Rocket Engineering Enrichment Program

A Hands-On Rocket Engineering Experience

Estes Alpha III illustration

What happens when you combine engineering, physics, teamwork, and real rocket launches?

Students don’t just learn about rockets—they build one, launch it, analyze it, and discover the science that makes it fly.

This enrichment program is a project-based introduction to aerospace engineering and scientific thinking. Through a series of engaging hands-on activities, students explore how real engineers design, test, and improve rockets while developing problem-solving skills that extend far beyond the launch field.


What Students Will Do

Throughout the program students will:

  • Build and personalize their own model rocket
  • Learn how rockets generate thrust
  • Explore Newton’s Laws of Motion through demonstrations and experiments
  • Discover how fins, mass, and balance affect stability
  • Measure rocket performance using real flight data
  • Practice engineering design through testing and redesign
  • Safely launch their own rocket
  • Take their completed rocket home
Build-Launch-Discover

Every lesson combines a short interactive presentation with hands-on activities that keep students actively engaged.


Rocket diagram labeled

Engineering Through Experience

Students experience the ideas firsthand.

Activities include:

  • Balloon rocket experiments
  • Paper rocket design challenges
  • Rocket stability investigations
  • Model rocket construction
  • Flight prediction and analysis
  • Real launch procedures
  • Engineering design challenges

Students are encouraged to ask questions, make predictions, test ideas, and improve their designs just as engineers do.


Program Overview flowchart

Safety Comes First

Safety first poster

Model rocketry has been enjoyed safely for decades when proper procedures are followed.

Students learn:

  • Launch range safety
  • Rocket inspection procedures
  • Safe motor installation
  • Launch pad operation
  • Countdown and launch protocols
  • Recovery procedures

Safety isn’t simply discussed—it becomes part of the engineering process through structured checklists and instructor supervision.


What Makes This Program Different?

Newton's 3rd Law: Action-Reaction

Designed for curious minds. Whether a student dreams of becoming an engineer, loves building things, or simply enjoys discovering how the world works, this program provides an exciting introduction to STEM through one of the most inspiring engineering projects ever created—a flying rocket.

Every student leaves with new knowledge, greater confidence, practical engineering experience, and a rocket they built themselves. The program connects each activity into a complete engineering experience where students learn how scientific ideas explain what they observe.

Topics include:

  • Newton’s Laws of Motion
  • Thrust and propulsion
  • Aerodynamics
  • Stability and center of gravity
  • Drag and recovery systems
  • Measurement and data collection
  • Engineering design and iteration

Concepts are presented in an age-appropriate way, emphasizing curiosity and understanding rather than heavy mathematics.


Ready for Launch?

Whether your child is fascinated by space, enjoys building things, or simply loves asking “How does that work?”, this enrichment program provides an exciting opportunity to learn through doing.

What’s Included

Eight hands-on STEM sessions

Alpha III model rocket kit

Launch motor(s)

All classroom materials

Safety instruction

Final launch event with experienced rocketeers

Interested in bringing Rocket Engineering to your school, homeschool group, or enrichment program?

Contact me for upcoming sessions, scheduling, and registration details.

The Tsiolkovsky Rocket Equation: From Conservation of Momentum to a Model Rocket

The Tsiolkovsky Rocket Equation is one of the most elegant results in classical mechanics. Despite describing everything from hobby rockets to missions leaving the Solar System, the underlying mathematics is surprisingly approachable. Starting with nothing more than conservation of momentum and a little calculus, we can derive an equation that predicts the maximum velocity change a rocket is capable of producing–often called “Delta-V”.

In this article we’ll derive the rocket equation from first principles and then apply it to a familiar model rocket—the Estes Alpha III powered by a B4-4 engine.


Why Rockets Are Different

Most vehicles push against something already present.

  • A car pushes against the road.
  • An airplane pushes against the air.
  • A boat pushes against the water.

A rocket is different because it carries its own reaction mass. High-speed exhaust gases are expelled from the nozzle, and by Newton’s Third Law the rocket is accelerated in the opposite direction.

A rocket becomes lighter as it accelerates because it is continuously throwing away part of its own mass (the fuel). That changing mass is exactly what makes rockets mathematically interesting.


Step 1 — Start with Conservation of Momentum

Illustration of Momentum Exchange in a Rocket

The total momentum of the rocket and the expelled exhaust must remain constant. Momentum is defined as

\[
p = mv
\]

If the rocket starts from rest, the momentum of the rocket must exactly balance the momentum carried away by the exhaust gases.

\[
m_{\text{fuel}} v_e + m_{\text{rocket}} v = 0
\]

or

\[
m_{\text{fuel}} v_e = -m_{\text{rocket}} v
\]

The negative sign simply reminds us that the rocket and exhaust travel in opposite directions.


Step 2 — Recognize that Mass is Changing

This equation is only true for an instant in time because things keep changing. As fuel burns,

  • total rocket mass decreases,
  • fuel mass decreases as it leaves the rocket as exhaust
  • rocket velocity increases.

Instead of dealing with finite changes, we examine an infinitesimally small amount of fuel leaving the rocket.

This gives

\[
dm \, v_e = – M_r \, dv
\]

where

  • \(dm\) is a tiny amount of fuel expelled,
  • \(v_e\) is the exhaust velocity
  • \(M_r\) is the instantaneous rocket mass,
  • \(dv\) is the tiny increase in rocket velocity.

Step 3 — Separate the Variables

Rearranging to solve for the rocket’s velocity \(dv\) gives

\[
\frac{v_e}{M_r} \, dm = – dv
\]

or

\[
dv = – v_e \frac{dm}{M_r}
\]

Now the rocket’s changing velocity (\(dv\)) is one side and the changing fuel mass (\(dm\)) is on the other. This form is ready for integration.


Step 4 — Integrate During the Entire Burn

Assuming the exhaust velocity remains approximately constant during the burn,

\[
\int_{v_0}^{v_f} dv =
– v_e \, \int_{M_0}^{M_f}
\frac{1}{M_r} \, dm
\]

The left side is straightforward,

\[
v_f \, – \, v_0 = \Delta v
\]

while the right side becomes the natural logarithm,

\[
-v_e \left[\ln M_f \, – \, \ln M_0\right]
\]

Using logarithm identities,

\[
\boxed{\Delta v = v_e
\ln\left(\frac{M_0}{M_f}\right)}
\]

This is the famous Tsiolkovsky Rocket Equation.


Applying the Equation to an Estes Alpha III

Now let’s see how well this ideal equation predicts the performance of a real model rocket. For this example we’ll use the specifications provided on the Estes website:

Estes Alpha III

  • Empty rocket mass: 34.0 g

Estes B4-4 Motor

  • Motor mass: 19.3 g
  • Propellant mass: 7.6 g
  • Total impulse: 5.0 N·s
  • Burn time: 1.10 s

The rocket begins flight carrying the full motor. Therefore

\[
M_0 = 34.0 + 19.3 = 53.3\text{ g}
\]

After the propellant is burned,

\[
M_f = 53.3 \, – \, 7.6 = 45.7\text{ g}
\]

The mass ratio is therefore

\[
\frac{M_0}{M_f} = 1.166
\]

Taking the natural logarithm,

\[
\ln(1.166) = 0.154
\]

The remaining unknown is the effective exhaust velocity, \(v_e\). One estimate comes from the motor’s total impulse, which is provided in the motor’s specification sheet.

Impulse is the total push delivered by a force over time:

\[
I = F_{\text{avg}} \cdot \Delta t
\]

Impulse is also equal to a change in momentum:

\[
I = \Delta p
\]

Since momentum is

\[
p = mv
\]

the motor’s impulse can be interpreted as the momentum carried away by the expelled propellant. If the propellant mass is \(m_p\) and the effective exhaust velocity is \(v_e\), then

\[
I \approx m_p v_e
\]

This is an idealized estimate, but it gives us a useful value for the rocket equation.

For the B4-4 motor:

\[
I = 5.0 \, \text{N} \cdot \text{s}
\\
m_p = 0.0076 \, \text{kg}
\]

Solving for effective exhaust velocity:

\[
v_e = \frac{I}{m_p}
\]

\[
v_e = \frac{5.0}{0.0076}
\approx 658 \, \text{m/s}
\]

Now substitute this into the rocket equation:

\[
\boxed{\Delta v = v_e
\ln\left(\frac{M_0}{M_f}\right)}
\]

Using the previously calculated mass ratio,

\[
\ln\left(\frac{M_0}{M_f}\right) = \ln(1.166) \approx 0.154
\]

Therefore,

\[
\Delta v = (658)(0.154)
\approx 101 \, \text{m/s}
\]

The ideal rocket equation predicts a maximum velocity change of approximately

\[
\boxed{\Delta v \approx 100 \, \text{m/s}}
\]

or about

\[
\boxed{225 \, \text{mph}}
\]


Alpha III mass loss diagram

Why Doesn’t the Rocket Reach This Speed?

If you’ve ever watched an Alpha III launch, you may notice that measured peak velocities are usually lower than this calculation predicts.

That’s because the Tsiolkovsky Rocket Equation is an ideal model.

It assumes:

  • no aerodynamic drag,
  • no gravity losses during powered flight,
  • perfectly constant exhaust velocity,
  • no energy lost to heating or turbulence.

A real rocket experiences all of these effects simultaneously.

Computer flight simulators such as OpenRocket include drag, changing thrust curves, atmospheric density, gravity, and coast phase dynamics, producing much more realistic predictions.

The rocket equation, however, still serves as the fundamental theoretical limit on rocket performance.


Final Thoughts

One of the remarkable aspects of the rocket equation is that it emerges from only two ideas:

  • Newton’s Third Law
  • Conservation of Momentum

Everything else follows naturally from calculus.

Although hobby rockets are tiny compared to launch vehicles carrying satellites or astronauts, they obey exactly the same physics. Whether launching an Estes Alpha III from a school field or sending a spacecraft toward Mars, every rocket ultimately answers to the same elegant equation first derived by Konstantin Tsiolkovsky over a century ago.

Revisiting Eddington: Measuring Starlight Deflection

In 1919, Arthur S. EddingtonFrank W. Dyson, and Mr. C. Davidson famously led an expedition to photograph a total solar eclipse and confirm Einstein’s prediction that massive bodies like the Sun could bend starlight. That photographic evidence became one of the first major tests of General Relativity. Here, using a digital remaster of the image, I’ll attempt to recreate the experiment measurements.

Tools and Data

These are the things needed to get going:

  • high-quality digitized image of the 1919 eclipse from ESO (link). This version uses image processing techniques to improve the image quality from the original photo plates.
  • sky map from Stellarium, set to the same region of sky but offset by 6 months to avoid the Sun’s interference.
  • Affinity Photo for image overlay and alignment.
  • Manual centroiding and pixel measurements to detect deflection.

Image Alignment

To ensure accuracy, I anchored both images using two distant reference stars — HR 1375 and 69 Tauri that are far enough from the eclipsed Sun to remain unaffected by gravitational lensing.

I loaded the original eclipse image as the background layer in Affinity Photo and locked it in place. Then I added the Stellarium-generated star field as a transparent overlay on top. By adjusting the opacity, I was able to see both sets of stars simultaneously for alignment. Notably, the star images from Stellarium appear significantly larger than the more compact and sharper ESO eclipse stars. In the cutouts shown in Figure 1, you can clearly see the difference. Each Stellarium star forms a large diffuse blob and the ESO image has its star as a bright point at the center.

After carefully stretching, rotating, and nudging the top layer, I aligned the two images so that the reference stars matched. It took a fair bit of trial and error, but I eventually achieved alignment within ±0.5 pixel, which is pretty decent for a manual process. This gave me confidence that any measured offsets for stars near the Sun were not due to alignment error — a point further supported by the zoomed-in cutouts shown in Figure 1, where the distant stars remain well-aligned.

Figure 1: Zoomed-in cutouts of reference and target stars. HR 1375 and 69 Tauri were used to align the two image layers within ±0.5 pixel. 67 Tauri shows a slight offset down and to the right, approximately 0.5-1.0 pixels — consistent with gravitational deflection predicted by General Relativity.

Here’s the annotated overlay, with 67 Tauri circled, and a zoomed inset revealing a small but visible offset between the eclipse photo and the reference sky.

potw1926a with Stellurium overlay annotated

Measuring the Deflection

The distance between 65 Tauri and 67 Tauri in the eclipse photo was measured as:

  • 158.7 pixels — determined by measuring the horizontal and vertical offsets between the two stars and applying Pythagoras’ theorem: \( \sqrt{105^2 + 119^2} \approx 158.7\)
  • Calculated angular separation340 arcseconds

This gives a plate scale of

Scale = 340 arcsec / 158.7 pixels ≈ 2.14 arcsec/pixel

Zooming in on 67 Tauri, the observed centroid deflection between the reference and eclipse position is down and right and approximately:

[0.75 to 1 pixels] × 2.14 arcsec/pixel ≈ 1.61 to 2.14 arcseconds

Comparison to Einstein’s Prediction

\( \delta = \frac{4GM}{c^2 R} \)

This is Einstein’s formula for the deflection angle ( \( \delta \) ) of starlight grazing the Sun, where:

Gravitational constant: \( G = 6.674 \times 10^{-11}~\text{m}^3\,\text{kg}^{-1}\,\text{s}^{-2} \\ \)
Mass of the Sun: \( M = 1.989 \times 10^{30}~\text{kg} \\ \)
Speed of light: \( c = 3.00 \times 10^8~\text{m/s}\\ \)
R is the radius/distance from the Sun’s center where the light ray is passing

At the solar limb where R is the same as the Sun’s radius then:

\( R = R_\odot = 6.96 \times 10^8~\text{m} \). Substitute this into the formula like so:

\( \delta = \frac{4GM}{c^2 R_\odot}
= \frac{4 \times (6.674 \times 10^{-11}) \times (1.989 \times 10^{30})}
{(3.00 \times 10^8)^2 \times (6.96 \times 10^8)} \)

\( \delta \approx 8.487 \times 10^{-6} \text{ radians} \), the deflection angle at the Sun’s rim.

And converting radians arcseconds (206265 arcseconds per radian) we get

\( \delta \approx 8.487 \times 10^{-6} \times 206265 \approx 1.75 \) arcseconds

Adjust for 67 Tauri’s apparent distance from the Sun

For 67 Tauri, which lies approximately 1.2–1.5 solar radii (r) from the Sun’s center, the expected deflection is:

\( \delta = \frac{4GM}{c^2 R_\odot} \cdot \frac{R_\odot}{r} \approx \frac{1.75^{”}}{r} \)

\( \delta \approx 1.17^{”} \quad \text{to} \quad 1.46^{”} \)

So, the measured deflection of approximately 1.61 to 2.14 arcseconds is a bit higher than expected. However, given error sources like:

  • Image projection distortions
  • Inaccuracies in the Stellarium overlay projection
  • Sub-pixel centroiding uncertainty
  • Manual centroiding for alignment and offset detection

…the result is remarkably close and very much in the spirit of Eddington’s original work.

This small experiment was a fun way to relive one of the greatest moments in science. With a bit of patience and publicly available images, it’s possible to experience Eddington’s achievement for yourself.


Angular Separation Calculation

To calculate the angular separation between 65 Tauri and 67 Tauri, use coordinates:

65 Tauri
RA = 04ʰ 25ᵐ 22.1655ˢ = 66.34235°
Dec = +22° 17′ 37.9375″ = +22.29387°

67 Tauri
RA = 04ʰ 25ᵐ 25.0152ˢ = 66.35423°
Dec = +22° 11′ 59.9876″ = +22.19999°

The spherical angular separation formula:

\(\theta = \arccos\left[
\sin(\delta_1)\sin(\delta_2) +
\cos(\delta_1)\cos(\delta_2)\cos(\alpha_1 – \alpha_2)
\right]\)

Substituting the values (converted to radians):

\(\alpha_1 = 1.157892441 \, \text{rad}, \quad \alpha_2 = 1.158099786 \, \text{rad}\)

\(\delta_1 = 0.3891014345 \, \text{rad}, \quad \delta_2 = 0.3874629194 \, \text{rad}\)

\(\theta = \arccos\left[\sin(0.38910..)\sin(0.38746..) + \cos(0.38910..)\cos(0.38746..)\cos(1.15789.. – 1.15809..) \right]\)

\(\theta \approx \arccos(0.9999986392) \approx 0.001649 \, \text{rad}\)

Converting to arcseconds:

\(\theta = 0.0016497 \times \frac{180 \times 3600}{\pi} \approx 340\)

So, the angular separation between 65 Tauri and 67 Tauri is approximately \( \boxed{340~\text{arcseconds}}\).

Physics Unit – Electricity and Electric Fields

(Teaching Materials)

I am sharing a set of instructional materials from my Honors Physics unit on Electricity and Electric Fields. The collection includes lesson materials, mini-lessons, assessments, and laboratory activities designed for a typical high-school physics sequence covering circuits, Coulomb’s Law, and electric fields.

The unit follows a logical progression beginning with electric circuits and current, moving through Ohm’s Law and electrical power, and concluding with electrostatics, Coulomb’s Law, and electric field concepts.

These resources were developed for classroom use and emphasize conceptual understanding, algebraic reasoning, and real-world applications of electromagnetism.

Contents of the Download

  • Lesson Docs: Core lesson notes and structured instructional materials used during class.
  • Mini-Lessons: Short concept explanations and worked examples used to introduce or reinforce key ideas.
  • Worksheets: Guided practice problems and structured exercises designed to strengthen algebraic reasoning and physics problem-solving skills.
  • Quizzes and Tests: Assessments used throughout the unit to evaluate student understanding of circuits, Coulomb’s Law, and electric fields.
  • Labs: Hands-on investigations including circuit construction, resistance experiments, and mapping electric field lines.

Download the full folder here

APEX – A Framework for Smarter Problem Solving

We all run into problems—physics problems, real-life emergencies, coding frustrations, lab setups, you name it. The instinct is often to jump straight into action, but that’s usually how mistakes get made. APEX is a simple framework I use in physics and in everyday thinking to slow things down, bring structure to the chaos, and make better decisions.

APEX stands for:
Assess → Plan → Execute → eXamine

It works because it gives you a sequence. Order matters. You can’t plan before you understand the situation, you shouldn’t execute before you have a plan, and you definitely shouldn’t walk away before checking if things actually worked.


Why APEX?

APEX turns “where do I even start?” into something predictable and manageable. Whether you’re solving a Coulomb’s Law problem or dealing with a real-world emergency, the steps don’t change. Break the problem into parts, think clearly, and avoid panic.


The Four Steps

1. Assess

What do you know? What don’t you know? What’s the situation?
This step is about gathering information without judgment or rushing.

2. Plan

What tools, equations, or actions do you need?
You form a strategy—simple, clear, and executable.

3. Execute

Do the thing. In a physics problem, this means plugging in values, drawing diagrams, or performing the calculation. In real-life scenarios, this is where you actually act on your plan.

4. eXamine

Did it work? Does the answer make sense? Do you need to adjust anything?
Most problems don’t require perfection—they require reflection.


APEX Resource Files

I use APEX constantly in my physics classes. It’s especially helpful for problems that seem overwhelming at first glance. In the APEX document, I walk step-by-step through a Coulomb’s Law example involving two charged nanobots in a fluid channel. Students see how each APEX step narrows the chaos into a clean calculation.

The accompanying slide deck offers a concise visual version of the same idea, showing how Assess–Plan–Execute–eXamine can be taught quickly and reinforced frequently.

APEX is not just a classroom tool—it’s a mindset.

Move a WordPress Site to Azure App Service

Here is how to move a simple WordPress blog to Azure Web App Service. This method is not the simplest but it works well enough and is pretty clean.

Backup

Export the database with a tool such as phpMyAdmin. Then zip up all the files from the wp-content folder.

Or you could use a commercial plugin to to the backup and restore. I don’t like the ones I’ve tried and the manual way is fairly simple.

Create Web App in Azure

  1. In Azure portal, Create a New Resource
  2. Search for “WordPress” then create

Next, fill out the forms with values that make sense, although a few things to pay attention to are:

Database Provider

If your web site gets very little traffic, then choosing “MySQL In App” is reasonable and it’ll save money; About $250/month. The main limitation with this option is the site cannot scale out to handle sudden, heavy loads. However, you can “scale up” the service tier which may help.

App Service Options

App Service Plan

Choose the app service that’s right for you. In this example, we picked the lowest price tier and expect it’ll be upgraded later after some testing.

Keep in mind you can reasonably add up to 5 or so websites within a production tier service plan if they are low traffic and not resource needy.

D1 price tier

Configure WordPress

After the deployment, go to the resource overview page and copy the site’s URL.

Resource Overview Page

Follow URL to the WordPress setup page and do the initial setup.

Fill out the form to initialize WordPress then login to the fresh site. The username and such isn’t needed beyond getting logged in for the first time because in the next steps the whole site is restored from backup.

Initialize the WordPress site

Restore from the backup

How to do this part depends on what method used to backup the website. If you are using a plugin then install it and follow its instructions.

Manual restore

Manual restore is basically two steps:

  1. Import the database using the phpMyAdmin tool
  2. Upload the wp-content folder contents to the website

Import database – Click on “MySQL in App” on the left-side menu then find “Manage” to use the phpMyAdmin tool. Use phpMyAdmin to drop the existing database tables then import your site’s database.

Upload Files – First you need the login credentials. Look in Deployment Center -> “Deployment Credentials” to get what you need to connect to the document root of the web app, using SFTP.

Using your favorite SFTP application, connect to the website and upload your wp-content folder. I recommend zipping up the wp-content folder and upload that. Then connect using the console to unzip the file.

Find the SFTP URL and credentials

Console/Terminal – Click on “Console” in the left-side menu to use command line tools such as Zip, Gzip, Tar, etc.

Finish up

After the import is successful, login with an account from your restored website and do:

  1. Go to Settings -> Permalinks and click the Save button to rebuild them.
  2. Edit the wp-config file “Authentication Unique Keys and Salts” and perhaps other settings to reflect what you had before. Do Not replace the wp-config file outright because it is specifically configured to work with Azure.
  3. Back in the Deployment Center, disconnect from the gitHub repository; You don’t need it anymore.

Extras

For the most part, the site is ready to use and it’s a good idea to review everything is working now.

Fix URLs

Install “Better Search Replace” plugin to change your website URLs if needed. Usually this is because your domain name had to change. For example, “n390.com” moved to “n390.com”.

Add a custom domain name

After the content is imported you can browse the App Service URL and everything should be as it should. However, the hostname is using YOURWEBSITE.azurewebsites.net domain name.

On your Azure Web App blade’s left-side menu go to Custom Domain and click on “Add a custom domain”. Follow the instructions to validate ownership then it should be good-to-go.

Add TLS/SSL

Good news! SSL is available in Azure. But, if you want to add one to your custom domain, then you gotta upgrade to at least the Basic Plan.

Click on TLS/SSL settings in the left-side menu then look in “Private Key Certificates” to create your own. Follow these instructions for complete details.

az SSL managed cert