Flight Readiness Review Addendum: Full-Scale Re-Flight. Roll Induction and Counter Roll NASA University Student Launch.

Similar documents
CRITICAL DESIGN REVIEW. University of South Florida Society of Aeronautics and Rocketry

Critical Design Review

Flight Readiness Review

FLIGHT READINESS REVIEW TEAM OPTICS

Statement of Work Requirements Verification Table - Addendum

Jordan High School Rocketry Team. A Roll Stabilized Video Platform and Inflatable Location Device

NASA SL - NU FRONTIERS. PDR presentation to the NASA Student Launch Review Panel

Illinois Space Society Flight Readiness Review. University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign NASA Student Launch March 30, 2016

NASA - USLI Presentation 1/23/2013. University of Minnesota: USLI CDR 1

Presentation Outline. # Title # Title

CRITICAL DESIGN PRESENTATION

University Student Launch Initiative

Presentation Outline. # Title

NASA SL Critical Design Review

NASA s Student Launch Initiative :

Georgia Tech NASA Critical Design Review Teleconference Presented By: Georgia Tech Team ARES

NASA SL Flight Readiness Review

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

Flight Readiness Review March 16, Agenda. California State Polytechnic University, Pomona W. Temple Ave, Pomona, CA 91768

PROJECT AQUILA 211 ENGINEERING DRIVE AUBURN, AL POST LAUNCH ASSESSMENT REVIEW

Critical Design Review Report

Tacho Lycos 2017 NASA Student Launch Critical Design Review

NASA USLI PRELIMINARY DESIGN REVIEW. University of California, Davis SpaceED Rockets Team

Tacho Lycos 2017 NASA Student Launch Flight Readiness Review

Auburn University. Project Wall-Eagle FRR

Overview. Mission Overview Payload and Subsystems Rocket and Subsystems Management

University Student Launch Initiative

Auburn University Student Launch. PDR Presentation November 16, 2015

NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY

University of Notre Dame

AUBURN UNIVERSITY STUDENT LAUNCH. Project Nova. 211 Davis Hall AUBURN, AL Post Launch Assessment Review

GIT LIT NASA STUDENT LAUNCH PRELIMINARY DESIGN REVIEW NOVEMBER 13TH, 2017

First Nations Launch Rocket Competition 2016

Northwest Indian College Space Center USLI Post Launch Assessment Review

SpaceLoft XL Sub-Orbital Launch Vehicle

Illinois Space Society University of Illinois Urbana Champaign Student Launch Maxi-MAV Preliminary Design Review November 5, 2014

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Illinois Space Society Student Launch Preliminary Design Review November 3, 2017

Cal Poly Pomona Rocketry NASA Student Launch Competition POST LAUNCH ASSESMENT REVIEW April 24, 2017

Preliminary Design Review. California State University, Long Beach USLI November 13th, 2017

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Rover Delivery NASA University Student Launch Initiative Post-Launch Assessment Review. Charger Rocket Works.

Critical Design Review

Post Launch Assessment Review

UC Berkeley Space Technologies and Rocketry Preliminary Design Review Presentation. Access Control: CalSTAR Public Access

The University of Toledo

Project NOVA

Notre Dame Rocketry Team. Flight Readiness Review March 8, :00 PM CST

NASA USLI Flight Readiness Review (FRR) Rensselaer Rocket Society (RRS)

The University of Toledo

AUBURN UNIVERSITY STUDENT LAUNCH PROJECT NOVA II. 211 Davis Hall AUBURN, AL CDR

Student Launch. Enclosed: Preliminary Design Review. Submitted by: Rocket Team Project Lead: David Eilken

Rocketry Projects Conducted at the University of Cincinnati

Preliminary Design Review. Cyclone Student Launch Initiative

This Week. Next Week 4/7/15

Florida A & M University. Flight Readiness Review. 11/19/2010 Preliminary Design Review

University Student Launch Initiative Preliminary Design Review

Team Air Mail Preliminary Design Review

NASA Student Launch College and University. Preliminary Design Review

Post Launch Assessment Review

NWIC Space Center s 2017 First Nations Launch Achievements

Critical Design Review

Critical Design Review Report NASA Student Launch Florida International University American Society of Mechanical Engineers (FIU-ASME)

Flight Readiness Review Report NASA Student Launch Florida International University American Society of Mechanical Engineers (FIU-ASME)

PRELIMINARY DESIGN REVIEW

Northwest Indian College Space Center USLI Critical Design Review

Preliminary Design Review

USLI Critical Design Report

Presentation 3 Vehicle Systems - Phoenix

Student Launch. Enclosed: Proposal. Submitted by: Rocket Team Project Lead: David Eilken. Submission Date: September 30, 2016

THE UNIVERSITY OF AKRON

HPR Staging & Air Starting By Gary Stroick

NASA Student Launch W. Foothill Blvd. Glendora, CA Artemis. Deployable Rover. November 3rd, Preliminary Design Review

NASA University Student Launch Initiative (Sensor Payload) Final Design Review. Payload Name: G.A.M.B.L.S.

USLI Flight Readiness Review

Michigan Aeronautical Science Association

Tripoli Rocketry Association Level 3 Certification Attempt

Pre-Flight Checklist for SLIPSTICK III

Rocket Activity Advanced High- Power Paper Rockets

NASA SL Preliminary Design Review

Innovating the future of disaster relief

First Nation Launch Competition Handbook

Table of Content 1) General Information ) Summary of PDR Report ) Changes Made Since Proposal ) Safety... 8

To determine which number of fins will enable the Viking Model Rocket to reach the highest altitude with the largest thrust (or fastest speed.

NUMAV. AIAA at Northeastern University

Project WALL-Eagle Maxi-Mav Critical Design Review

Case Study: ParaShield

EL DORADO COUNTY REGIONAL FIRE PROTECTION STANDARD

First Nation Launch Competition Handbook

Preliminary Design Review November 15, Agenda. California State Polytechnic University, Pomona W. Temple Ave, Pomona, CA 91768

Madison West High School Green Team

AVOIDING THE BENDS! Why Super-Roc Models Buckle and How to Design for a Successful Flight. by Chris Flanigan (NAR L1)

University of North Dakota Department of Physics Frozen Fury Rocketry Team

Flight and Terminal Ballistic Performance Demonstration of a Gun-Launched Medium Caliber Ramjet Propelled Air Defense Projectile

CNY Rocket Team Challenge. Basics of Using RockSim 9 to Predict Altitude for the Central New York Rocket Team Challenge

ROYAL CANADIAN AIR CADETS PROFICIENCY LEVEL FOUR INSTRUCTIONAL GUIDE SECTION 3 EO C DESCRIBE MODEL ROCKETRY PREPARATION

Project WALL-Eagle Maxi-Mav Flight Readiness Review

PML RECOVERY COMPONENTS FAQ

By: Georgia Institute of Technology Team Autonomous Rocket Equipment System (A.R.E.S.) Georgia Institute of Technology North Avenue NW Atlanta GA,

Development of a Subsonic Sounding Rocket for Research Flights of Variable Payloads

Wisconsin Space Grant Consortium. Collegiate Rocket Competition Handbook. Rev. 10-SEP-2018

Transcription:

Flight Readiness Review Addendum: Full-Scale Re-Flight Roll Induction and Counter Roll 2016-2017 NASA University Student Launch 27 March 2017 Propulsion Research Center, 301 Sparkman Dr. NW, Huntsville Al, 35899 256-824-7209 0

Introduction The Charger Rocket Works (CRW) Team conducted a re-flight of the full-scale rocket on March 19, 2017 in Manchester TN. The primary purpose of this launch was to prove that a new parachute, a Fruity Chute 144 Iris Ultra Compact, allows the rocket to meet the landing kinetic energy requirements for the NASA Student Launch competition. In addition to validating the flight kinetic energies, the re-flight also provided an opportunity for further testing of the roll induction and counter roll payload and further practice with assembly and flight preparation. Launch Conditions Figure 1: CRW Team Re-Flight Launch The configuration of the vehicle for the re-flight was in the same configuration as both fullscale flights discussed in the Flight Readiness Review, with the exception of the motor and the main parachute. Figure 2: Viserion during Ascent Phase 1

The wind speed reached 10 mph on launch day so the CRW team chose to fly on an Aerotech K1000 due to drift concerns instead of the competition motor, Aerotech L2200. The RMS-75-5120 hardware initially purchased for the L2200 (4 grain) motor was utilized for the 2-grain motor with the addition of a grain spacer. This resulted in a lower wet mass of the vehicle, but the burnout mass was equivalent to the final configuration. Figure 2 shows the re-flight ascent phase. The newly selected Fruity Chute 144 Iris Ultra Compact parachute is shown fully deployed in the vehicles descent phase just before impact in Figure 3.. Figure 3: Descent Phase Measured flight data is presented in Figure 4. The vehicle reaches an apogee of 1031 feet with drogue deployment at apogee. Terminal velocity under main occurred at approximately 300 ft AGL and slowly descended to the ground at a velocity of 12.3 ft/s. Figure 4: Re-flight Launch Data 2

Flight Results While use of the smaller motor allowed for a successful verification of the recovery system and kinetic energy requirements. While the smaller motor allowed for a successful recovery system test, and kinetic energy requirement verification, it should be noted that the flight deviates from the full-scale competition flight predictions and those deviations are depicted in Table 1. It should also be restated that there is a 2.9 pound delta of wet mass between the full-scale re-flight and final vehicle configuration. This is only due to the mass of the propellant and both configurations have a wet mass of approximately 47 pounds with some uncertainty allotted for propellant variation and mass of the spacer. Because a full-scale flight with the competition motor has been conducted, these flight deviations were not considered to be significant for the recovery system test on the reflight. Table 1: Flight Characteristics Full-Scale Re-Flight Final Prediction Wet Mass (lb) 50.2 52.7 Stability Margin (off the rail) 2.33 2.16 Max Velocity (ft/s) 286 636 Velocity off the rail (ft/s) 56.1 74.1 Max Acceleration 135 407 Apogee (ft) 1031 5278 Assessment of New Main Parachute In the two full-scale flights conducted prior to Flight Readiness Review (FRR), the recovery systems used resulted in safe and controlled recovery descents. Because of vehicle mass, the terminal velocity under the main parachute produced kinetic energy values that exceeded the maximum allowable value for the NASA Student Launch competition. To reduce the terminal velocity under main, a new main parachute was selected prior to the Flight Readiness Review and discussed in detail in the document itself. The parachute selected and presented in the Critical Design Review (CDR) was a SkyAngle Cert-3 XL. Table 2 provides a summary of the landing velocity and kinetic energies of the three sections of the rocket from the first full-scale flight. Under the SkyAngle Cert-3 XL, the rocket had a landing velocity of 17.2 ft/s and had a maximum kinetic energy at landing of 110 ft-lbf. Table 2: Landing Velocity and Kinetic energies under the SkyAngle Cert-3 XL Section Nose Cone Upper Airframe Lower Airframe Mass (lb) 5.03 10.78 23.93 Velocity (ft/s) 17.2 17.2 17.2 KE (ft-lbf) 23.11 49.52 109.93 3

Because the kinetic energy at landing obtained from the full-scale flight exceeded the 75 ft-lbf NASA requirement, the SkyAngle parachute was replaced with a Fruity Chute 144 Iris Ultra Compact. The Fruity Chute 144 Iris Ultra Compact was flown on the full-scale re-flight. During the descent phase, the rocket body descended at a slow and controlled rate. Flight data was analyzed post-recovery to determine the terminal velocity and kinetic energies under drogue and main. Table 3 displays the terminal velocity and kinetic energies under drogue while Table 4 displays the terminal velocity and kinetic energies under main. As shown in the tables, the terminal velocity under the Fruity Chute parachute was found to be 12.3 ft/s, producing a maximum kinetic energy at landing of 59 ft-lbf, meeting than the NASA SL kinetic energy at impact requirement. Table 3: Landing Velocity and Kinetic energies under the Drogue Parachute Section Nose Cone/Upper Lower Airframe Mass (lb) 18.11 25.25 Velocity (ft/s) 58.31 58.31 KE (ft-lbf) 955.87 1333.10 Table 4: Landing Velocity and Kinetic energies under the Fruity Chute 144 Iris Ultra Compact Section Nose Cone Upper Airframe Lower Airframe Mass (lb) 5.8 12.31 25.25 Velocity (ft/s) 12.3 12.3 12.3 KE (ft-lbf) 13.63 28.92 59.32 The flight data from the re-flight was plotted and the terminal velocities are shown in Figure 5. It can be seen that there is a significant deceleration when the main is deployed, which results in the terminal velocity needed to meet kinetic energy requirements. Figure 5: Terminal Velocities 4

The drift distance can be seen below in Figure 6, with a net drift of 703.46 ft. Conclusions Figure 6: Drift Distance In summary, the re-flight conducted on March 19 met all flight objectives identified in the FRR. The CRW team achieved FRR-predicted values for velocity and kinetic energy at impact, with a maximum kinetic energy at impact of 59.32 ft-lbf. The fruity-chute parachute was successfully deployed via the same configuration discussed in FRR, resulting in a kinetic energy at impact that meets the NASA Student Launch requirement of less than 75 ft-lbf. 5