> we found the maximum altitude estimates were about 15% too high.
this often happens when the wrong rocket finish is selected. Everyone chooses a polished finish when in actuality they've just sprayed the thing with paint.
Skin drag is real.
this often happens when the wrong rocket finish is selected. Everyone chooses a polished finish when in actuality they've just sprayed the thing with paint.
Skin drag is real.
Look into the physics of archery, which has similar accellerations albeit of a narrower tube. The choice between a heavier/stronger arrow v a lighter/flexible shaft is the entire game.
Amateur rocketry people try very hard to make their rockets symmetrical.
Hobby rockets have to be stiff enough not to banana. I don't think it is figured into model rocketry beyond that.
Flex doesn't really become a concern with carbon fibre until you approach Mach 3. I say this because I've built two rockets of an identical design philosophy; one for 54mm motors and one for 75mm motors. The 54mm motor rocket did M2.64 and I could fly it again today if I wanted. The 75mm rekitted itself at M3. It failed where I'd not reinforced the hand rolled airframe that I was flying. 4 wraps of 2x2 200gsm twill CF. Same number I used on the 54mm fine.
For both of these rockets the vast majority of the airframe is directly over a aluminum motor casing that is a rigid body. These things are grossly over-engineered when compared to the pressures/forces they see.