NODDEX: Nitric Oxide and Dust Detector EXperiment Preliminary Design Review
description
Transcript of NODDEX: Nitric Oxide and Dust Detector EXperiment Preliminary Design Review
2012
PDR
NODDEX: Nitric Oxide and Dust Detector EXperiment
Preliminary Design Review
Virginia Tech/Baylor UniversityPresented by Stephen Noel
December 7, 2011
1
2012
PDR
PDR Presentation Content
2
• Section 1: Mission Overview– Mission Overview– Organizational Chart– Theory and Concepts– Concept of Operations– Expected Results
• Section 2: System Overview– Subsystem Definitions– Critical Interfaces – System Level Block Diagram– System/Project Level Requirement Verification Plan– User Guide Compliance– Sharing Logistics with UW
2012
PDR
PDR Presentation Contents
• Section 3: Subsystem Design– Data Logger Trade Study– NO Sensor
• NO Block Diagram• PDD Risk Matrix/Mitigation
– PDD• PDD Block Diagram• PDD Risk Matrix/Mitigation
– IMU• IMU Block Diagram• IMU Risk Matrix/Mitigation
3
2012
PDR
PDR Presentation Contents
• Section 4: Prototyping Plan– NO Prototyping (or reuse)– PDD Prototyping and Testing
• Section 5: Project Management Plan– Schedule – Budget– Work Breakdown Structure
4
2012
PDR
Mission OverviewStephen Noel
5
2012
PDR
Mission Overview
• Nitric Oxide (NO) sensor implementation– Measure concentration of NO as a function
of altitude– Flight heritage in RockSat-C (NOIME)
• Piezo Dust Detector (PDD)– Collect measurements of velocity and
energy from incoming dust particles– Existing flight heritage on UT satellite
6
2012
PDR
Mission Overview
• Utilize Nitric Oxide sensor for NO concentration data collection in high altitudes– IMU data to accompany NO data– Optimal senor orientation– Successful data transmission and storage– Mechanical and thermal securing for reentry
• Successful implementation of Piezo Dust Detector and collection of space dust impact energy readings for Baylor University
– Successful data transmission and storage– Mechanical and thermal securing for reentry
7
2012
PDR
Organizational Chart
8
Graduate Advisor:
Robbie Robertson
Faculty Advisor:
Dr. Troy Henderson
2012
PDR
Theory and Concepts
• Utilizing NO sensor and IMU from NOIME (RockSat-C flight heritage)– NO sensor collects wavelength data
around 220nm– NO sensor oriented at 45 degrees to catch
light off of upper atmosphere– Stepped conical shape on the inside to
allow only direct rays– IMU collects acceleration, angular rate,
and magnetic field data
9
2012
PDR
Theory and Concepts
• Piezo Dust Detector (PDD)– Little flight heritage– Stacked webs of charged wires which
filter particles measuring dust velocity and energy
10
2012
PDR
NODDEX ConOps (for Terrier-Orion)
t ≈ 15 min
Splash Down
t ≈ TBD
Altitude: TBD
Skirt Released,
NO data collection
-NO, IME, and PDD
sensors on
-Begin data collection
t = 0 min
t ≈ 4.0 min
Altitude: 95 km
NO data collectionApogee
t ≈ 2.8 min
Altitude: ≈115 km
End of Orion Burn
t ≈ 0.6 min
Altitude: 52 km
t ≈ 4.5 min
Altitude: 75 km
Reentry
Altitude
t ≈ 5.5 min
Chute Deploys
2012
PDR
Expected Results
12
• Utilizing NO sensor and IMU from NOIME (RockSat-C flight heritage)– NO sensor collects wavelength data
around 220nm– Compare data to current atmospheric
models
• Still need expected PDD results data from Baylor University
2012
PDR
System OverviewStephen Noel
13
2012
PDR
Subsystem Overview
14
IMU
Amplifiers
2012
PDR
Critical Interfaces
15
Interface Name Brief Description Potential Solution
IMU/Transceiver/Log1 and TM
IMU mounts to RockSat-X deck rigidly. RS482 connection into transceiver, RS232 connection from transceiver into data logger 1 and to the TM output.
Determine physical connectors needed. Transceiver will convert the RS482 signal to RS232 standard.
NO/Femto amplifier/Post amplifier/Log2
and TM
NO sensor rigidly connected to RockSat-X deck. RS232 connection from NO sensor to Femto amplifier. Femto Amplifier connected to a post amplifier. Outputs into data logger 2 and TM by analog pin.
Decide on post amplifier (produce or buy?). Determine specific connectors needed. Determine how to connect hardware to deck.
PDD/Log3 and TM
PDD rigidly connected to RockSat-X deck. RS 232 connection to data logger 3 and serial TM pin.
Determine how to connect hardware to deck. Determine specific connectors needed.
2012
PDR
System Level Block Diagram
16
Analog
2012
PDR
Requirement Verification
17
Requirement Verification Method Description
Optimal NO senor orientation and successful data transmission and storage
Demonstration Will verify calibration with simulation in lab assisted by Dr. Bailey
The full system shall fit on a single RockSat-X deck
Inspection Visual inspection will verify this requirement
The system shall survive the vibration characteristics prescribed by the RockSat-X program.
Test The system will be subjected to these vibration loads in June during testing week.
2012
PDR
RockSat-X 2011 User’s Guide Compliance
18
• Rough Order of Magnitude mass estimates pending• Payload components are relatively small, no layout problems
expects• No deployables needed• TM connector pin allocation:
Wyoming/VT TM connector:1 Analog (pin 10)1 RS232 Data (pin 32)1 RS232 Ground (pin 33)
Colorado TM Connector:1 RS232 Data (pin 32)1 RS232 Ground (pin 33)
• Using two timer event pins and one GSE• CG will be kept within +/- 1 inch of center of deck • The PDD uses 3W, need to allocate power appropriately
RS-X Shared Power ConnectorPin Function Team1 GSE-1 WYO2 TE-RA
WYO3 TE-RB4 TE-NR1 WYO5 GND WYO6 GND WYO7 GND WYO8 GND WYO9 GSE-2 VT
10 TE-NR2 VT11 TE-NR3 VT12 GND VT13 GND VT14 GND VT
15 GND VT
2012
PDR
Sharing Logistics
19
• Payload area will be shared with UW– The AstroX team strives to test an
electrically active heat shield prototype
• Plan for collaboration– Team leads will stay in contact via email– SolidWorks models, mass budgets, power
budgets, etc. are shared through a joint drop box account
2012
PDR
Subsystem DesignStephen Noel
20
2012
PDR
Trade Studies
21
Data Logger
Persistor CF2 Logomatic v2
Cost 10 8Availability 10 9
Size 6 8Data Storage 7 8
Ease of Programming
5 10
Average: 7.6 8.6
• Open access to spare Persistors, where as would need to purchase a third Logomatic
• Logomatic requires little to no programming to initialize whereas Persistor requires working knowledge of C language
• Equivalent length and width, but Persistor is approximately twice as thick as Logomatic*Most other hardware is legacy
2012
PDR
NO: Block Diagram
22
Analog
Amplifies very weak signal from NO sensor
Amplifies with a gain of ~10
2012
PDR
NO: Risk Matrix
23
NO.RSK.1: Data Logger fails in-flight, Wallops telemetry data corrupted, no data received or recoveredNO.RSK.2: NO pointing insufficient for data collectionNO.RSK.3: NO probe does not survive heating of reentryNO.RSK.4: NO probe critically damaged by salt water exposureNO.RSK.5: NO post amplifier fails, no reliable data receivedNO.RSK.6: NO Femto amplifier fails, no reliable data received
2012
PDR
PDD: Block Diagram
24
Needs 5V and up to 3W
2012
PDR
PDD: Risk Matrix
25
PDD.RSK.1: Data Logger fails in-flight, Wallops telemetry data corrupted, no data received or recoveredPDD.RSK.2: PDD does not provide reliable data, not calibrated correctlyPDD.RSK.3: PDD does not survive heating of reentryPDD.RSK.4: PDD critically damaged by salt water exposure
2012
PDR
IMU: Block Diagram
26
Convert RS482 to RS232
Use less reliable serial line
2012
PDR
IMU: Risk Matrix
27
IMU.RSK.1: Data Logger fails in-flight, Wallops telemetry data corrupted, no data received or recoveredIMU.RSK.2: IMU does not provide reliable data, not calibrated correctlyIMU.RSK.3: IMU does not survive heating of reentryIMU.RSK.4: IMU critically damaged by salt water exposureIMU.RSK.5: IMU transceiver fails, no data received
2012
PDR
Prototyping PlanStephen Noel
28
2012
PDR
Prototyping Plan
29
Orientation of the sensor and the field of view requiredNO sensor
PDD
Post Amplifier
Concerns about testing and calibrating the PDD in the lab
to determine the expected data
The amplification is enough so that the outputs from Femto
Amplifier is detectable
Verify the vertical distance to Wyoming’s plate so that it does not
obstruct the field of view of the sensor. Place sensor as close to
edge of plate as possible.
Work with Baylor University and determine their method of
calibration and expected results
Testing to make sure that the gain of the post amplifier is
high enough
Risk/Concern Action
2012
PDR
Project Management PlanStephen Noel
30
2012
PDR
Schedule
31
2012
PDR
Budget
32
NODDEX BudgetUpdated: 12/7/2011
Item Supplier Estimated or Specific Cost Number Required Total Cost Notes
NO Sensor In-house $0.00 1 $0.00 Will make in shop if needed
PDD Sensor Baylor U $0.00 1 $0.00 Already have
IMU None $0.00 1 $0.00 Already have
Femto amplifier Femto $0.00 $0.00 Already have
Post amplifier TBD 1 Cost TBD
New Data Logger SparkFun $60.00 1 $60.00
Old Data Loggers SparkFun $0.00 2 $0.00 Already have
Testing Materials N/A $200 1 $200.00 Misc.
$260.00 Subtotal
$325.00 w/ 25% margin
2012
PDR
WBS (Work Breakdown Structure)
33
NO PDD IMU
•Finish obtaining design criteria from Dr. Bailey
•Redesign if necessary
•Test and implement
•Obtain SolidWorks drawings from Baylor
•Receive and test prototype
•Implement
•Test last year’s IMU
•Decide if we will design platform for IMU similar to other years
•Implement
2012
PDR
Conclusion
34