Gotta love a photography challenge – capturing a rocket shot from a pneumatic Howitzer.

One of the builders said that capturing the rocket ejection by camera was impossible,
as it accelerates from 0 to 1000 ft/sec in a quarter second (corrected from 1000 MPH).

So… we assumed that there would be no way to use human reflexes to time the action, so we decided to use motor drive shooting continuously from just before launch. We used the height of the rail, and the exit speed estimate and the distance of the tripod from the rail to calculate how far the projectile could travel in the 0.25 seconds between frames (4 fps camera), and used the arc tangent to calculate the camera tilt angle. So if the input assumptions were correct, we would be guaranteed to have at least one shot with the rocket in frame. I shot 1/8000 second exposures to freeze the motion, and used tripod to anchor the angle and composition (and dampen my startle reflexes =)

My pal Victor used some French software to post process the 16mm wide-angle perspective back into something less warped.

Shooting continuously with my camera – 0.25 seconds later β€” a custom g-switch sensed deceleration, and the flight computer popped the parachute streamer. Photo below.

This was an electronics test. Pulling 600 g’s can be a bit harsh. The rocket is a 38mm J570 case with a composite fin can on the rear and a 38mm avionics package and nose cone screwed directly into the forward motor closure. So it’s the ultimate in minimum diameter airframes. The flame-painted motor case is the rocket body.

This weekend, we hope to ignite the motor instead of popping the chute, and set the altitude record for any given motor size. πŸ˜‰

10 responses to “Homebrew Rocket Howitzer”

  1. 0.25 seconds later, the next frame in my camera:

    Victor process  Launch tube 2b

    White puff of parachute ejection mid frame, rocket with yellow streamer near the top. The RocketMavericks team has developed and tested rear deployed chutes which come in handy for non-vertical launches.

    Then the rocket came back ballistic and slammed down two feet from my tripod. Classic!

  2. wow, amazing technical feat catching the rocket! maybe you need one of those Casio EXILIM EX-FH20 40fps cameras in your kit πŸ˜‰

  3. I hope you were looking up when it came back…

  4. With that big of a kick start you should have no problem setting those altitude records.

  5. I can’t resist doing the arithmetic here.

    0-1000 mph (447 m/s) in 1/4 s will take 56 meters to accelerate. If that projectile is really exiting that barrel at 1000 mph, it’s accelerating in a lot less time than 1/4 s. It looks like the barrel is about 8m long, so the acceleration time must be around 1/30 s, which means it’s pulling 1200g (!).

    1000 MPH is higher than the speed of sound (in air, at least), pretty hard to get with ordinary pneumatics. So what’s the propellant? Helium? Or is it multi-stage?

    (on second thought, 1000 fps or 300 m/s sounds more reasonable, doesn’t require exotic pneumatics, and still yields a respectable 600 g.)

  6. Good point. I will check. Update: typo on units now fixed. Thanks for the sanity check.

    I have a sense the speed estimate was for the test we intended to do, with rocket lit. Once that happens, oh, yes, we should be well past supersonic. I’ve seen some of these puppies scream pat Mach 3.

  7. Shutter speed must’ve been pretty fast to freeze the rocket… 1/8000?

  8. For reference:

    High power rifle muzzle velocities (e.g., 7mm rem magnum, 280 rem, 30.06) are 3,000 to 3800 fps.

    3,500 fps = ~.67 miles/sec = ~ 2,423 mph…

  9. A lot of the g data we got did not make sense because of accelerometer calibration issues due to launch detect errors. There are issues with the flight electronics calibration. Steve has a unit error, as the 0-1000 is ft/s.
    We have already redesigned the launcher 3 times also due to some gas venting and recoil defects limiting the launcher to under 10% efficiencies. We have worked those out now. Eventually, we will move to a rail gun rather than using propellants, but we have to work the electronics and rocket propellant up to the g loading stresses. We have also moved to a milspec munition initiator to solve the launch detect problems. A typical rail gun will exhibit 12,000 – 18,000 g’s with a muzzle exit velocity in excess of Mach 8. No propellant or electronics will take this kind of loading today without very special electronics and binders:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1q_rRicAwI

    One step at a time…….. we will get there.

Leave a Reply to el mig Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *