[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference rusure::math

Title:Mathematics at DEC
Moderator:RUSURE::EDP
Created:Mon Feb 03 1986
Last Modified:Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:2083
Total number of notes:14613

1207.0. "3D GEOMETRY PROBLEM CALCULATING ROCKET HEIGHT" by SNELL::DJBROWN () Wed Mar 07 1990 16:05

    First posted in Brain_bogglers.. STILL UNSOLVED!  
                                              H E L P !!
                                                  DJBROWN
================================================================================
        <<< DYO780::DISK$DATA03:[NOTES$LIBRARY]BRAIN_BOGGLERS.NOTE;1 >>>
                              -< Brain Bogglers >-
================================================================================
Note 893.0      Rocket altitude measurements via ground telemetry      6 replies
SNELL::DJBROWN                                       55 lines  23-FEB-1990 14:01
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Here's a little 3D geometry problem that's been puzzling me for
    a while.
    
      I like to dabble a little in model rocketry.  As such, I wish
    to devise a method for determining the altitude my rockets get
    to.  All I have at my disposal is a little Angle_meter that I use
    to track the rocket in flight, and then to pull the trigger (when
    the chute deploys) to lock in this angle (measured off of the
    horizontal) so that the angle at deployment can be read.
    
    SEE CRUDE DIAGRAM NEXT PAGE..
        
    
                                                  
                                   ^               
                                   ||               
                                  /||\               
                  /                .               
                                   .  ^             
               /                   .  |             
     Tracking                      .  |
     Gun                           .  H             
      |    /                       .  |             
      |                            .  v             
      v   \                                        
       /   \ <--Angle THETA                                          
      //    |                      .       Height = D * Tan(THETA)      
    O /     |                                   
    +/      <--D-->                                  
    |                              |          
    /\  <-ME                       | Launch site          
    ========================================================
    
        
	This method is erroneous because the rockets usually fly maybe
    hundreds of yards downfield horizontally, thus nullifying this simple
    trigonometric method.
    
    My postulation...  If I were to have THREE such 'Angle-meters', at
    three different but known locations on the launch field, can the rocket
    height be calculated by trig methods by knowing the 'angles off
    horizontal' from each of the three meters, and by knowing the (x,y,0)
    locations of each tracker?          If so, what is that equation? and
    where should the trackers be located?  (I like to consider the launch
    location as coordinate (0,0,0). 

    I hope this seems clear.  I really seem hung up on the math.  Any
    insight would be appreciated.
    
      Actually, Im hoping to have a rocket contest within my son's
    cubscout troup in a couple months.  So, please...  HELP!
    
    						Dave J Brown
    
---------------------------------------------------------------
    
    
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
1207.1HPSTEK::XIAIn my beginning is my end.Wed Mar 07 1990 18:055
    re .0,
    Yes, you can do it with three.  However, if you can also obtain the
    horizontal angle, you only need two, and the calculation is much
    simpler with this method.
    Eugene
1207.2HPSTEK::XIAIn my beginning is my end.Wed Mar 07 1990 18:203
    I think your real problem will be the synchronization of your
    measurements.
    Eugene
1207.3ALIEN::POSTPISCHILAlways mount a scratch monkey.Wed Mar 07 1990 21:4210
    I discussed this with Brian McCarthy, who also pursues rocketry as a
    hobby, and he said that somebody did a study on the use of two
    measurements compared to three.  Theoretically, three measurements can
    produce an exact answer whereas two can give an answer only if certain
    assumptions are made.  However, the study found that two measurements
    does in fact give a good result -- apparently the calculations for
    three measurements are not stable.
    
    
    				-- edp
1207.4CHOVAX::YOUNGAn Urban Legend in my own time.Wed Mar 07 1990 23:155
    Re .3:
    
    Is that with or without the horizontal measurement of .1 ?
    
    --  Barry
1207.5BEING::POSTPISCHILAlways mount a scratch monkey.Thu Mar 08 1990 07:516
    Re .4:
    
    I think it is without, but I'm not sure.
    
    
    				-- edp
1207.64GL::GILBERTOwnership ObligatesThu Mar 08 1990 08:337
    Re .4, .5:
    
    For two measurements of declination (?) without the horizontal angle
    (azimuth), you essentially know two cones.  They don't intersect in
    a single point -- you need the azimuths or a third declination.
    
    Anyway, I expect the original poser still wants some equations.
1207.7exFIVER::DJBROWNThu Mar 08 1990 14:409
    Yup, an equation is really what I need.  (One I can put into my
    TI58C for use on the field).   I have at my disposal ONLY the Single
    angle tracker (3x) that is built my the model rocket mfr.
    
    Synchronization I wouldnt anticipate to be a problem because all
    three trackers pull their triggers at the very instant they see
    the retro-charge POP the chute out (Lots of smoke, very evident!)
    
    						DJ Brown
1207.8BEING::POSTPISCHILAlways mount a scratch monkey.Fri Mar 09 1990 08:1513
    Re .6:
    
    I believe some assumption is made about the position of the rocket. 
    For example, you do not need to completely determine the rocket's
    position, just its altitude.  If at least one measurement is
    sufficiently far away from the launch site, the intersection of the
    cone from that measurement with the other cone may be close enough to
    horizontal that all points in the intersection are within a desired
    degree of accuracy.  (Should the other cone be very near the launch
    site?)
    
    
    				-- edp
1207.9Brute Force SucksFIVER::DJBROWNMon Mar 12 1990 12:509
    OK, So Ive reduced it to the following three simultaneous equations..
    
    A1x� + B1x + C1y� + D1y + E1z� + F1z = K1      equation 1
    A2x� + B2x + C2y� + D2y + E2z� + F2z = K2      equation 2
    A3x� + B3x + C3y� + D3y + E3z� + F3z = K3      equation 3
    
                       Can this be solved for (x,y,z) ??
    
    					Dave "IMAROKITMAN" Brown
1207.10HPSTEK::XIAIn my beginning is my end.Mon Mar 12 1990 13:465
    re -1,
    As you may have already found out, few people are interested in solving
    things with brute force.  Around here we tend to describe the method
    and leave others to fill in the details. :-)
    Eugene
1207.11SIMPLE GEOMETRYFDCV01::ADUBEWed Mar 14 1990 13:4023
            .		If you have two observers(O1 & O2) on the same 
           ..		horizontal plane as the rocket launch and a distance 
          . ..		of "a" you can determine "h" by measuring the 
         .  .		horizontal angles "A" and "B" when you measure 
        .   . .		the verticle angles "D" and "E". (note: you won't 
       .   h. 		need angle "E" just "A" "B" and "D").
      .     .  .	
     .    .  .
    .   .   . .E.	The equation is h=(  a * TAN(B) )   TAN(D)
   . D.     .  .			  -------------- * ------
  . .       .   ..			  (TAN(B)+TAN(A))   COS(A)
 .. A       .  B .			    
...................			    
O1        a      O2


All angles are taken at rocket lauch level, therefore if you have two obsevers
each looking at the rocket measuring the angles(A,B, and D) 5 feet off the 
ground,		true h=h+5ft.

Locate the observers upwind from the launch pad so that angle A and B are not 0.

AL