Each flight log entry usually
represents a launch or test day, and describes the
events that took place.
Click on an image to view a larger image, and
click the
browser's BACK button to return back to the
page.
Day 171 - How to Measure Altitude
Date:
14th February 2016
Location:Whalan Reserve, NSW, Australia
Conditions:Calm, Blue Skies, 32C,
Team Members at Event: John K, Paul K, GK,and PK.
Measuring Altitudes
This week we have a look at 4 different ways to measure
altitude of a water rocket. We tested all of these techniques on
each launch to compare how accurate they are and then we look at
the advantages and disadvantages of each.
Technique
Description
Inclinometer
An inclinometer is used to measure the elevation angle of the
rocket at apogee from a known distance away from the launch pad. Then using a little
trigonometry we can estimate the rocket's altitude.
Ground Photography
This technique involves setting up a fixed video camera a
known distance away from the launch pad and filming the entire
flight. You can then use a video frame with the rocket at
apogee to work out the altitude using a calibration
image.
Aerial Photography
This involves placing a small camera on board the rocket and
filming the flight looking down. You then select a video frame
at or near apogee that has a view of a known size
object or feature on the ground. Again using a
calibration image you can work out the distance from that object
or feature. If that object is directly below the
rocket you can work out the altitude.
Altimeter
This technique involves placing an altimeter on board the
rocket and measuring the altitude directly. These typically rely
on barometric
pressure sensors, GPS, or accelerometers to derived the
altitude. .
Video
Experiment Setup
Inclinometer
We made the inclinometer from a couple of spare aluminium
sections we had on hand. The pivot point was made with a screw
and a lock nut. We put a piece of felt between the arm and the
base and tightened the lock nut until there was sufficient
friction to keep the arm in the set position while still
allowing it to easily move. This way you could track the rocket to
apogee and then at apogee you would just leave the arm in place
so you could record the reading from the side.
We used two different angle measuring devices. We used the
classic hanging weight on the end of a thread and a protractor.
We also mounted an iPod on top of the arm and used a free App
that uses the internal accelerometers to measure the angle. The
protractor and thread is good for about 0.5 degree accuracy
while the iPod was down to about 0.1 degrees. Most smart phones
today can perform the same function.
The whole inclinometer could also be pivoted about the
vertical axis so the rocket could be tracked laterally away from the
launch pad.
We would always take two readings. One with the inclinometer
pointing at the nose of the rocket on the pad as that was about
the same height as the inclinometer was above ground. The second
reading was then recorded at apogee. The difference between
these angles was used in the calculation.
iPod/Smart-Phone inclinometer
Inclinometer App
Classic inclinometer
Looking down the sight
To work out the altitude
we use the following formula:
h = tan(θ) *
d
where: h is the
altitude, θ is
the angle of elevation d
is the distance from the launch
pad.
Ground Photography
The ground camera used in the experiment was the GoPro Hero
3 Black Edition. We set the recording format to 2.7K video with a wide
setting. We chose the higher resolution format so it was easier
to locate the rocket in the sky and with better precision. The
camera was set up on a tripod and angled upwards at around 45
degrees. We also rotated the camera to portrait mode so we could
get the most pixels vertically. This would give us enough coverage with the launcher in
view near the bottom of the frame and more than 90 degrees
above the camera to make sure we caught the apogee of the
flight. We located the camera at the same distance from the rocket
as the inclinometer. (42.5m)
To get the calibration image, we placed the camera at the
same angle, and 42.5cm away from a vertical wall. This would give us a
100:1 scale factor. We then placed markings up the wall and took
an image with the camera with the same video settings.
Camera Set up on tripod
Calibration image setup
Calibration image
Aerial Photography
For this experiment we
prepared a 100m string with 5m marks on it and then at the
launch site we ran 50m of the string in one direction and then
50m at 90 degrees in another direction. We then placed a set of
white coriflute markers at each 5m point and pinned it to the ground with
a skewer stick so wind couldn't blow it away. With this setup we were
hoping that at least some of the markings would be visible from
the air at apogee. We used two different cameras taped to
either side of the rocket. One camera had a regular narrower
field of view while the other had a wide angle lens.
We again obtained a calibration image for each camera, but
this time we located the camera exactly 1m from the wall.
Cameras on the side of rocket
String with markers
Markers set out on the field
Narrow FOV calibration Image
Wide FOV calibration Image
To work out the altitude
we simply use ratios of the measurements
in the apogee photo vs the calibration
image measurements.
For example if in the
apogee image we see that 35m on the
ground corresponds to 30cm in the
calibration image then we can use the
following formula to work out how high
we are:
1 m / 0.3m
= h / 35m
h = (1 x 35) /
0.3
h =
116.7m
Altimeters
We used two different altimeters for these flights The peak
only reading AltimeterOne and the recording AltimeterThree.
These altimeters use barometric pressure sensors to measure altitude
down to an accuracy of about 1 foot.
AltimeterOne
AltimeterThree & App
Altimeters Mounted to the side
of the rocket
Results
We repeated the experiment on three flights and measured the altitude
using all 4 techniques on each flight.
Inclinometer Results
The following angles were observed with the two different
inclinometers. They were in quite close agreement with each
other. The table also shows the calculated altitude estimate
based on the average of the two angles. The inclinometer was
located 42.5 meters from the launch pad.
Flight 1 - zero angle
Flight 2 - zero angle
Flight 3 - zero angle
Flight 1 - elevation angle
Flight 2 - elevation angle
Flight 3 - elevation angle
Flight
Protractor Angle
App Angle
Altitude Estimate
1
67.0 - 0.5 = 66.5º
66.6 - 0.2 = 66.4º
320 feet ( 97.5m )
2
66.0 - 0.0 = 66.0º
66.0 - 0.2 = 65.8º
312 feet ( 95 m )
3
64.5 - 0.0 = 64.5º
64.2 - 0.1 = 64.1º
289 feet ( 88 m )
Ground Photography Results
To find the apogee image we watched the flight video frame by
frame and paused when the rocket
stopped gaining altitude. We then saved this frame to
a file. We then overlayed this image with the calibration image
and read the altitude off directly. Each small tick mark
represents 1 meter in the images below.
Flight 1 with calibration image
Flight 2 with calibration image
Flight 3 with calibration image
After combining the calibration image with the apogee image we
arrived at the following altitude estimates:
Flight
Altitude Estimate
1
302 feet ( 92 m )
2
299 feet ( 91 m )
3
279 feet ( 85 m )
Aerial Photography Results
The markers on the ground were easily visible in the footage
right near apogee. Having the two sets of markers at 90 degrees
helped ensure that at least one set wasn't obscured by the
rocket. We again reviewed the video for each flight and saved an
image when the rocket was near apogee and the ground markers
were visible. The narrow FOV camera failed to record the entire
flight of Flight #3.
Flight 1 narrow angle
Flight 2 narrow angle
Flight 1 wide angle
Flight 2 wide angle
Flight 3 wide angle
After overlaying the calibration image and rotating it to
align with the ground markers we were able to work out the
altitude by scaling the readings appropriately. Here are the
altitude estimates from the two cameras. The estimates in
brackets represent altitude derived from the second set of
markers placed at 90 degrees. These are higher because the camera is looking at them
from an angle, ie. not directly above them,
Flight
Narrow Angle
Wide Angle
1
403 feet (122.8 m)
410 feet (125.0 m)
2
420 feet (128.2 m)
438 feet (133.6 m)
3
N/A
446 feet (136.2 m)
Altimeter Results
We flew the AltimeterOne on all three flights, and the
AltimeterThree was added on the last flight. We know from
past experiments that these are quite accurate, and so we used
these readings as the reference for the other measurement
techniques.
Flight
AltimeterOne
AltimeterThree
1
392 feet (119.5m)
Not flown
2
409 feet (124.6m)
Not flown
3
421 feet (128.3m)
420 feet (128m)
Analysis
Here is a summary of the measurements. As you can see the
inclinometer and ground camera photography have a significant
errors in their estimates. This is primarily due to non-vertical
flight of the rocket. On the diagram below you can see that if
the rocket reaches apogee some distance away from the vertical
the apparent elevation angle is not going to correctly represent
the true picture. For large elevation angles this error is
going to be even more significant.
Rocket flying away from the
inclinometer will give lower
altitude estimates than the real
altitude
Rocket flying towards the
inclinometer will give higher
altitude estimates than the real
altitude.
Averaging altitudes from two
different inclinometers located
90 degrees apart gives better
results.
Placing the inclinometer further
from the launch pad will give
better results.
Aerial photography will measure
the distance to the feature
rather than altitude if the
feature is not directly below
it.
Ground photography has similar
limitations to the inclinometer
because the calibration image is
taken against a vertical wall.
Conclusion
As we can see each of the different techniques produced
different altitude estimates for the same flight. When compared
to the altimeters the Inclinometer results varied by as much as
30% from the actual altitude. The ground photography technique
achieved similar results, while the aerial photography was a
little better.
If you are performing experiments where it is very important
to measure altitude accurately then altimeters are really your
only option, When flying casually and you just want to know
approximately how high your rocket went then the other
techniques could be used.
Let's have a look at some of the advantages and disadvantages
of using each of the techniques.
Technique
Advantages
Disadvantages
Inclinometer
Inexpensive
If you lose the rocket, you don't lose
your measurement device,
No drag/weight penalty on the
rocket.
Typically need at least two people to operate,
one to sight the rocket and one to launch it.
Not very accurate. Greater elevation angles lead
to less accuracy. Accuracy is also affected by
non-vertical flights.
You need to measure the distance to the launch
pad.
Ground Photography
May already have a camera so may be less expensive
than an inclinometer.
If you lose the rocket, you don't
lose your measurement device.
No drag/weight penalty on the rocket
When using video you can get additional data
such as acceleration and velocity.
Not very accurate, You need to have the entire
flight within the field of view of the camera.
You need to measure the distance to the launch
pad.
Need at least two people to operate, Although
with video you could just have one person.
Aerial Photography
You may already have a camera on board so may not be
more expensive.
Can be more accurate than ground photography or
inclinometer.
The camera needs to be able to see the ground at apogee
You need
to have something of known size on ground. The larger
the better.
You have a weight and possibly drag penalty.
Altimeters
Most accurate.
With recording altimeters you can get additional
data such as acceleration and velocity.
Can also be used for parachute deployment when
sensing apogee.
Can be expensive
You may lose an expensive altimeter if you lose
your rocket.