Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

37
Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011

Transcript of Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Page 1: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Critical Design Review Presentation

Jan. 20, 2011

Page 2: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Outline Report

• Rocket Body and Structure  • Flight Simulations

 • Payload and Electronics Bay

 • Educational Outreach

Page 3: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Major Changes

• For greater stability the rocket was made shorter (2.80 m instead of 3.12 m)

• Acrylic window for the payload bay

• Mini-camera

Page 4: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Rocket Body Specs

• Dimensions:– Length: 2.80 m

– Diameter: 102 mm

– Empty Mass: 7.72 kg

– CG Location: 1.68 m

– CP Location: 2.38 m

• Motor Specifications:– Motor: Aerotech K828FJ-6

– Length: 57.9 cm

– Diameter: 54 mm

– Impulse: 2157 Ns

– Max Altitude: 1625 m

– Max Velocity: 216 m/s (Mach 0.64)

Page 5: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Rocket Body and Structure

 Body

Recovery (Vehicle)Engine housing system Payload housing system

Page 6: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Static margin

CG: at 1.72 m from noseconeCP: at 2.38 m from nosecone

Static margin: 0.66 m

Page 7: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Payload integration feasibility• Payload encapsulated in a removable easy-to-access body tube we

call the payload bayo Can attach in different components directly to it

• Bulkheads located on both sides of the payload bayo Provide protection from the ejection blastso Each has two ½’’ holes to allow more components to also be attached. Steel

rods attach to these hole and travel the length of the payload.

Page 8: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Payload integration feasibility• First the Payload tube slides over the electronics stack.

• Then the coupler and bulkhead together slide into the payload bay and are screwed into place via 12 M4s  

• To make this process easier the bulkheads may be glued into place on the couplers.

Page 9: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Outline Report

• Rocket Body and Structure  • Flight Simulations

 • Payload and Electronics Bay

 • Educational Outreach

Page 10: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Flight Simulations

Maximum acceleration: 135 m/s2

Maximum velocity: 216 m/sApogee: 1625 mTotal flight time: 130 s

Page 11: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Rail exit velocity

16 m/s at 1 m altitude (53 ft/s at 3.3 ft)

Page 12: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Thrust to Weight RatioInitial mass: 9.0 kgInitial thrust: 1100 N

Thrust to weight ratio: 12.5

Page 13: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Parachute sizes and descent ratesDrogue Chute

SkyAngle 20nylond = 72.2 cmcD = 0.8deployed at apogee (1625 m / 1 mi)

descend at 20 m/s (65.6 ft/s)

Main ChuteSkyAngle 44nylond = 158.0 cmcD = 1.87deployed at 245m (800 ft)

descend at 5.5 m/s (18 ft/s)

Page 14: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Test plans and procedures

• Each component of rocket will be tested, individually where applicable

• Electronics bay subassembly will be tested as a whole

Page 15: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Ejection charge tests

Ejection charge tests currently scheduled for February 12

The test is composed of two stages:

• Determine size of the charge • Based on recommendations and past experience

• Live test• Particularly interested in the interaction between the two independent sets of

charges

Page 16: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Scale model flight test

Due to the delays with parts delivery we decided to upgrade our scale model flight test to a full scale flight test

Full-scale flight tests planned forFeb 19-20, Mar 12-13, Mar 26-27

Page 17: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Safety Plan

• Review of planned test procedure before each test

• Review of MSDS safety information applicable to each test

• Check each other’s work (theoretical and in the field)

Page 18: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Outline Report

• Rocket Body and Structure  • Flight Simulations

 • Payload and Electronics Bay

 • Educational Outreach

Page 19: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Altimeters

Camera Mechanism

Sensors

Arduino

Acrylic window

Payload Bay

Page 20: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Payload Overview• Processing - Arduino

microcontroller

• Atmospheric Sensors - temperature, pressure, humidity

• Optical Sensors – UV, Solar Irradiance

• Imaging – Camera mechanism

• Recovery (Electronics) – TeleMetrum and PerfectFlight Altimeters

Page 21: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Sensors• 1-wire devices

- Humidity/Solar

- UV

• Temperature

• Pressure

• Difficulties in interfacing 1-wire devices UV Sensor

Humidity/Solar Sensor

Pressure

Page 22: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Data storage

SD card shield for the Arduino

• SD card shield – quick, easy data collection

• Requires fewer pins

• USB vs. SD

- Simplicity

- Interfacing

- USB: Programming complications

vs.

USB shield

Page 23: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Dual Deployment Avionics• PerfectFlite MAWD and Altus Metrum Telemetrum will be

mounted side by side

• Successful ground tests using LEDs for both altimeters by simulating launch

• LEDs were placed at ejection charge terminals in place of ejection charges

Page 24: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Telemetrum GPS Tests• Time taken until GPS

lock will be measured

• Current Process - Verification

- GPS accuracy

- Range of connection to ground computer

- Battery life AltOS interface

Page 25: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Recovery Electronics – Launch Process

 

Page 26: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Camera Mechanism

Two Components:

• Camera

• Camera Mount / Positioning

Page 27: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Camera

• The Camera takes pictures during the launch, descent, and landing of the Rocket

• Camera must be small enough to fit in Optical section of Payload

• Interfaced with storage unit to compress and save photos

Page 28: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Camera Positioning

• Mechanism to position camera to take well oriented images

Page 29: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Camera Positioning

Page 30: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Positioning Vector

Page 31: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Micro Camera

• Multiple micro cameras in various orientations

• Continuous video capture

• Inexpensive

• Lightweight

Page 32: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Outline Report

• Rocket Body and Structure  • Flight Simulations • Payload and Electronics Bay • Educational Outreach

Page 33: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Engineering Open Houseo University event hosted by studentso Exhibitions to generate interest in engineeringo Elementary through college students, general publico Discussing our rocket, rocketry basicso Space Shuttle tile, rocket reentry

Page 34: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

o Illinois Space Society sponsored evento Middle and high school students from Illinois o Getting students interested in spaceo Demonstration discussing our rocketo Two rocket competitions

o Rocket kits for middle school studentso Junkyard rockets for high school students

Illinois Space Day

Page 35: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Intended Schedule

Page 36: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Change in Rocket Name

Page 37: Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.

Questions?