In This Issue

How To Calculate
Fin Flutter Speed

Cover Photo: Apogee Apprentice Rocket

Get one today at: http://www.apogeerockets.com/Apprentice.asp

Apogee Components, Inc. — Your Source For Rocket Supplies That Will Take You To The “Peak-of-Flight”
3355 Fillmore Ridge Heights
Colorado Springs, Colorado 80907-9024 USA
www.ApogeeRockets.com e-mail: [email protected]

ISSUE 291 J U LY 1 9 , 2 0 1 1
How To Calculate Fin Flutter Speed
By Zachary Howard
After construction completed on July 1, 1940, the Taco- al modes of the bridge. Despite being made from carbon
ma Narrows Bridge was the third largest suspension bridge steel and concrete on, November 7, 1940 the growing tor-
in the entire world, behind the Golden Gate Bridge and the sional oscillations overwhelmed the natural damping of the
George Washington Bridge. Its infamy lies not with historic bridge and Gertie plunged 300 ft into the ocean below. After
length but in its nickname, Galloping Gertie. The nickname months of research NACA engineers diagnosed the cause
arose from the bridge’s easily excitable bending mode. of the vibrations as aeroelastic flutter.
Drivers would watch the oncoming cars rise and fall with
the violent motion of the bridge. During a particularly strong Background
forty-mile per hour gust the newly excited torsion mode of In textbooks aeroelastic flutter is defined as “a dynamic
the bridge caused a violent twisting along the centerline of instability associated with the interaction of aerodynamic,
the bridge. Figure 1 below shows the bending and torsion- elastic and inertial forces.” The essence of this definition in-
volves understanding the interaction between an object and
the surrounding air. Let’s start with the simple aerodynamic
concept of lift. In the case of Galloping Gertie, the bridge
construction did not allow air to pass through the bridge;
rather it was diverted above and below. This diversion of air
creates lift and a pitching moment around the aerodynamic
center. Due to the coupling between an increase in pitch-
ing moment and an increase in lift, a positive feedback loop
is created. This means that the increase of one variable
drives the increase of the other in an infinite loop. If not
damped, the positive feedback loop leads to uncontrolled
aeroelastic flutter and ultimate failure of the structure. In

Figure 2. Increasing Torsion on Pitching Wing

Figure 1. Galloping Gertie’s Bending and Torsion
Modes Continued on page 3
About this Newsletter Newsletter Staff

You can subscribe to receive this e-zine FREE at the Apogee Writer: Tim Van Milligan
Components web site (www.ApogeeRockets.com), or by Layout / Cover Artist: Tim Van Milligan
sending an e-mail to: [email protected] with “SUB- Proofreader: Michelle Mason
SCRIBE” as the subject line of the message.

Page 2 ISSUE 291 J U LY 1 9 , 2 0 1 1

Continued from page 2

How To Calculate Fin Flutter Speed Flutter Boundary Equation

Figure 2 notice how an increase in the lifting force (orange The Flutter Boundary Equation is based on an earlier
arrow) creates a clockwise rotation of the wing and an calculation published in NACA Technical Paper 4197. If you
increased torsional moment (blue arrow). are familiar with that paper you will notice that Equation
Unlike the Tacoma Narrow bridge, a fin attached to a 1 listed below is slightly different than the one presented
rocket does not have large mechanical dampers. Instead, in the technical paper. The most significant mathematical
rockets need to rely on thoughtful construction and air to change is the use of a more accurate term for torsional
damp out any vibrational energy in the fins. Air is very ef- modulus. This accuracy was gained by the inclusion of
ficient at reducing the amplitude of the vibration while the plate theory. Due to the complex nature of the flutter
rocket remains under the flutter velocity. However, once the boundary equation we will focus our efforts on learning to
flutter velocity is ex- understand the variables rather than trudging though the
ceeded the air will ex- derivation.
ponentially amplify the
oscillations and rapidly G
Vf � a
increase the energy in 1.337AR 3 P(� � 1)
the fin to the point of
t
destruction. Figure 3 2(AR � 2)( ) 3
shows the exponential c
damping and ampli- Equation 1. Flutter Boundary Equation
fication of vibrational
energy in a rocket
fin below and above To begin our dissection of the Flutter Boundary Equa-
the flutter speed. For tion we will analyze the sole material property included in
the remainder of this this equation, the Shear Modulus. Identified by the letter
article we will establish (G) it has units of pounds per square inch or PSI, and is
an equation for predict- the representation of the amount of deformation associated
ing the flutter boundary with a particular amount of force. Simply, the higher the
Shear Modulus the more force it can handle.
Figure 3. Damped and Amplified and discuss all vari-
Oscillations ables involved.
Continued on page 4

GPS Tracking, Telemetry Transmitter

Your Source For Everything Rocketry

www.ApogeeRockets.com
& Dual-Deployment Electronics
One Small Payload That Controls The
Flight And Sends You Back LIVE Flight Data

• GPS - tells you the position of the rocket at

any point in the flight
• Dual-Deployment - controls when the main
and drouge chutes deploy
• Transmits telemetry in real-time
• Eliminates seperate electronic boards that can
cause radio-frequency interference
Launch
• Transmitter doubles as a rocket tracker to help Landing
you locate the rocket in scrub or canyons

www.ApogeeRockets.com/Altus_Metrum_GPS.asp

ISSUE 291 J U LY 1 9 , 2 0 1 1 Page 3

Continued from page 3

How To Calculate Fin Flutter Speed als, add an additional safety factor.
For the purposes of this equation the materials are From Equation 1, the variables under the square root
assumed to be isotropic, which means that the mechani- describing the geometry of the wing are the thickness of
cal properties of the material are the same in all coordinate the wing (t), root chord (c), Aspect Ratio (AR) and the Taper
directions. This assumption is very accurate for metals Ratio (l). The equations for these variables are listed below,
because they are manufactured in a relatively uniform way, along with a wing geometry guide shown in Figure 4. All
but for wood and hand laid composites isotropy cannot be units should be in inches.
assumed. In wood, shear stresses are unique to each axis, In a recent optimization study done by the Air Force
making the material orthotropic. You have probably noticed they found that semi-span had the most impact in flutter
how it is easier to split wood along the grain rather than try- speed calculations. Logically this makes sense, because
ing to cut it perpendicularly. a stubbier fin will be stiffer and more able to resist torsion
Additionally, there is no guarantee that two pieces of as compared to a longer, more flexible fin. However, there
wood, even is a trade off here with the minimum effective area needed
from the same to keep your rocket going straight. Through multiple design
tree, will have iterations using the RockSim software (www.ApogeeRock-
the same mate- ets.com/rocksim.asp), you should be able to come up with
rial properties. the right mixture of all desired values.
The same is
1
true for all hand S � (c r � c t )b
laid compos- 2
ites as well, b2
AR �
because of the S
variability in
c
cloth fibers and �� t
epoxy applica- cr
tion. Therefore, Equations 2. Geometric Equations
when using
published shear Next we come to Air Pressure (P). Using static atmo-
data on ortho-
Figure 4. Fin Geometry
tropic materi- Continued on page 5

The Secret To Arrow-Straight Launches? Your Source For Everything Rocketry

Perfectly Aligned Fins, Of Course... www.ApogeeRockets.com
Get The NEW “Ulf’s Fin Jig” • Easy to use. Just clamp the fin
to the support, and walk-away
while the glue dries
• Constructed out of aluminum,
not plastic! It will last through
a lifetime of use
• Contains three different size
pedistals for 13mm, 18mm,
and 24mm diameter tubes
• Great for small rockets and
classroom use

www.ApogeeRockets.com/fin_jig.asp

Page 4 ISSUE 291 J U LY 1 9 , 2 0 1 1

Continued from page 4

How To Calculate Fin Flutter Speed Duncan McDonald. Although his attempt at calculating fin
spheric models you will find that in the Troposphere, which flutter was wrong (He forgot to add in the pressure terms
is below 36152 ft, temperature and pressure vary linearly and to keep consistent units. Also, some of the constants
with altitude according to those listed in Equations 3. There in the equation are deceiving because they are actually a
are more equations that model temperature and pressure combination of a bunch of constant terms), he had valuable
changes in the Upper and Lower Stratosphere, which you test data from contributor Jeff Taylor who flew accelerom-
can find at http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/at- eters in his rockets and recorded their maximum speed.
mos.html. The answers to the pressure calculations need to Based on the article’s data, my Flutter Boundary Equa-
be converted into pounds per square inch in order to make tion successfully predicted the two instances of flutter and
sure that all the units under the square root cancel out. the three safe flights of Jeff’s rocket. That is a 100% suc-
T(�F) � 59 � .00356h cess rate in five test cases. Without more significant testing
the true accuracy of this equation will not be known, but
5.256
��T � 459.7 �� preliminary calculations suggest that a comfortable safety
P(lbs/ ft ) � 2116 � ��
2
��
�� 518.6 �� margin is anything 20% below the flutter velocity speed.
However, there have been instances of accuracy to within
Equations 3. Temperature and Pressure Variations
5%.
The one major prediction problem is that the flutter
The last variable of the Flutter Boundary Equation is
velocity changes with altitude; therefore, to accurately
speed of sound (a). Dependent only on the temperature of
predict flutter speed the altitude at which maximum velocity
the medium, the equation for the speed of sound is given in
is achieved must be known. Usually this is not known, so
Equation 4.
keeping the rockets velocity under the maximum allowable
a � 1.4 �1716.59 � (T(�F) + 460) at sea level is advised.
Equation 4. Speed of Sound
Root Chord (cr ) 9.75 in
This equation already has the Ideal Gas Law constants
associated with air inserted, making the temperature calcu-
lated through Equations 3 the only variable. The unit on this
Tip Chord (ct) 3.75 in
calculation is feet per second, which due to cancellation
among all other units makes the Flutter Boundary Equation Thickness (t) .125 in
in terms of feet per second.
Semi-Span (b) 4.75 in
Equation Verification and Safety Factor
In order to verify this equation, I have tested the Flutter Shear Modulus (psi) 380000psi
Boundary Equation with data published in an article called
“Fin Flutter” at http://www.info-central.org/?article=138 by
Continued on page 6

We’re Paying Cash

For Great Articles for This Newsletter
Are you a writer looking for some serious pocket change?
We’re paying up to $350 for good how-to articles for this
newsletter. If you’re interested, see our submission guidelines
on the Apogee web site.

www.ApogeeRockets.com/Newsletter_Guidelines.asp

ISSUE 291 J U LY 1 9 , 2 0 1 1 Page 5

Continued from page 5

How To Calculate Fin Flutter Speed

G
Example Vf � a
1.337AR 3 P(� � 1)
To truly cement your understanding of the Flutter t
Boundary Equation this following example will walk you 2(AR � 2)( ) 3
through all equations necessary, with real numbers from c
an actual rocket. We’re going to assume the rocket is at
380000
V f � 1105.26
3000ft.
Step 1: Preliminary Calculations 1.337 � .70 �13.19 � (.38 � 1)
3

.125 3
(9.75 � 3.75)4.75 2(.70 � 2)( )
S� � 32.06in 2 9.75
2
4.75 2
ft
AR � � .70 V f � 788.6 � 537.67mph
32.06 sec
3.75
�� � .38 The maximum velocity was measured at 449 mph,
9.75 which is below the flutter speed. In another test with the
T � 59 � .00356(3000) � 48.32�F same rocket, the maximum velocity was clocked at 631
mph. On that test the fins broke, as predicted by the equa-
5.256
2116 ��48.32 � 459.7 �� lb tion.
P� � �� �� � 13.19
144 �� 518.6 �� in 2 Authors Note
ft Firstly, I would like show my appreciation to Tim
a � 1.4 �1716.59 � (48.32 � 460) � 1105.26 Van Milligan for publishing my article in the fantastic Peak
sec of Flight Newsletter. Having been a subscriber for a long
Step 2: Plug into Flutter Boundary Equation time now, I have always appreciated the constant stream of
knowledge presented in these newsletters.

About the Author

Zachary Howard is a recent graduate from Georgia
Yes... Tech in Aerospace Engineering. From local launches to
competing in the Team America Rocketry Challenge, his
We Have Engine lifelong passion for rocketry has not wavered. After a recent
Mounts Too. failed Level 1 attempt, Zachary revisited his old textbooks
and begun deciphering the phenomena of fin flutter that
www.apogeerockets.com/motor_mount_kits.asp claimed his rocket.

Your Cool Rocket Designs

Look So Much Better In
RockSim Version 9!
Design It.
Launch It.
v9
www.RockSim.com
Space Foundation certified
as an excellent teaching aid. For further information, call Apogee Components at: 719-535-9335.

Page 6 ISSUE 291 J U LY 1 9 , 2 0 1 1