Wichita State Launch Project K.I.S.S.

Transcription

1 Wichita State Launch Project K.I.S.S. Benjamin Russell Jublain Wohler Mohamed Moustafa Tarun Bandemagala

2 Outline Introduction Vehicle Overview Mission Predictions Payload Design Requirement Compliance Safety Project Plan

3 Introduction Objectives 1. Design, build, test and launch a reliable, robust vehicle within the limited time, resources, and manpower available. 2. Achieve an apogee altitude of, or as close as possible to, 5,280 ft AGL. 3. Successfully deploy a rover payload that will autonomously move and deploy a set of folded solar panels. 4. Win the Rookie of the Year Award and Safety Award.

4 Introduction Team Roles

5 Vehicle Overview - Configuration & Layout

6 Vehicle Overview - Overall Dimensions All dimensions in inches Total Length = 92, Diameter = 5.5

7 Vehicle Overview - Weight 21.7 lbf Gross Launch Weight

8 Vehicle Overview - Materials Body Tube Material Body Tube Cost (50%) Weight (20%) Strength (30%) Decision Carbon Fiber Dismissed Fiberglass Runner-up Blue Tube Selected

9 Vehicle Overview - Materials Fin Material Material Cost (30%) Weight (40%) Strength (30%) Decision Plastic Dismissed Plywood Runner-up Aluminum Selected

10 Vehicle Overview Tail Cone Assembly Centering Ring Motor Block Tail Cone (Boat tail)

11 Vehicle Overview - Aerodynamics Nose Cone Geometry Nose Shape Cost and Manufacturability (30%) Drag Properties (60%) Aesthetics (10%) Decision Conical Dismissed Tangent Ogive Selected Haack Series Runner-up

12 Vehicle Overview - Aerodynamics Fin Geometry Fin Type Structural Advantage (30%) Effectiveness (60%) Aesthetics (10%) Decision Tapered Swept Selected Rectangular Dismissed Trapezoidal Runner-up

13 Vehicle Overview - Aerodynamics Fin Configuration Fin Count Semi-Span Required Total Wetted Area (in) (in2) Decision Selected Runner-up Dismissed

14 Vehicle Overview - Recovery Recovery Concepts Concept 3-Section 3-Chute Vehicle undergoes drogue ejection event at apogee and main ejection & payload float away under canopy at lower altitude 3-Section 2-Chute Vehicle undergoes drogue ejection event at apogee and main ejection at lower altitude 2-Section 2-Chute Vehicle undergoes drogue + main ejection event at apogee and main chute release at lower altitude Advantages Disadvantages - Least likelihood of payload obstruction by vehicle - Most control over payload impact velocity - Increased complexity - Most possible points of failure (11) - Most system mass - Least complex recovery Scheme - Most conventional, failure modes known - More possible points of failure (8) - Least possible points of failure (7) - Least complex construction - Less likelihood of payload obstruction by vehicle - More expensive - Unconventional redundancy method (for chute release) Decision Dismissed Runner-Up Selected

15 Vehicle Overview - Recovery Main Parachute SMCD > 71 ft2 for Ground-hit speed < 15 ft/s Parachute Type CD Minimum Viable SM (ft2) Packed Vol. (in3) Mass (g) Decision Toroidal (at 60 diameter) Selected Elliptical (at 92 diameter) Dismissed

16 Vehicle Overview - Recovery Drogue Chute for tp = 0.6 seconds SDCD > 3.1 ft2 for Fmax < 150 lbf

17 Vehicle Overview - Recovery Main Parachute Drogue Chute Property Property Value Value Manufacturer Dino Chutes Manufacturer Fruity Chutes Size & Model 36 X-Form Size & Model 60 Iris Ultra Material Ripstop Nylon Material Ripstop Nylon Drag Coefficient 0.85 (assumed) Drag Coefficient 2.2 Reference Area 5 ft2 Reference Area 33 ft2 Mass 41 grams Mass 309 grams Terminal Velocity 61.8 ft/s Manufacturer Rating 19 lbf Terminal Velocity 14.9 ft/s

18 Vehicle Overview - Recovery Shock Cord Shock Cord Elasticity (35%) Weight (20%) Heat & Wear Resistance (45%) Decision Tubular Nylon Dismissed Kevlar Selected Paracord Dismissed 1:2:1 suspension scheme and 30 ft total

19 Vehicle Overview - Recovery Separation and Ejection Ejection Method Reliability (40%) Weight (30%) Safety (30%) Decision Pressurized Gas 2 2 (210 grams) 4 Dismissed Combustible Charge 4 5 (10 grams) 2 Selected Volumetric Equivalency No LEUP Pyrodex 6 Shear pins Fault-tolerant 13.4 psi Charge Density (g/cc) Total Mass Required (grams) Black Powder Pyrodex

20 Vehicle Overview - Recovery Flight Altimeters

21 Vehicle Overview - Recovery Chute Release

22 Mission Analysis - Motor Selection Initial Analysis Goal of attaining apogee of 5,280 feet

23 Mission Analysis - Motor Selection Result

24 Mission Analysis - Motor Selection Process Simplified: 4 Motor Choices Motor Total Average Max Length Diameter Impulse Thrust Thrust (mm) (mm) (N) (N) (N) Burn Time (s) Prop Mass (g) Total Motor Mass (g) Case Mass (g) AeroTech K AeroTech K AeroTech K Cesaroni K

25 Mission Analysis - Motor Selection Parameter Iteration: Burnout Mass vs. CD All points represent an apogee of 5,280 feet!

26 Mission Analysis - Motor Selection Selected Motor AeroTech K560 Diameter (mm) 75 Length (cm) 39.6 Prop. Weight (g) 1,425 Total Weight (g) 2,744 Avg. Thrust (N) 560 Max. Thrust (N) 754 Tot. Impulse (Ns) 2,417 Burn Time (s) 4.1 T/W = 5.7

27 Mission Analysis - Stability C.P. & C.G. C.P. (distance from nose tip) 75 C.G. (distance from nose tip) 62 Stability Margin (rail exit) 2.38

28 Mission Analysis - Stability Flight Stability

29 Mission Analysis - Ascent Flight Path Nominal - 12 mph wind Subnominal - 8 mph wind

30 Mission Analysis - Ascent Velocity Profile Max Velocity = ~620 ft/s (M 0.56) Rail Exit Velocity = 56.4 ft/s

31 Mission Analysis - Ascent Structural Loading Max Compressive Loading = ~210 lbf

32 Mission Analysis - Ascent Apogee Apogee Predictions Wind Team-developed Simulation OpenRocket Simulation Difference 0 mph 5,338 ft 5,381 ft 0.8% 8 mph 5,307 ft 5,337 ft 0.6% 12 mph 5,275 ft 5,281 ft 0.1%

33 Mission Analysis - Descent Terminal Velocities

34 Mission Analysis - Drift Drift Predictions Wind (mph) Ascent Drift (ft) Descent Drift (ft) Total Drift (ft) , ,300 2,510 1, ,520 3,340 1,820

35 Mission Analysis - Power System Component Consumption StratologgerCF 1.5 ma Indicator LED 10 ma Recovery StratologgerCF Power Source Capacity Standby 9V Battery 500 mah 43 hrs 9V Battery 500 mah 43 hrs Built-in Li-Po undisclosed 48+ hrs 9V Battery 500 mah 5.8 hrs 1.5 ma Indicator LED 10 ma Chute Release undisclosed Arduino Nano 35 ma XBee 50 ma Accelerometer 0.4 ma Servo off Geared Motor off Geared Motor off Payload

36 Payload - Concept Selection

37 Payload - Deployment & Reorientation

38 Payload - Components

39 Payload - Mass & Dimensions Payload Mass Buildup Component Mass (grams) Geared Motors 18 High-Torque Servo 55 Battery 45 Arduino Uno 28 Accelerometer 3 XBee 8 XBee Shield 25 Wiring Estimate 10 Bearings + Axles 5 Enclosure 355 Solar Panels 16 Body + Top Door 335 Total Mass 903 grams

40 Payload - Traversability Rover Idealized Obstacle Criteria Parameter Max. Value θ1 + θ h 1.58

41 Requirement Verification Verification Method Key Method Demonstration Description The requirement is, or will be, completely verified by a decision or action taken by the team and disclosed explicitly or implicitly in milestone reports. This includes team operations and vehicle/payload design decisions. Inspection The requirement will be verified by a direct inspection from team members (including mentor and safety officer), the NASA project team, the RSO, or a third-party. This includes the team s internally maintained checklists to be validated before each milestone. Analysis The decision, system or specification will be analyzed using engineering methods, calculations and/or simulation to guarantee requirement fulfillment Testing The decision, system or specification in question will be verified through direct testing to ensure fulfillment of the requirement

42 Safety 1. Hazard Analyses a. Personnel b. Failure Modes c. Environmental 2. Pre-Launch Checklist 3. Launch Safety Equipment

43 Safety - Risk Assessment Codes Risk Assessment Codes (NASA MPR ) Risk Assessment Codes Severity Probability 1 Catastrophic 2 Critical 3 Marginal 4 Negligible A Frequent 1A 2A 3A 4A B Probable 1B 2B 3B 4B C Occasional 1C 2C 3C 4C D Remote 1D 2D 3D 4D E Improbable 1E 2E 3E 4E

44 Safety - Personnel Hazard Analysis Personnel Hazard Analysis (PHA) Personal Safety - Team members, mentors, lab and machine shop staff, and all public personnel in operational vicinity during machining, testing, and any and all launches Property Safety - All property associated with Project K.I.S.S.: personal, public, lab and machine shop, and university property. Project Success - Team personnel mentors, and associated university staff hazards to project success. E.g. scheduling, budget, coordination, and availability.

45 Safety - PHA, Post-Mitigation + Severity Catastrophic - Critical - Propellant Contact Property Damage Time Availability Negligible Probability Component Delivery Scheduling - Improbable - Remote - Occasional - Probable - Frequent Machining Tools Marginal +

46 Safety - FMEA Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) Hazards pertaining to the success of the launch and all aspects of the rocket and its subsystem have been analyzed. These subsystems include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. Propulsion 2. Structure 3. Recovery 4. Payload operations and integration 5. Launch operations

47 Safety - FMEA, Post-Mitigation + Severity Catastrophic - Marginal Rapid unplanned Loose Payload disassembly Attitude Instability - Negligible Probability Parachute fail to open Critical Improbable - Remote - Occasional - Probable - Frequent Shock cord failure - +

48 Safety - FMEA Environmental Hazards Hazards which relate to: 1. Launch range characteristics 2. Weather 3. Rocket motor exhaust 4. Property in vicinity of launch range

49 Safety - Environmental Hazards, Post-Mitigation + Severity Catastrophic - Critical - Terrain Trees Negligible Probability Rover Signal Blockage Carbon Monoxide Exposure - Improbable - Remote - Occasional - Probable - Frequent Rocket Damage to Property Marginal +

50 Safety - Pre-Launch Checklist Pre-Launch Checklist Safety glasses with side shields equipped Teams chosen Walkies distributed, one per team Wind direction and speed check Perimeter and airspace check Visual/physical inspection of the following components: a. Payload or mass simulator installation b. Shear pins visual inspection c. GPS tracking device d. RF Shield - Confirm placement and that shield is firmly secured e. f Stability margin check Altimeter bay - Confirm no exposed wire and that accidental connections shall not occur g. Motor retention h. Chute release Rover signal acquisition check Altimeter arming Ignition activation switch placed 330 feet from launch pad

51 Safety - Launch Safety Equipment Launch Safety Equipment The following equipment will be available during launch in order to assure safety throughout the launch procedure. All equipment shall be provided by the Safety Officer Fire extinguisher Fire rakes Flag line/caution tape and mounting poles Rocket Safety Check area indications Signage to indicate any local field rules that spectators much be aware of Tape measure reel Four (4) pairs of safety glasses with side shields Two (2) walkie talkies Waterproof tarp (to be at least 8 by 10 ) Air horn Stop watch Clipboard Copies of all procedures and checklists in numbered, itemized format Binoculars First aid kit Gaffer tape Aluminum foil tape

52 Project Plan - Budget Overall Costs Full-scale Vehicle $1, Sub-scale Demonstrator $ Rover Payload $ Travel $1, Educational Engagement $ Subtotal 20% Overhead Total Aerospace Engineering $4, $ $4,907.70

53 Project Plan - Timeline

54 Thank You For your Time Questions? We love them.