ATTOMIC ProjectATTOMIC Project

Austin Tests Thermodynamics of Austin Tests Thermodynamics of Moon’s Inner CrustMoon’s Inner Crust

11

Team IntroductionsTeam Introductions

Project ManagerProject Manager: Matthew Pensa: Matthew PensaSystems EngineerSystems Engineer: Donald Murrow: Donald Murrow

Ketan Awasthi Ketan Awasthi Zach BlunierZach BlunierJacob Chapman Jacob Chapman Michael KrauzMichael KrauzDaniel Lane Daniel Lane Ryan ReeceRyan ReeceJoshua SmithJoshua Smith

22

Overview and Mission ObjectiveOverview and Mission Objective

Mission ObjectiveMission ObjectiveTo measure the temperature of the moon’s regolith To measure the temperature of the moon’s regolith compared to the surface to test if the regolith is an compared to the surface to test if the regolith is an insulator using themocouples placed inside insulator using themocouples placed inside penetrators.penetrators.

Specifications and ConstraintsSpecifications and Constraints Total mass Total mass ≤ 3≤ 3 kg. This includes all support kg. This includes all support

equipment necessary.equipment necessary. The original Volumetric Envelope was 6”x6”x12” but The original Volumetric Envelope was 6”x6”x12” but

after discussion with Dr. Benfield the volumetric after discussion with Dr. Benfield the volumetric envelope was enlarged. envelope was enlarged.

Power allotted is 10 watts. Power allotted is 10 watts. 33

Deployment Mechanism Deployment Mechanism

Four spread out barrels each measuring Four spread out barrels each measuring different lengths so the penetrators will fire to different lengths so the penetrators will fire to different depths. different depths.

One Spherical shaped helium tank One Spherical shaped helium tank pressurized at 4500 psi.pressurized at 4500 psi.

Valve at top of each barrel to control when Valve at top of each barrel to control when helium is released.helium is released.

44

55

Ball Detents Spring loaded Hold penetrator in place

Barrel LipCatch detachable back end of

penetrator to control depth

66

Side ViewSide View77

Field TestField Test

88

Penetrator DesignsPenetrator Designs

Pros- Based on Pros- Based on Japan’s Lunar A Japan’s Lunar A mission. Smaller mission. Smaller diameter at tip. Low diameter at tip. Low Volume. Aerodynamic Volume. Aerodynamic in design.in design.

Cons- Will slow down Cons- Will slow down upon entering the upon entering the moon’s crust.moon’s crust.

Pros- Has a uniform Pros- Has a uniform diameter all the way diameter all the way through. through.

Cons- Has higher Cons- Has higher volume than other volume than other designs.designs.

Pros- Less Surface area Pros- Less Surface area to cause friction. to cause friction.

Cons- Could be difficult to Cons- Could be difficult to secure inside barrel secure inside barrel because of varied because of varied diameter.diameter.

99

Process of ruling out penetratorProcess of ruling out penetrator

We performed a field test to determine We performed a field test to determine which penetrator would be most sufficient which penetrator would be most sufficient for the mission. The experiment consisted for the mission. The experiment consisted of dropping the three penetrators from a of dropping the three penetrators from a measured height into a bucket of sand to measured height into a bucket of sand to and record how deep they penetrated. and record how deep they penetrated. Each penetrator was dropped three times Each penetrator was dropped three times in order to obtain an accurate in order to obtain an accurate measurement. measurement.

1010

Final PenetratorFinal Penetrator

After the field test, we concluded that After the field test, we concluded that Ryan’s design proved to be the most Ryan’s design proved to be the most effective because it penetrated the sand effective because it penetrated the sand the most efficiently.the most efficiently.

1111

Calculating Mass of the ATTOMIC ProjectPenetrators

Penetrator Volume of Body Tube (cm³) Volume of Nosecone (cm³) Volume of Cap (cm³) Mass of Body (g) Mass of Nosecone (g) Mass of Cap (g) Total Penetrator Mass (g)Michael's [A] 11.0284 3.62154 Ø 55.142 60.479718 Ø 115.621718Zach's [B] 6.47289 2.40889 Ø 32.36445 40.228463 Ø 72.592913Ryan's [C] 6.50566 1.60593 3.35934 32.5283 26.819031 56.100978 115.448309

Materials Material Density of Material (g/cc) x4 Penetrators (g)for Nosecone Tungsten Alloy 16.7 461.793236for Body Tube Titanium Glass Alloy 5

Deployment Mechanism

Pieces Volume of Indiv. Piece (cm³) Number of Pieces in Project Total Volume (cm³) Mass of Pieces (g)Helium Tank 1.25" 370.052 1 370.052 658.69256Barrel 1 (19.66") 92.8654 1 92.8654 46.4327Barrel 2 (15.53") 73.7254 1 73.7254 36.8627Barrel 3 (11.9025") 56.9122 1 56.9122 28.4561Barrel 4 (8.74") 42.2622 1 42.2622 42.2622Frame b/w Barrels 151.531 1 151.531 75.7655Pre-Barrel 21.9258 4 87.7032 43.8516Topper 2.81857 1 2.81857 1.409285Error Comp. 100

Materials Material Density of Material (g/cc) Mass of Deploy. Mech. (g)for Helium Tanks Carbon Fiber 1.78 933.732645for Barrels Carbon Foam 0.5for Frames Carbon Foam 0.5for Topper Carbon Foam 0.5

Tethers

Lengths (cm) Density of Cable+Kevlar (g/cm) Mass of Cables (g)90 0.29763 26.786780 0.29763 23.810470 0.29763 20.834160 0.29763 17.8578

Total Mass of Tethers (g)89.289

Total Mass of Project (g)1484.814881

Trade Studies & Experimental RiskTrade Studies & Experimental Risk

Unknown composition of regolith where Unknown composition of regolith where our penetrators will plunge into the soil.our penetrators will plunge into the soil.

Which materials to use.Which materials to use.Volume which the tether will occupy. Volume which the tether will occupy.

1313

Penetrator EquationPenetrator Equation

High-Velocity Equation (>61m/s)High-Velocity Equation (>61m/s)D=0.000018*S*N(m/A)D=0.000018*S*N(m/A)0.70.7(V-30.5)(V-30.5)

D: Depth penetratedD: Depth penetratedS: Penetrability coefficient of targetS: Penetrability coefficient of targetN: Nose performance coefficientN: Nose performance coefficientA: Cross sectional area of penetratorA: Cross sectional area of penetratorm: mass of penetratorm: mass of penetrator

1414

We would like to thank The University of We would like to thank The University of Alabama at Huntsville, Dr.Benfield, and Alabama at Huntsville, Dr.Benfield, and

Dr. Turner for this outsanding opportunity Dr. Turner for this outsanding opportunity which they have provided for us to create which they have provided for us to create

this experiment.this experiment.

1515

QuestionsQuestionsandand

DiscussionDiscussion

1616