Hey Joe, if it is really you ❤️ the comments..Please tell me (this might be a stupid question) how far off is the software for Thrust Vector Control from a one for a full-size rocket. Or rather how much if any can you scale the rocket and use the same software and procedures. Thanks.
want to ask: Do you think, using FPGA and co, so working on Hardware, for doing the math and decisions about the movements, is better? or is the speed of a Microcontroller enough?!
Can imagine ... after what nasa did before and during apollo, all was jaw-dropping impressive ... (and still is, cuz I was born after) ... after first shuttle flight and landing, not much ever was, apart from the mars-sky-crane-landing ... now with this introduction of self-landing-rockets, we're getting back on to something. Seing this happen "back-yard-style" sure is impressive and makes you wonder where nasa's creativity was during the 80s 90s and 00s.
@@Chapter3Fan I don't think NASA lost its creativity as all. What they lost was funding. NASA was the first to work on a re-usable rocket, some time in the early 90's. Do a search on delta clipper. It is where Elon Musk (and others) got the idea. The big plus now is that with some many groups working on space flight, we are able to come at the problems from many angels. NOVA did a nice show on this a few months ago. I think it was called "Rise of rockets."
That's awesome that those high schoolers have an aerospace engineering class. I didn't, so I am curious as to how it differs from a regular high school physics class?
@@slimxshady6111 it's basically an applied physics class wrapped around rockets. Between the lessons on force, momentum, fluids, ect... they build rockets. Starting with small ones and ending with much larger high-powered rockets with Hybrid motors.
maybe the arm could have a friction fit sleeve that would allow the arm to shrink in length on impact and use the friction to absorb the energy in place of SpaceX's crush-core.
To keep it 3d-printed, he could have a part of the legs buckle for absorption, and then lay flat for more surface area. It wouldn't be much more weight to enlarge those legs either, but I suspect aesthetics play a big part in this rocket too.
It could also use a ratchet mechanism so that the legs could move to absorb the pressure but then NOT bounce back. A spring would determine how much it moves due to the landing pressure, and it could still be 3D printed and have the same basic "look" as the SpaceX rockets.
Wow I'm such a better person because of watching this video. What a wonderful experience it was to sit through all roughly 17 minutes of it. I‘ll never be the same and I feel bad for everyone who didn't watch the whole thing.
Hi Joe. First of all, I wanted to congratulate you for this amazing work. I following all your videos for a few months. Even your topic is not the same as mine, I always loved rockets and if I had more time and a little bit of more space, I would love to try some rocket projects as well. You’re doing a great job and it is clear that you’re working a lot for this and you like it. You have better results each time. I’m sure your channel will get very high. Keep up.
"These are model rockets, you cant take them too seriously." *Has model rockets that land themselves with RCS and LIDAR using software that he wrote in his living room.* Dude, this is seriously awesome stuff!
Sensor fusion! Slap a kalman filter on everything and it'll probably fix a bunch of your sensor issues. Right now you're using only one of your sensors at a time and cutting between them as you change flight regimes, accepting the downsides of each in turn. You don't have to do this - there's math that will let you throw all of your measurements into a single state estimate and gain something that's close to having the best features of both sensors. The accelerometers continuously recalibrate the gyros, the gyros provide high-resolution angular measurements, the barometer keeps the accelerometer's altitude information from drifting, and the accelerometers provide high-resolution altitude information. You can even manually tune the amount of noise you expect from each signal over what time scales. Sensor fusion also works with multiple sensors *of the same kind*. I'm impressed with the performance you're getting given how slowly you're observing your sensors; when I did humanoid robotics we wanted to be measuring important sensors at multiple kilohertz. But buying more expensive single sensors isn't necessarily the only way to improve measurement frequency. You can also mount multiple low-quality sensors and throw them all into the update step of your filter. Even if you measure them all at the same time it'll probably help you reject some vibration. The real win would be sampling them out of phase, which would give you a better chance of capturing large transients like the shock you get from dropping the legs. I apologize if this is something you're already doing, or if you've already rejected these features because they don't fit into project scope or available computational resources. I only watched this video and looked around on your website for a few minutes. But the part where you're cutting between sensors entirely makes me hope that this will at least provide some paths for improvement. Good luck!
Saul Reynolds-Haertle I second this; Kalman Filters are a mathematically elegant panacea for squeezing the cleanest possible data out of multiple noisy sensors.
Thirded... Was going to say the same thing. Also, after trying Kalman filters, consider dithering (which is similar to adding noise to a mix for mastering from your audio engineering days), and even averaging the values of several IMUs.
Very impressive. For the record, back in 1964, I built an Estes cluster rocket equipped with a retro-rocket upper stage, with a (live, in water) zebra fish payload. The rocket launched on the 3 most powerful engines Estes had at the time, at stage separation, a long, sheltered wick ignited resulting in ignition about 1-2 seconds into free fall, and when the engine burned out, parachute separation of the payload occurred. The Upper unit definitely slowed down, parachute did deploy, and the zebra fish survived. I doubt if we went any higher than 200-300 feet, but the gizmo worked. These were in the days before computer chips, electronic cameras, deployable landing gear. Your work is admirable. I did mine in the days when slide rules built the Saturn V, and launched astronauts to the moon and back, all within a 7-8 year time frame, start to finish. Keep up the good work. Elon Musk is on the right track. NASA lost it about 30 years ago, and is still looking for its butt!
Very well done Joe. That was so close on such a difficult surface. If that thing had your RCS it would have probably stood upright. Best of luck with the next tests.
Wow joe, you inspired me so much with all your projects, i have been following the landing program from the beginning. And you have inspired this 14 year old kid to do research and stard all sorts of projects. (I hope I am not the only one)
Im 16 and although ive been doing research and projects for a few years i never considered rocketry until BPS.space! Ive now made my own flight computers which I will probably fly sometime this summer :)
Milos de Wit You’re not the only one. I’m 14 as well, and a friend and I are trying to make what we call MABS. We are using an ardunio uno starter kit, a humming bird, and Fusion 360 to create the MABS system. I don’t want to reveal anymore details as I believe the idea is actually patentable, but big cannon. Big cannon for good.
@@nicholasn.2883 wow, sounds interesting, I am currently trying to make a small autonomous plane, also arduino controlled, using a ultrasonic sensor and off the shelf gyroscope/accelerometer. Good luck with your product, also big plans for the future!
After you adjust your burn time...cheat, and make it so your landing legs stick into the grass a little or get off the grass altogether. Your landing is not the problem it's the recoil of the soft surface that's causing your rocket to fall over! Great job...
Glad to hear an acknowledgement of the issues around variance in total motor impulse and ignition timing. Another thing you’ll have to factor in is the total amount of vertical impulse lost to control actuations, that is to say, when the thrust vector is gimbaled off-vertical. Your idea about wagging the gimbal to bleed excess energy is interesting too. My assertion remains however that you’ll need throttle to make this repeatable.
MAd respect for all the tiny engineering + Not taking the shortcut by tuning up the Software rather than HW. And so many other things, thanks for the inspiration.
Joel, could you use hobby shocks like what is on RC cars for landing? They can absorb very well hard landings. Just a thought. Good job on your progress!
When I first saw the rocket get dropped and fire up then slow down to a stop surrounded by smoke, I thought you had stuck it perfectly! So close, I cant wait to see the the rocket launch and landing tests. Brilliant project, I am rooting for you buddy...
Great work Joe...I have a suggestion or two... Unlike you, I'm not a rocket scientist but I think the landing surface is possibly another contributing factor for the vehicle tipping over... So, why not design a portable firm landing surface... Idk what is the proper term but getting a working retro system that would aid in orientation of the vehicle and possibly eliminate the sliding issue.... Finally, for the legs, would a shock absorption system help to eliminate the bounce also. .. May your skies be always blue and Godspeed in you endeavors....
I think having a landing pad might indeed contribute quite a bit. Perhaps you can add something of a QR-like code to it, with markers that help determine orientation, for automatic positioning. :-D
Regarding the landing pad idea : It'd be easier testing over a large flat surface like an empty parking lot. To keep it portable, the landing pad would need to be small, and once he's testing launches and landings simultaneously, the launch could be effected by even the smallest winds and once the landing sequence started it could be several feet off the mark from where it started. He would need to add a guidance system to literally fly the rocket back to the specific spot where his landing pad would be, and that would equate to more weight to the vehicle, not to mention more time in development. All of this is possible to overcome but the question is, does he want to take it that far? IMHO, I think it would be easier to tweak the landing legs and the timing of the thrust, as he mentioned in the video. That way he could land on just about any level surface.
As for the landing gear, I was thinking of some way to to slow their deployment as well as landing shock by adjusting the resistance of the landing arm pivots. This could be done in a number of ways I'm sure, such as thrust bearings or washers with pivot bolts and nylon lock nuts for adjusting.
Hi Joe, you should contact ST Microelectronics about their latest LSM6DSOX Sensor. They are one of the best IMUs I found on the open market. Greetings, Moritz
In the "quadrocopter industry" some flight controllers use several imu's and combine the measurements to obtain higher accuracy. That might be an option for you.
I love seeing you giddy when stuff is working (this near-landing, the RCS test in another video). I remember when I used to get that feeling too. Oh, and +1 for “boioioioioioing”.
use tiny syringes as struts, that would dampen the landing gear on deployment and add impact absorption on touchdown. (coat the inside of the syringes with mineral oil to reduce the static friction coefficient)
To get the drift out: 1) Write a bit of code that clamps your gyro data to reasonable values if they exceed those values in either the + or - direction. 2) Use the same code that triggers the nichrome and releases the landing legs to initiate that bit of code. 3) Let it run until touchdown. (You only really need the clamping code to run during those last few seconds, so no need to bloat your main control loop with it.) Constraining your gimbaling just prior to touchdown shouldn't otherwise cause any ill effects to vehicle control.
Just discovered BPS.Space by watching this video. I’m so impressed with the work you are doing! This video reminds me of many I have watched about Tsiolkovsky, Goddard, and von Braun. I’m not blowing smoke up your ass, either. If you watch those old videos of those guys (well, not the Russian) you’ll see that they are doing the same kinds of things that you are doing. I’m heading over to Patreon now. Can’t wait to see how you end up attacking the problem areas on this flight and then, of course, the next flight.
Awesome, your so close ! Do you take into account the change in mass while the motor is burning in your motor ignition timing calculation? Because 13cm sound like the result of the rocket descelerating to much at the end of the burn ^^. Anyway, congratulation !
Maybe adding some kind of "dampers" to the legs could help to deal whith the rebound. Also, as u mentioned, you can 3d print some single use pieces, which would be used to "crash", thus, bleeding the impact energy into them (more or less like an airbag)
Model Rocketry is something that is in my past. I had a lot of fun with it. I just came across your video and I was really impressed with what I saw, even though it did tip over. I'm going to be eagerly watching for updates on your progress. This is too cool!!!
Incredible. The level of thought, precision and professionalism is crazy. Entertaining and very interesting too. I know i'm no the first but he's basically Elon.
I'm just sooo jealous Joe! I'd give my eye teeth to have had these toys er... tools back when I was building rockets in the 80s. Keep up the awesome work.
It's so exciting seeing your progress. Seeing that long-range shot with 0 horizontal movements was amazing after comparing it to the previous test landings. So cool!
Amazing, so so close and not disimilar to one of SpaceX's near misses shortly before nailing the landing for the first time. BTW The use of Querternions and then a statement "these are model rockets you can't take it too seriously" seem a little contradictory ;-)
I am the guy that you and Tim meme'd on twitter about the consistency of the burns. GG. For real tho, I think it would be crazy if you had a permanent range where you could set up fixed cameras and do some mocap/3d spatial mapping - imagine the data overload that could provide.
Hi Joel. Amazing work! In my opinion you’re already there! The reason why it failed is because you’re landing on grass... it bounced on the grass, which is “bouncy” and also uneven. I think it would work on a solid, even surface... Keep going!
Also, not sure if it would be a major design issue, but the ratio of the height (and weight) of the rocket and the square surface area created by the 4 legs may be wrong. If you could make the legs a bit longer the rocket should be more stable on landing and not tip over... just ideas!
First off, fantastic work. This is the grass roots science we cannot ever lose. I look forward to the day you stick the landing. Hell, it took Spacex a few 9's to get it done. Just a couple of thoughts, as a software programmer I will say your one statement is not quite correct. I feel that while you can fix a lot of things with software, if there is a hardware fix that makes sense, do it first then shape the software around the better hardware solution. If the legs are flexing enough to cause a bounce, that as others stated, try mini shocks, aluminium foil that would slightly crumple on landing, or brace the legs so they do not flex as much. I disagree on engine cutoff higher, because that would only exacerbate the landing problem. Tweaking the software to remove shocks makes sense, but given you were just outside 10 cm and that might put you inside 10, I would think the goal could be 5 CM with the 1% variance putting you slightly higher or lower, but still off the ground. You have not said, but since the thrust and power time is a constant value due to being solid fuel and no throttling, do you factor in mass of the vehicle in regards to when you light the fire? Anyway, great videos and explanations. Thank you for sharing and your efforts.
Part of the issue with the leg deployment is that each leg is a mechanically separate unit but they don't all exert force on the rocket body simultaneously or with the same load. So, you end up with not only a bit of Z axis bounce (not a big deal but could be fixed with a cam type pivot so they don't pick up so much speed) you also get an XY jerk that must be compensated for at arguably the most critical time. Joining the legs mechanically ensures that they all snap into place with an equal amount of force and at the same time. The trick is to join them mechanically in such a way that they remain independent once deployed (to absorb impact at varying loads across the legs). They don't need to be truly independent however. A sway bar (anti-roll bar) acts on both sides of a vehicles suspension to join them together mechanically but it doesn't prohibit independent motion. Finding the right balance is critical though. On a vehicle, too stiff of a sway and every action on one side aggressively influences the other side and can cause issues while too light of a sway means body roll as the rolling inertia of the vehicle above the suspension overcomes the bar. Thankfully, you can aid the entirety of fixing this by substantially lightening your landing gear suspension. 1kg falling 10cm (call it 20cm for a beefy margin) just doesn't need much cushion or the progressive loading that rubber gives you. - I push resolving this issue in this way simply because a hardware fix should always take precedence over a software fix. Otherwise, the software fix is really a bandaid covering a flawed design. I understand your logic in software over hardware in some regards but you have an easy fix (albeit with some engineering and testing) over a complicated fix if you just address the hardware. Of course, I totally get wanting to fix issues with the avenue you're most comfortable in too so ... - Also, why not ignite the rocket motor the same way you're cutting your rubber bands? Autoignition temp should be reached quickly and consistently. Lasting, setup a landing pad already! Small deviations in the ground and the grass is equivalent to SpaceX trying to land in a brush pile! Not only do the legs have to cope but your ground effect thrust is always uneven and therefor requires compensating.
Always impressive stuff from you Joe - congrats on the obvious progress! It will be interesting to see the results of your proposed change to the burn initiate altitude. As I think you mentioned, raising it does seem counter-intuitive.
You can always try to reduce drift in attitude and position estimation with better filtering, however with the sensors that you are using you can't avoid having some drift (namely given your sensors your system is not observable). To avoid position drift you could maybe use optical flow with a down facing camera, but maybe you can reduce the drift enough with just filtering.
Anyone else paying attention to the changing text on the bottom left of the whiteboard which said 'Im Running Out Of Jokes' throughout the video? Great video!
awesome! gunna have to either figure out how to throttle ur engine, or cluster with shutdown capability, or the timing for engine lightoff not too high in altitude, followed by engine cutoff at touchdown. good luck! you will get it, and you are an amazing talented engineer
Just as a reminder, this video was sponsored by CRAP. Concerned Rocketeers Against Parachutes. To become a CRAP yourself, go to bps.space/crap
BPS.space I already am a crap
@@Ender436 Thank you for your commitment to CRAP
Great job though. So close!
Hey Joe, if it is really you ❤️ the comments..Please tell me (this might be a stupid question) how far off is the software for Thrust Vector Control from a one for a full-size rocket. Or rather how much if any can you scale the rocket and use the same software and procedures. Thanks.
want to ask:
Do you think, using FPGA and co, so working on Hardware, for doing the math and decisions about the movements, is better? or is the speed of a Microcontroller enough?!
This is just an elaborate job application to SpaceX.
Respect
Dustin Penner that’s what he originally intended
Lol
Dustin Penner You say that like it’s a bad thing?
Bob Pulgino nope.
I CAN HELP U MAKE YOUR OWN INGIGHTER S WIRE KANTAL WIRE THEY WORK FOR ME
I teach an aerospace engineering class to high school students. We just watched this video, and they lost their minds!
Can imagine ... after what nasa did before and during apollo, all was jaw-dropping impressive ... (and still is, cuz I was born after) ... after first shuttle flight and landing, not much ever was, apart from the mars-sky-crane-landing ... now with this introduction of self-landing-rockets, we're getting back on to something. Seing this happen "back-yard-style" sure is impressive and makes you wonder where nasa's creativity was during the 80s 90s and 00s.
@@Chapter3Fan I don't think NASA lost its creativity as all. What they lost was funding. NASA was the first to work on a re-usable rocket, some time in the early 90's. Do a search on delta clipper. It is where Elon Musk (and others) got the idea. The big plus now is that with some many groups working on space flight, we are able to come at the problems from many angels. NOVA did a nice show on this a few months ago. I think it was called "Rise of rockets."
That's awesome that those high schoolers have an aerospace engineering class. I didn't, so I am curious as to how it differs from a regular high school physics class?
@@slimxshady6111 it's basically an applied physics class wrapped around rockets. Between the lessons on force, momentum, fluids, ect... they build rockets. Starting with small ones and ending with much larger high-powered rockets with Hybrid motors.
@@michaelfski jealous
This is absolutely an amazing accomplishment! I can't wait to see your next test!
Didn’t expect to see you here.
Modify the landing legs so that they ABSORB the shock of landing rather than bounce back from the shock.
Yup. Could perhaps use a very coarse/weak styrofoam. SpaceX uses foamed aluminium cylinders, which crush to absorb the shock
maybe the arm could have a friction fit sleeve that would allow the arm to shrink in length on impact and use the friction to absorb the energy in place of SpaceX's crush-core.
To keep it 3d-printed, he could have a part of the legs buckle for absorption, and then lay flat for more surface area. It wouldn't be much more weight to enlarge those legs either, but I suspect aesthetics play a big part in this rocket too.
It could also use a ratchet mechanism so that the legs could move to absorb the pressure but then NOT bounce back. A spring would determine how much it moves due to the landing pressure, and it could still be 3D printed and have the same basic "look" as the SpaceX rockets.
I don't think you can really 3d-print this but what about using pistons?
Wow I'm such a better person because of watching this video. What a wonderful experience it was to sit through all roughly 17 minutes of it. I‘ll never be the same and I feel bad for everyone who didn't watch the whole thing.
Hi Joe. First of all, I wanted to congratulate you for this amazing work. I following all your videos for a few months. Even your topic is not the same as mine, I always loved rockets and if I had more time and a little bit of more space, I would love to try some rocket projects as well. You’re doing a great job and it is clear that you’re working a lot for this and you like it. You have better results each time. I’m sure your channel will get very high. Keep up.
"These are model rockets, you cant take them too seriously."
*Has model rockets that land themselves with RCS and LIDAR using software that he wrote in his living room.*
Dude, this is seriously awesome stuff!
Chris Sunderland very true!! It is very impressive!!!
This one doesn't use RCS though
It neither uses a LIDAR but still seriously cool!
LIDAR is a fools errand
treesniper12 didnt Elon also say the Falcon 9 uses LiDAR in the same sentence?
Sensor fusion! Slap a kalman filter on everything and it'll probably fix a bunch of your sensor issues.
Right now you're using only one of your sensors at a time and cutting between them as you change flight regimes, accepting the downsides of each in turn. You don't have to do this - there's math that will let you throw all of your measurements into a single state estimate and gain something that's close to having the best features of both sensors. The accelerometers continuously recalibrate the gyros, the gyros provide high-resolution angular measurements, the barometer keeps the accelerometer's altitude information from drifting, and the accelerometers provide high-resolution altitude information. You can even manually tune the amount of noise you expect from each signal over what time scales.
Sensor fusion also works with multiple sensors *of the same kind*. I'm impressed with the performance you're getting given how slowly you're observing your sensors; when I did humanoid robotics we wanted to be measuring important sensors at multiple kilohertz. But buying more expensive single sensors isn't necessarily the only way to improve measurement frequency. You can also mount multiple low-quality sensors and throw them all into the update step of your filter. Even if you measure them all at the same time it'll probably help you reject some vibration. The real win would be sampling them out of phase, which would give you a better chance of capturing large transients like the shock you get from dropping the legs.
I apologize if this is something you're already doing, or if you've already rejected these features because they don't fit into project scope or available computational resources. I only watched this video and looked around on your website for a few minutes. But the part where you're cutting between sensors entirely makes me hope that this will at least provide some paths for improvement. Good luck!
Saul Reynolds-Haertle I second this; Kalman Filters are a mathematically elegant panacea for squeezing the cleanest possible data out of multiple noisy sensors.
Thirded... Was going to say the same thing. Also, after trying Kalman filters, consider dithering (which is similar to adding noise to a mix for mastering from your audio engineering days), and even averaging the values of several IMUs.
omg joe, you are so damn close to sticking it, I cant wait to see the next test!
This was so close I thought you landed it when I saw your tweet 👏🚀
Congratulations to this nearly perfect landing!
Greetings from Germany 🇩🇪
Very impressive. For the record, back in 1964, I built an Estes cluster rocket equipped with a retro-rocket upper stage, with a (live, in water) zebra fish payload. The rocket launched on the 3 most powerful engines Estes had at the time, at stage separation, a long, sheltered wick ignited resulting in ignition about 1-2 seconds into free fall, and when the engine burned out, parachute separation of the payload occurred. The Upper unit definitely slowed down, parachute did deploy, and the zebra fish survived. I doubt if we went any higher than 200-300 feet, but the gizmo worked. These were in the days before computer chips, electronic cameras, deployable landing gear. Your work is admirable. I did mine in the days when slide rules built the Saturn V, and launched astronauts to the moon and back, all within a 7-8 year time frame, start to finish. Keep up the good work. Elon Musk is on the right track. NASA lost it about 30 years ago, and is still looking for its butt!
This video is a *master piece*
Very well done Joe. That was so close on such a difficult surface. If that thing had your RCS it would have probably stood upright. Best of luck with the next tests.
"These are model rockets. You can't take it too seriously" 😂
As if the internet could *NOT* take something seriously.
@@andrewmorris483 As if the internet is serious.
@@questionator2 the internet is only serious when it doesn't matter.
Little ones lead to BIG ONES... crawl walk run
Go tell that to the guys making the racing drones. This is no different. He’s going to make a lot of money once he gets this down
A channel that shows content before intro/ads/10min rambling... respect
Wow joe, you inspired me so much with all your projects, i have been following the landing program from the beginning. And you have inspired this 14 year old kid to do research and stard all sorts of projects. (I hope I am not the only one)
Im 16 and although ive been doing research and projects for a few years i never considered rocketry until BPS.space! Ive now made my own flight computers which I will probably fly sometime this summer :)
@@0siiris and Milos that's awesome, thank you! Best of luck with your projects! :)
Milos de Wit
You’re not the only one. I’m 14 as well, and a friend and I are trying to make what we call MABS. We are using an ardunio uno starter kit, a humming bird, and Fusion 360 to create the MABS system. I don’t want to reveal anymore details as I believe the idea is actually patentable, but big cannon. Big cannon for good.
@@nicholasn.2883 wow, sounds interesting, I am currently trying to make a small autonomous plane, also arduino controlled, using a ultrasonic sensor and off the shelf gyroscope/accelerometer. Good luck with your product, also big plans for the future!
After you adjust your burn time...cheat, and make it so your landing legs stick into the grass a little or get off the grass altogether. Your landing is not the problem it's the recoil of the soft surface that's causing your rocket to fall over!
Great job...
Amazing to see the progress your making! Keep up the great work you have one of the most interesting channels on all of RUclips!
Watching your old videos, oh wow how great progress you've made!
Your journey with this is extremely entertaining. Thank you for sharing.
Glad to hear an acknowledgement of the issues around variance in total motor impulse and ignition timing. Another thing you’ll have to factor in is the total amount of vertical impulse lost to control actuations, that is to say, when the thrust vector is gimbaled off-vertical. Your idea about wagging the gimbal to bleed excess energy is interesting too.
My assertion remains however that you’ll need throttle to make this repeatable.
MAd respect for all the tiny engineering + Not taking the shortcut by tuning up the Software rather than HW. And so many other things, thanks for the inspiration.
Joel, could you use hobby shocks like what is on RC cars for landing? They can absorb very well hard landings. Just a thought.
Good job on your progress!
When I first saw the rocket get dropped and fire up then slow down to a stop surrounded by smoke, I thought you had stuck it perfectly! So close, I cant wait to see the the rocket launch and landing tests. Brilliant project, I am rooting for you buddy...
Did a spontaneous BPS search in RUclips and saw this... "Echo - Landing Test #4 uploaded 6 minutes ago"
Ooo yes please!
Subscribe & hit the bell, saves you a search
Very impressed you're doing so well with solids, wouldn't have thought it feasible.
Sooo close! Keep up the great work. Also, definitely include the wide shot like at 0:23 when you do nail it, because we want to see your reaction!
It's awesome to see the improvements in each video, very satisfying.
Great work Joe...I have a suggestion or two...
Unlike you, I'm not a rocket scientist but I think the landing surface is possibly another contributing factor for the vehicle tipping over...
So, why not design a portable firm landing surface...
Idk what is the proper term but getting a working retro system that would aid in orientation of the vehicle and possibly eliminate the sliding issue....
Finally, for the legs, would a shock absorption system help to eliminate the bounce also. ..
May your skies be always blue and Godspeed in you endeavors....
I think having a landing pad might indeed contribute quite a bit.
Perhaps you can add something of a QR-like code to it, with markers that help determine orientation, for automatic positioning. :-D
This is a great idea! I feel like it would totally help.
Love the channel! Keep up the great work!
Regarding the landing pad idea :
It'd be easier testing over a large flat surface like an empty parking lot.
To keep it portable, the landing pad would need to be small, and once he's testing launches and landings simultaneously, the launch could be effected by even the smallest winds and once the landing sequence started it could be several feet off the mark from where it started.
He would need to add a guidance system to literally fly the rocket back to the specific spot where his landing pad would be, and that would equate to more weight to the vehicle, not to mention more time in development. All of this is possible to overcome but the question is, does he want to take it that far?
IMHO, I think it would be easier to tweak the landing legs and the timing of the thrust, as he mentioned in the video. That way he could land on just about any level surface.
As for the landing gear, I was thinking of some way to to slow their deployment as well as landing shock by adjusting the resistance of the landing arm pivots. This could be done in a number of ways I'm sure, such as thrust bearings or washers with pivot bolts and nylon lock nuts for adjusting.
This was so close! Great job! Cant wait to see what’s next!
Hi Joe,
you should contact ST Microelectronics about their latest LSM6DSOX Sensor. They are one of the best IMUs I found on the open market.
Greetings,
Moritz
Congratulations Joe! Excellent control in the descent and landing. Exciting to see!!
This is amazing Joe! keep on doing this until you LAND IT!!! I BELIEVE IN YOU!!!
That you are doing this w/o thrust control or radar assist... brilliant.
“These are model rockets, like, you can´t take it too seriously” - Says the guys landing them with solids😂
In the "quadrocopter industry" some flight controllers use several imu's and combine the measurements to obtain higher accuracy. That might be an option for you.
Ooh that might be a pretty good idea
he’s using that in his products I believe
Damn I hope this goes well
Edit: Darn, That was soooo close! You’ll get it next time.
I love seeing you giddy when stuff is working (this near-landing, the RCS test in another video). I remember when I used to get that feeling too. Oh, and +1 for “boioioioioioing”.
use tiny syringes as struts, that would dampen the landing gear on deployment and add impact absorption on touchdown. (coat the inside of the syringes with mineral oil to reduce the static friction coefficient)
To get the drift out: 1) Write a bit of code that clamps your gyro data to reasonable values if they exceed those values in either the + or - direction. 2) Use the same code that triggers the nichrome and releases the landing legs to initiate that bit of code. 3) Let it run until touchdown. (You only really need the clamping code to run during those last few seconds, so no need to bloat your main control loop with it.) Constraining your gimbaling just prior to touchdown shouldn't otherwise cause any ill effects to vehicle control.
"I'm out of whiteboard jokes."
-Joe's Whiteboard
Just discovered BPS.Space by watching this video. I’m so impressed with the work you are doing! This video reminds me of many I have watched about Tsiolkovsky, Goddard, and von Braun. I’m not blowing smoke up your ass, either. If you watch those old videos of those guys (well, not the Russian) you’ll see that they are doing the same kinds of things that you are doing. I’m heading over to Patreon now. Can’t wait to see how you end up attacking the problem areas on this flight and then, of course, the next flight.
Awesome, your so close !
Do you take into account the change in mass while the motor is burning in your motor ignition timing calculation? Because 13cm sound like the result of the rocket descelerating to much at the end of the burn ^^.
Anyway, congratulation !
I've been watching this channel for over a year, and I'm glad to see it grow so much!
Maybe adding some kind of "dampers" to the legs could help to deal whith the rebound.
Also, as u mentioned, you can 3d print some single use pieces, which would be used to "crash", thus, bleeding the impact energy into them (more or less like an airbag)
With the RCS, it won't drift therefore reducing all chances of rotational momentum after first impact
Never thought I would see this on such a small scale! Amazing work!!
Cant believ your pulling this off. What's next Backyard fusion energy.
Model Rocketry is something that is in my past. I had a lot of fun with it. I just came across your video and I was really impressed with what I saw, even though it did tip over. I'm going to be eagerly watching for updates on your progress. This is too cool!!!
Incredible. The level of thought, precision and professionalism is crazy. Entertaining and very interesting too. I know i'm no the first but he's basically Elon.
Magnets on the feet and a steel landing platform!
Could you use multiple lower powered engines to balance rocket motor variability?
9 is a nice number!
i’m really liking that you are uploading more it really keeps me entertained
Modify the landing legs so that they ABSORB the shock,
Roger Garrett is on the right track
hats off, I never you would have made it this far, and quick. I left a while ago and now i'm back to stay.
1:46 you put it together 🤣
That fap sound.
What you're doing is amazing!! Love watching these regular updates, it will be great to see it work!!
I think that you need to upgrado those landing legs, My reaction to the test: oh jesus crist that was close!!!
I'm just sooo jealous Joe! I'd give my eye teeth to have had these toys er... tools back when I was building rockets in the 80s. Keep up the awesome work.
First here (I guess). I love your work! You've inspired me to start designing and 3D print modelrockets. First flight will be soon :)
Blue skies, friend 🚀
@@BPSspace btw, maybe you could make a landingspot (or just use a concrete or asphalt ground) to make sure it won't tip over
Man that was unbelievably close! Congratulations!
Hi Joe. Great video.
Knowing when you deploy the landing gear, can you mute or increase the dampening of the gyro signal for that short instant?
It's so exciting seeing your progress. Seeing that long-range shot with 0 horizontal movements was amazing after comparing it to the previous test landings. So cool!
My brother is a chemical engineer in the company that makes the crush cores for the falcon 9! He's really cool!
Wow, what an impressive effort! You clearly know what you're talking about and present your work really well. : )
Amazing, so so close and not disimilar to one of SpaceX's near misses shortly before nailing the landing for the first time. BTW The use of Querternions and then a statement "these are model rockets you can't take it too seriously" seem a little contradictory ;-)
Add some shock absorption into the base of the landing legs where they mount on the body of the rocket. I'm loving this channel, lots of good content!
Thrusty McThrustFace in the back!
The OG 🚀
I am the guy that you and Tim meme'd on twitter about the consistency of the burns. GG. For real tho, I think it would be crazy if you had a permanent range where you could set up fixed cameras and do some mocap/3d spatial mapping - imagine the data overload that could provide.
So you ran out of whiteboard jokes
Sometimes it be like that
Hamza Abdullah
IM
@@nicholasn.2883 RUNNING
@@small_SHOT
I have no clue why I posted that. Probably at 4 am and delirious, and I also probably found it hilarious
Awesome video like always
Hi Joel. Amazing work!
In my opinion you’re already there! The reason why it failed is because you’re landing on grass... it bounced on the grass, which is “bouncy” and also uneven. I think it would work on a solid, even surface...
Keep going!
Also, not sure if it would be a major design issue, but the ratio of the height (and weight) of the rocket and the square surface area created by the 4 legs may be wrong. If you could make the legs a bit longer the rocket should be more stable on landing and not tip over... just ideas!
You are so good at explaining things!
love your channel - learning so much from you already your work and efforts are Priceless thank you so much for this
First off, fantastic work. This is the grass roots science we cannot ever lose. I look forward to the day you stick the landing. Hell, it took Spacex a few 9's to get it done.
Just a couple of thoughts, as a software programmer I will say your one statement is not quite correct. I feel that while you can fix a lot of things with software, if there is a hardware fix that makes sense, do it first then shape the software around the better hardware solution. If the legs are flexing enough to cause a bounce, that as others stated, try mini shocks, aluminium foil that would slightly crumple on landing, or brace the legs so they do not flex as much. I disagree on engine cutoff higher, because that would only exacerbate the landing problem. Tweaking the software to remove shocks makes sense, but given you were just outside 10 cm and that might put you inside 10, I would think the goal could be 5 CM with the 1% variance putting you slightly higher or lower, but still off the ground. You have not said, but since the thrust and power time is a constant value due to being solid fuel and no throttling, do you factor in mass of the vehicle in regards to when you light the fire?
Anyway, great videos and explanations. Thank you for sharing and your efforts.
Beautiful! Each attempt getting closer, loving the progress!
came from motherboard...but i really want you to do this. You got this man!
That's awesome! Love to see progress
Part of the issue with the leg deployment is that each leg is a mechanically separate unit but they don't all exert force on the rocket body simultaneously or with the same load. So, you end up with not only a bit of Z axis bounce (not a big deal but could be fixed with a cam type pivot so they don't pick up so much speed) you also get an XY jerk that must be compensated for at arguably the most critical time. Joining the legs mechanically ensures that they all snap into place with an equal amount of force and at the same time. The trick is to join them mechanically in such a way that they remain independent once deployed (to absorb impact at varying loads across the legs). They don't need to be truly independent however. A sway bar (anti-roll bar) acts on both sides of a vehicles suspension to join them together mechanically but it doesn't prohibit independent motion. Finding the right balance is critical though. On a vehicle, too stiff of a sway and every action on one side aggressively influences the other side and can cause issues while too light of a sway means body roll as the rolling inertia of the vehicle above the suspension overcomes the bar. Thankfully, you can aid the entirety of fixing this by substantially lightening your landing gear suspension. 1kg falling 10cm (call it 20cm for a beefy margin) just doesn't need much cushion or the progressive loading that rubber gives you. - I push resolving this issue in this way simply because a hardware fix should always take precedence over a software fix. Otherwise, the software fix is really a bandaid covering a flawed design. I understand your logic in software over hardware in some regards but you have an easy fix (albeit with some engineering and testing) over a complicated fix if you just address the hardware. Of course, I totally get wanting to fix issues with the avenue you're most comfortable in too so ... - Also, why not ignite the rocket motor the same way you're cutting your rubber bands? Autoignition temp should be reached quickly and consistently. Lasting, setup a landing pad already! Small deviations in the ground and the grass is equivalent to SpaceX trying to land in a brush pile! Not only do the legs have to cope but your ground effect thrust is always uneven and therefor requires compensating.
Excellent work. As many other recommended, consider seriously shock absorbent landing lags. Elastic reaction may come form the ground itself.
I am really excited to see all these ups and downs of this rocket channel
Awesome test! Can't wait for the next update!
Good luck my friend. Love these kind of one man projects.
Awesome Brother!!!! If it wasn’t for the grass I think it would have landed!!! Been following you and the progress is amazing!!!
I just discovered your channel today, watched test #3 and come back to this!
Always impressive stuff from you Joe - congrats on the obvious progress! It will be interesting to see the results of your proposed change to the burn initiate altitude. As I think you mentioned, raising it does seem counter-intuitive.
Amazing progress from your first video
WOW! Nice work. Last I checked in you were miles from this. Keep up the fantastic work!
Soo close! Love your work and keep on going!
You can always try to reduce drift in attitude and position estimation with better filtering, however with the sensors that you are using you can't avoid having some drift (namely given your sensors your system is not observable). To avoid position drift you could maybe use optical flow with a down facing camera, but maybe you can reduce the drift enough with just filtering.
Fascinating! Love all the software stuff. Looking forward to the day you can say: LANDED IT!
Anyone else paying attention to the changing text on the bottom left of the whiteboard which said 'Im Running Out Of Jokes' throughout the video? Great video!
haha I had to chuckle at the lawn dart landing legs. It brought a picture of jarts in my head.
This is getting so good. Amazing quality!!
Amazing drawing on the board in the background by the way - dude I admire you and your work a lot! Keep it up!
I think the rocket will get into a Spin with those fins 2:42 . I love your content.
Wierd flex but ok...
This was soo cool to watch, congratulations!!
awesome! gunna have to either figure out how to throttle ur engine, or cluster with shutdown capability, or the timing for engine lightoff not too high in altitude, followed by engine cutoff at touchdown. good luck! you will get it, and you are an amazing talented engineer
Thata was super close. I hope to see this succeed sometime soon. Looking forward to the nest heavy launch!
“Im out of whiteboard jokes.”