeff, the coding knowledge will return quicker than you think. I too, was 15 years out of embedded controller development and retired. I ran into my last Masters project student. He convinced me to return to flying rockets. In 4 months I learned C++ and had a 400Hz flight computer in the air.

 

[NTP2]

The word “just” is frequently used to falsely minimize the effort to do something hard. Overuse suggests the user doesn’t fully understand the problem they are discussing.

That is why people react somewhat harshly to the use of the word.

Which doesn’t mean that problem isn’t worth pursuing, or that it’s impossible to solve. It is simply an admonishment to have a realistic view of the scale or difficulty of the problem.

I know it’s not going to be easy I was saying once a lot of effort is put into it it could be made easier for other people to do.

 

[neil_w]

I know it’s not going to be easy I was saying once a lot of effort is put into it it could be made easier for other people to do.

Joe Barnard essentially did this. It was easy*er* for other people to use what he did... but still not easy. As far as I can tell, not too many people tried, and it required a lot of support on his end, which is why he gave up on the whole enterprise.

If his gimbal mount design files are still available then that's certainly a big head start on the physical side of things.

By all means go try to do TVC. It'll be expensive (Joe did a *lot* of test flights) and difficult but certainly rewarding if you can get it working. Just don't get ahead of yourself.

 

[JimJarvis50]

Sure, "just". I haven't done any coding for embedded controllers in over 15 years. I haven't done coding of any sort in over 10 years so would have to "relearn" all of that. I also don't have a 3D printer which would require some sort of CAD program to generate custom parts and since I have no experience with 3D printers or CAD programs, that's another learning curve hill I really don't want to climb.

Besides, yours is TVC and I would want an aerodynamic controls so it works for the whole flight. Like I said, something commercially available, and I might be interested.

I could probably make that happen....

Jim

 

[NTP2]

Joe Barnard essentially did this. It was easy*er* for other people to use what he did... but still not easy. As far as I can tell, not too many people tried, and it required a lot of support on his end, which is why he gave up on the whole enterprise.

If his gimbal mount design files are still available then that's certainly a big head start on the physical side of things.

By all means go try to do TVC. It'll be expensive (Joe did a *lot* of test flights) and difficult but certainly rewarding if you can get it working. Just don't get ahead of yourself.

You could probably cut back on the tests since we know the how he did it and I would like to say that I have no interest in landing “just” flying.

 

[thzero]

You could probably cut back on the tests since we know the how he did it and I would like to say that I have no interest in landing “just” flying.

First learn how to navigate GitHub.

Second learn how to program a micro controller such as the Adrino (.i.e. the .ino files)

Third get something running on a land based vehicle. Then yeah maybe use the turbo fan to simulate a rocket

Tied with third, learn simulation in the loop.

Etc.

 

[watheyak]

Help me fill in a puzzle piece I'm confused about.

What happens to a TVC rocket after motor burnout?

 

[NTP2]

Help me fill in a puzzle piece I'm confused about.

What happens to a TVC rocket after motor burnout?

I am not sure all the videos I have seen have it costing a little then start falling and 1 parachutes or 2 landing attempt. But I am not sure how it does not cost farther like a normal rocket.

 

[watheyak]

But I am not sure how it does not cost farther like a normal rocket.

It's definitely not going to coast like a normal rocket.

Unless sideways is normal. It's stable like a baseball bat at that point.

 

[NTP2]

It's definitely not going to coast like a normal rocket.

Unless sideways is normal. It's stable like a baseball bat at that point.

It doesn’t flip over that the weird part.

 

[jadebox]

As an advisor, rocket TVC projects have one of the lowest success rates coupled with the highest percentage of participants becoming discouraged and leaving rocketry completely.

For those dedicated in the pursuit of TVC, I recommend a ducted fan hover drone. They provide hours of test and flight time compared to seconds with rockets. The knowledge gained from drone flights can be transferred to rocket flight TVC systems.

A young man who has done some really cool work with TVC locally, installs quadcopter motors in his gimbaled motor mounts so he can test his systems on the ground.

 

[DWD]

I am not sure all the videos I have seen have it costing a little then start falling and 1 parachutes or 2 landing attempt. But I am not sure how it does not cost farther like a normal rocket.

One reason is the thrust to weight ratio on a TVC rocket is much lower than a normal rocket ( ~ 1.3 to 1 for TVC ) so at burnout they are not going as fast and do not coast as far before the chute is deployed.

 

[neil_w]

I am not sure all the videos I have seen have it costing a little then start falling and 1 parachutes or 2 landing attempt. But I am not sure how it does not cost farther like a normal rocket.

They do not coast far because they typically are powered by long-burn, low-thrust motors, with a fairly low thrust-weight ratio. Therefore they ascend very slowly, and coast very little.

 

[cerving]

Other than as a design exercise, TVC is not going to be practical for hobby rocketry. The motors just don't burn long enough, and those that do are very low thrust which makes it even more challenging due to the very low thrust-to-weight ratio. Those who are pursing dynamic stability are generally doing so with aerodynamic assists such as nose cone mounted canards, which should work with a much wider range of rocket/motor combinations. They're not easy, either...

 

[Art Upton]

I will note that there seem to be a lot more TVC flight computers and gimbal designs out there than successfully flown systems. I'd be nervous about spending money on something that is not proven to work.

Developing your own system is definitely possible. I hang out on Joe Barnard's Discord server, and there are a decent number of people who have developed their own systems, some of them to the point of successful propulsive landing. Most of them are high school or college students.

I have seen youtube videos of propulsive landing, but then tip over on their legs but they landed.

 

[NTP2]

I have seen youtube videos of propulsive landing, but then tip over on their legs but they landed.

I will don’t want to land “just” fly.