If second stage IGNITION is triggered byĮJECTION_CHARGE it is filtered out, and second stage IGNITION fails to If STAGE_SEPARATION is inserted first, theįilter in BasicEventSimulationEngine.java ignoring events fromĬomponents that are no longer attached to the rocket drops ignoresĮJECTION_CHARGE. When the events STAGE_SEPARATION and EJECTION_CHARGE are both triggered byīURNOUT, both events occur simultaneously and either can be inserted * missed reversing the operands in the calculation of last bit of impulse * Little bit more massaging for clarity (replace avgImpulse with impulse) * Code clarification should make no difference to results Small number and then adding doesn't introduce any instabilities I'mĪdd parentheses to clarify that values are being multiplied by time Comment said it was for numerical stability multiplying by a Remove test for short time interval before first data point in thrustĬurve. * Fix Average Thrust Calculation (fixes issue openrocket#441) * Fixes repeated bug in Presets/Material Loading - inconsistent test criteria Changed implementation of RadiusMethod.*.getRadius() Previous function did not make sense, where implemented in FinSet.Ģ. renamed getOuterRadius() => getBoundingRadius() * tightened access specifiers in FinSet.java * cleanup up unused imports in core/test/net/sf/openrocket/rocketcomponent/* * may now create and drag a point in one click. * run configuration and jar paths are now cross-platform * added jar artifact for IDEA Intellij build * added shared build configurations for Intellij at. * Updated dependencies for running from intellij it is now a second, expanded, different colored box. * reworks FreeformFinSet Selected point display. * Adding new points to FreeformFins are now placed at the mouse cursor * separated FinSet Tests into files corresponding to FinSet, TrapezoidalFinSet, and FreeformFinSet * FinPointFigure contents are bottom-aligned, properly sized. if the visible bounds are larger than the requested scale bounds, then the figure is expanded to match. * AbstractScaleFigure now stores (& requires!) the visible bounds when setting zoom/scale. * May now delete points again, in the FreeformFinSetConfig window * renamed FinSet#fins => FinSet#finCount to make it's meaning more explicit * Moved fins from core-body to booster-body (they are now doubly-instanced) adjusted tests to accept this. * Fixes the way BarrowmanCalculator handles instancing, particularly for ComponentAssemblies * BarrowmanCalculator no longer multiplies instanced leaf nodes. added unittests for fin count loading/saving/creation * Fins default to instance count / fin count = 1 * Clicking in fin-point figure now calculates closest segment correctly * implemented FinPoint SelectedIndex Indicators * Addes back in ConfigDialog outside spacing. * clicking away from points now longer causes an exception * FinPointFigure ScrollBars now adjust with zoom in/out * FinPointFigure draws its parent/mounting half-body (w/front & back terminators) ScaleSelector Text updates with +/- buttons * FinPointFigure now auto-scales correctly * excised EXTRA_SCALE (=S) factor in ScaleFigure Code harmonizes the border pixels variables in the scalefigure package removed interface that was only inherited by the single AbstractBaseClass * Reduce redundant methods in Scalefigures, and harmonize common function names FlightConfiguration now exposes the BoundingBox method for its rocket * updated BoundingBox class to be more useful * Refactored naming in ScaleSelector to be more consistent 'Zoom' -> 'Scale' Resolved some sources of phantom whitespace Spacing on component configuration (You almost have to try on purpose to create a really bad fin design before it becomes a serious drag problem.* fixed warnings and made variable names more explicit in FinSetConfig Dialogs The mid-chord can be gently curved (lens-shaped) or rise to a high point (diamond-cross section).Īnd all of this is sort of fussing over nothing, because (as cjl posted) these rocket fins spend their flight at very low angles of attack and generally cause little aero drag regardless of what shape they are. In a subsonic airfoil you don't want to have sharp corners on the airfoil (which would appear on a three-dimensional fin surface as a ridge line running along the span) because that tends to trigger flow separation (and drag) in subsonic flight.įor a supersonic airfoil (or even one which spends most-but-not-all of its time in supersonic flight) you DO want a sharp leading edge and a sharp trailing edge. You may have heard someone talking about airfoil shapes (as opposed to fin planform shapes)? For subsonic flight, you get the lowest drag with a teardrop shape (rounded leading edge and a trailing edge with thickness that tapers down to zero). I know it's been a while since I sat in an aero class, but what I remember for drag parameters are wetted area, frontal area, fin airfoil shape, and surface roughness.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |