1. Problem Definition: Design, build and launch a single stage model rocket. Build and program a FlyBrix Drone that takes off, hovers, flies forward and lands. Design, build and demonstrate a remote-controlled airplane with elevators and rudder capable of taking off, flying and landing.
2. The FlyBrix Drone and airplane did not required alternative solutions because they came with instructions. Although the model rocket also came with instructions, we were given the freedom to design our own fins. We considered using elliptical, clipped delta, and rectangular fins. The length of the rocket was also adjustable; however, we prioritized the shape of the fins because they impacted the rocket's aerodynamics the most.
3. In the end, we chose to include elliptical fins in our final design. Theoretically, elliptical fins should be the most efficient for model rockets. Due to the fact that there is less lift around the tip of the fin, the difference in pressure is also much smaller. Because elliptical fins cause less induced drag than other fins in theory, we can assume that they will coast higher in practice.
4. We detailed the design of our plane by choosing effective locations for the servo motors and the motor. We placed the servo motors on the underside of the wing and we cut out a hole on the body of the plane to insert the motor. Although these steps were not necessary they made these two components more accessible. For the model rocket, we detailed the design by calculating and manipulating the centers of gravity. Initially, the center of gravity was closer to the base of rocket than the center of pressure. In order to achieve stability, we added additional weight in the form of a PVC pipe. This effectively moves the center of gravity to a farther point on the rocket than the center of pressure.
5. We defended our designs to other groups. For example, without denouncing other groups' designs, we advocated for our the shape of our rocket nose and fins.
6. Manufacturing the plane and the rocket took two days. Manufacturing and programming the drone took about an hour. This is the first time that our group did not need to rush to manufacture our designs. We tested our rocket by using the string test. To be more specific, we attached a string to the rocket's center of gravity and spun it around. Because the nose of our rocket pointed forward and moved stably, we could assume that it would have the trajectory of a downward parabola during test day. Parts of the plane, such as the elevators and rudders, were individually tested before launching and they worked successfully. After the drone was manufactured and programmed, we tested the drone by controlling it with one of our phones. The drone did not work successfully because its stabilizers and tuning did not work.
7. During launch day, our rocket travelled in the shape of a downward parabola and flew approximately forty feet upwards before coming back down. The rocket's parachute deployed seconds after the rocket landed on the ground instead of when it was still in the air. The parachute did not deploy in time because the delay before the blast of air was too long. This was a shared problem between groups and the most effective way of deploying the parachute correctly is to get a bigger motor altogether. When the airplane was launched, it briefly flew before crashing landing. There was a problem in how the plane was controlled; however, the plane itself worked successfully. Because the propellor came off during the crash landing, a small improvement that we could have made was to attach the propellor on tighter. The drone flew for a moment before crashing into the wall because the tuning and stabilizers did not work.
8. This is our final design report.