Squalicum High School Aerospace Club

We're competing in the 2024 American Rocketry Challenge

2023-24 members (left to right on the top photo): Andrew, Remy, Nehchal, Sukhraj, Soheil, (Riley and Finn not pictured, Advisors Mr. Singh and Dave not pictured)

Team photo taken on our first launch, February 17, 2024:

Launch Info:

Saturday, the 17^th of February, 2024 @ ~10:00-11:00 AM

• ~45 °F.
• Low winds.
• Pre-launch mass of 593g.
• Aerotech F42-4T single use motor.
• PerfectFlite Firefly altimeter.

Results:

• 487' apogee.
• 35sec flight duration.

Some likely issues were that the stability was too high because of how big the fins were, which also caused the rocket to turn into the wind, so the rocket spun around a lot and was messed up even by the relatively calm winds, the motor's ejection charge delay was too also too low, and the altimeter was mounted right up against the foam protecting the egg without any holes cut out for airflow, so it may not have gotten a very accurate reading.
OpenRocket simulation file used: SqHS openrocket 1.ork

Sunday, the third of March, 2024 @ ~9:00-10:00 AM

• ~40 °F.
• 73% relative humidty.
• 29.66 in. Hg air pressure.
• Slight amounts of rain.
• 12+ mph winds (definitely too much, it harmed us a bit and our rocket landed really far away in the neighbor's field).
• Pre-launch mass of 601g.
• Aerotech F67-6W single use motor.

Results:

• 57sec flight duration.
• 989' apogee.
• Peak velocity: 97ms^-1.
• Time to apogee: 7.3 seconds.

After our first launch but before this second launch, we cut the fins to be smaller which reduced the OpenRocket calculated stability from ~3½ to ~1.9, used a motor with a longer delay so the parachute would eject closer to apogee and not too long before, and mounted the altimeter (for this launch we used a Jolly Logic altimeter two instead of the PerfectFlite Firefly like the first time) in a new 3D printed transition isolated from everything else as opposed to right up against the foam cushioning the egg with no holes cut for the altimeter to get an accurate reading of the air pressure.
Everything mostly went fine, we just need to use a smaller motor next time. We weren't really sure how well it would go with how much worse our first launch did than expected.
OpenRocket simulation file used: SQH rocket 2.ork

Tuesday, the fifth of March, 2024 @ ~5:00 PM - launch failed due to launch controller issues. No continuity.

Wednesday the 13^th of March, 2024 @ ~4:30-5:30PM, after school

• ~50 °F.
• Mostly clear skies.
• Lower winds, 6-7 mph of wind max the whole time.
• Pre-launch mass of 615g.
• New stronger but slightly heavier 3D printed transition (same model but PLA rather than ASA) held onto the upper tube with three new removable plastic rivets.
• PerfectFlite Firefly altimeter.
• First flight: Cesaroni Pro29 57F59-7A, we drilled 5 sec off of the initial 12sec delay.
• Second flight: Cesaroni Pro29 57F59-5A, we drilled 7 sec off of the initial 12sec delay.

Results:

• 51sec flight duration
• First flight: 884' apogee.
• Second flight: 906' apogee.

We're improving our results a lot, but we were thinking that we'd be getting closer to 820' or likely lower, looking at the OpenRocket. I don't know if we misused the delay drilling tool or what, but for some reason the second flight went higher than the first one, even though we thought we took more delay off which would have led to an overall shorter time. During both flights the parachute ejected a couple seconds after the apogee. It's possible the parachute was packed differently leading to different results, I'm not sure. Next launch the plan is to just add as much weight as we can and just have the rocket be at the 650g limit and hope we bring the apogee down enough.

Saturday, the 16^th of March, 2024 @ 9:30 - 11:00.

• >55 °F.
• Clear skies.
• Very low winds.
• PerfectFlite Firefly altimeter.
• First flight: 650g (max allowed weight) - we added some coins totalling ~35g extra.
• First flight: Cesaroni Pro29 57F59-5A, we drilled 7 sec off of the initial 12sec delay.
• Second flight: Aerotech F42-4T.

First flight results:

• 52sec flight duration
• 892' apogee.
• Broken egg (same one we'd been using since the first launch, it was disgusting) probably because the coins we used to add weight hit the egg at some point.

We were frustrated at still flying so high and long even though we added all that weight, it was probably partially because of how good the weather was that we still went so high.

The second flight was a distaster. The rocket split into two pieces, the elastic cord between the bottom half and the transition with the parachtue is normally tied onto the transition, but somehow became untied, possible because the ejection on our motor was so soon so it was still travelling too fast when that happened. The top part came down not attached to the parachute, so the egg broke violently. We got 605' but it might have been inaccurate because the altimeter had come loose at some point in the flight. Luckily no structural or hard to replace parts were seriously damaged.

Because we're still going so high even though we're at the weight limit, we're going to try to add as much drag as we easily can with velcro and 3D printing a much rouger transition. Hopefully we're going higher than we want right now partially because of the weather today, and if we launch in more wind we won't go as high.
OpenRocket simulation file used: SQH rocket 3.ork

Tuesday, the 19^th of March, 2024 @ 4:00 - 6:15.

• 58 °F.
• Clear skies.
• ~5mph, lowish winds.
• PerfectFlite Firefly altimeter.
• Every flight: Cesaroni Pro29 57F59-5A, we drilled 7 sec off of the initial 12sec delay.
• Every flight: new 3D printed rougher transition to try to add drag to lower the height.
• Every flight: Stability at ~2¼, too high probably.
• First flight: 650g (max allowed weight) - we added some coins in the new 3D printed cap.
• First flight: Added Velcro covering the fins and also wrapped around the transition, removed after this flight but it was in the highlighted part of the photo.
• Second flight: 637g no coins, we took off the Velcro wrapping the tube but still had all the velcro on the fins.
• Third flight: 623g no coins, we took off the Velcro on the inside side of the fins but left the more fuzzy Velcros on the farther out side.

Results:

• First flight: 651' apogee.
• First flight: 36 second duration.
• First flight: The rocket curved over to the side a lot on the flight up despite the low wind, it may have been because some of the long Velcro strips wrapped around the rocket were rubbing on the rail.


• Second flight: 761' apogee.
• Second flight: 44 second duration.
• Second flight: Unlike the first and third flight, the rocket went pretty straight up and didn't curve at all.


• Third flight: 771' apogee.
• Third flight: 48 second flight duration.
• Third flight: The rocket was also curving over on one side and if that didn't happen we probably would have gone higher.

One of our likely issues was that the stability was too high, even though the winds were low at the ground high up they were probably higher, maybe the Velcro was catching the air as well in unexpected ways. Our plan is to cut down the fins a little bit more to reduce the stability to maybe closer to 1¾. Especially on the last flight, our rocket curved way to one side while flying even though the delay was only slightly after apogee. Our bottom tube is also getting really beat up because we glued a new rope on so hopefully we can fix that.

Sunday, the 24^th of March, 2024 @ 9:00 - 11:15.

• 50 °F.
• Clear, slightly cloudy skies.
• Low winds.
• PerfectFlite Firefly altimeter.
• We cut the transition-side bottom section tube down from about 9" to 4". This whole time, in OpenRocket we had that tube at 6", I thought Sukhraj cut it when he cut the top tube but didn't, so the model I created was based off of incorrect information. This meant previously our stability was actually about 2½, definitely too high, after this it went down to around 2.
• Since our stretchy rope had already burnt twice, Riley covered the exposed part that has to be below the fireproof wrap in duct tape and stapled it on really well, this worked out great and the duct tape is slightly worn now but the inside rope is unscathed.
• Same design rough transition but with a shorter low length so it would still fit against the reinforcement tube inside the new shorter tube.
• Every flight: Cesaroni Pro29 57F59-4.5A, we drilled 7.5 sec off the initial 12sec delay, setting the delay drilling tool to -9 and using the new +1½ 3D printed spacer.
• First flight: 613g.
• First flight: two of the fuzzy velcro on the bottom outside of each fin.
• First flight: shorter rough transition so it would fit in the new tube.


• Second flight: 612g.
• Second flight: no more velcro at all.
• Second flight: same transition as the first time.


• Third flight: 625g.
• Third flight: old smooth purple transition with duct tape at the bottom to hopefully not screw up the airflow as badly.

Results:

• First flight: 776' apogee.
• First flight: 47½sec duration.
• First flight: The rocket went straight up and the new 4.5sec (not quite exact but still slightly shorter than the 5sec delay) deployed when it was nearing the natural apogee and going up slowly, we'll keep this delay it was perfect.


• Second flight: 790' apogee, because no more Velcro to hold it back.
• Second flight: 46½sec duration.


• Third flight: 814' apogee.
• The purple transition wasn't tied on so the top half just free fell down without a parachute, we didn't get a time. This also happened another time, the egg broke of course but no damage has happened because of how it was made.

Now that we fixed the stability problem by cutting the top of the bottom section tube shorter and with little wind, our rocket it going up quite straight. We couldn't do any qualifying flights today because unfortunately even though Dave got back from his trip, he's sick so he still couldn't come. Fingers crossed for some good weather days soon because we need to qualify by April eighth, and our spring break is that last week. If we have another day like today and just make a shorter smooth transition we could get a good qualifying flight. We also plan on cutting the parachute a little bit at some point because we're still staying in the air slightly too long. 4½ seconds of delay may seem a little short, but I think the real delay may be slightly higher than that, but it is still adjusting correctly relative to what it was in the past.

Other photos from our February 17, 2024 launch:

If you want to sign up for the club or contact me, please email me at andrew@andrewmorse.org or call +1(360) 734-5501. You can contact our club advisor Mr. Singh at Sukhdip.singh@bellinghamschools.org, or Dave at Dave@walp.us.