CRITICAL DESIGN PRESENTATION

Similar documents
FLIGHT READINESS REVIEW TEAM OPTICS

Critical Design Review

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

Auburn University. Project Wall-Eagle FRR

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

Flight Readiness Review

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

Presentation Outline. # Title # Title

PRELIMINARY DESIGN REVIEW

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

Presentation Outline. # Title

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

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

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

NASA SL Critical Design Review

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

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

Auburn University Student Launch. PDR Presentation November 16, 2015

Project NOVA

Preliminary Design Review. Cyclone Student Launch Initiative

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

NUMAV. AIAA at Northeastern University

Overview. Mission Overview Payload and Subsystems Rocket and Subsystems Management

NASA SL Flight Readiness Review

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

The University of Toledo

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

Tacho Lycos 2017 NASA Student Launch Critical Design Review

Critical Design Review

Team Air Mail Preliminary Design Review

Tacho Lycos 2017 NASA Student Launch Flight Readiness Review

Critical Design Review Report

University Student Launch Initiative

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

Tripoli Rocketry Association Level 3 Certification Attempt

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

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

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

The University of Toledo

University of Notre Dame

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

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

Presentation 3 Vehicle Systems - Phoenix

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

Northwest Indian College Space Center USLI Critical Design Review

Preliminary Design Review

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

Statement of Work Requirements Verification Table - Addendum

Critical Design Review

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

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

NASA s Student Launch Initiative :

Pre-Flight Checklist for SLIPSTICK III

Rocket Design. Tripoli Minnesota Gary Stroick. February 2010

NASA Student Launch College and University. Preliminary Design Review

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

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

NASA SL Preliminary Design Review

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

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

USLI Flight Readiness Review

Madison West High School Green Team

SpaceLoft XL Sub-Orbital Launch Vehicle

Post Launch Assessment Review

Pegasus II. Tripoli Level 3 Project Documentation. Brian Wheeler

Project WALL-Eagle Maxi-Mav Flight Readiness Review

USLI Critical Design Report

University Student Launch Initiative

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

LEVEL 3 BUILD YELLOW BIRD. Dan Schwartz

Rocketry Projects Conducted at the University of Cincinnati

CYCLONE STUDENT LAUNCH INITIATIVE

Project WALL-Eagle Maxi-Mav Critical Design Review

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

ISS Space Grant Team Exocoetidae

HPR Staging & Air Starting By Gary Stroick

First Nations Launch Rocket Competition 2016

University Student Launch Initiative Preliminary Design Review

Electronic Deployment

Post Launch Assessment Review

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

NWIC Space Center s 2017 First Nations Launch Achievements

Innovating the future of disaster relief

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

Modified shock-cord mount and cables (cables are shown pushed into motor mount here)

267 Snell Engineering Northeastern University Boston, MA 02115

Critical Design Review

UNIVERSITY OF NORTH DAKOTA FROZEN FURY CRITICAL DESIGN REVIEW REPORT NASA STUDENT LAUNCH 2015

UC Berkeley Space Technologies and Rocketry NASA Student Launch Proposal Project Arktos. 432 Eshleman Hall, MC 4500 Berkeley, CA

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics

University of South Florida

DemoSat-B User s Guide

THE UNIVERSITY OF AKRON

AKRONAUTS. P o s t - L a u n c h A ss e s m e n t R e v i e w. The University of Akron College of Engineering. Akron, OH 44325

Pre-Launch Procedures

Y. Lemmens, T. Benoit, J. de Boer, T. Olbrechts LMS, A Siemens Business. Real-time Mechanism and System Simulation To Support Flight Simulators

This Week. Next Week 4/7/15

EE 370L Controls Laboratory. Laboratory Exercise #E1 Motor Control

Northwest Indian College Space Center USLI Post Launch Assessment Review

Transcription:

CRITICAL DESIGN PRESENTATION UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH ALABAMA LAUNCH SOCIETY BILL BROWN, BEECHER FAUST, ROCKWELL GARRIDO, CARSON SCHAFF, MICHAEL WIESNETH, MATTHEW WOJCIECHOWSKI ADVISOR: CARLOS MONTALVO MENTOR: CHRIS CREWS

Vehicle Dimensions OVERALL LENGTH: 93 BODY DIAMETER: 5 LIFT OFF WEIGHT: 19.06 LBS COUPLER LENGTH ( AVIONICS BAY): 11 NOSE CONE LENGTH: 20 BODY LENGTH: 73 NOSE CONE SHAPE: OGIVE COMPONENT MATERIAL: FIBERGLASS

Fin Dimensions FIN DESIGN: CLIPPED DELTA NUMBER OF FINS: 4 ROOT CORD: 10 TIP CORD: 5 SWEEP LENGTH: 5 SWEEP ANGLE: 45

Final Motor Choice MOTOR SELECTED: K480W-P TOTAL IMPULSE: 515.93 LBF-S WITH THE ESTIMATED MASS OF THE LAUNCH VEHICLE THIS MOTOR ACHIEVED AN ALTITUDE OF 5280 FT. THIS WAS SIMULATED USING OPENROCKET.

STABILITY AT RAIL EXIT = 2.5 STATIC STABILITY = 2.5

Center of Pressure and Center of Gravity Locations CENTER OF PRESSURE = 72.81 IN FROM NOSE CONE CENTER OF GRAVITY = 59.92 IN FROM NOSE CONE SIMULATED USING OPENROCKET \

Thrust to Weight Ratio and Rail Exit Velocity MAX THRUST / WEIGHT = 206.15 LB /19.06 LB = 6.53 RAIL EXIT VELOCITY = 67.1 SIMULATED IN OPENROCKET FT/S

Mass Statement and Mass Margin TOTAL MASS LOADED = 19.06 LB TOTAL MASS EMPTY =16.38 LB ADJUSTABLE MASS MARGIN = 1.15 LB

Recovery Subsystem - Parachutes DROGUE PARACHUTE: 36 IN NYLON MAIN PARACHUTE: 72 IN NYLON CONICAL W/ SPILL HOLE RECOVERY HARNESS: KEVLAR TIED TO WELDED EYEBOLTS KEVLAR SIZE: 0.55 IN HARNESS LENGTH: 24 FT DROGUE DESCENT RATE: 51.1 FT/S MAIN DESCENT RATE: 22.6 FT/S

Kinetic Energy At Key Phases THESE VALUES CORRESPOND TO BOOSTER SECTION OF THE VEHICLE WHICH HAS A MASS OF.3 LBM MAIN CHUTE DEPLOYMENT = 391.82 FT-LBS LANDING = 73.17 FT-LBS

Predicted Drift from Launch Pad 5 MPH WIND: 425 FT 10 MPH WIND: 875 FT 15 MPH WIND: 1325 FT 20 MPH WIND: 2020 FT

FINAL PAYLOAD DESIGN FINAL ROLL INDUCTION SYSTEM DESIGN FINAL VERIFICATION SYSTEM ELECTRICAL PAYLOAD COMPONENTS AND HARDWARE PAYLOAD CONSTRUCTION AND INTEGRATION PAYLOAD SAFETY DESIGN CRITERIA

Final Roll Induction System Design ROLL FINS WILL BE CONNECTED DIRECTLY TO TWO SEPARATE SERVOS AN ARDUINO MEGA WILL SEND EQUIVALENT SIGNALS TO BOTH SERVOS TO ENSURE EQUAL ROLL FIN DEFLECTION

Roll Fin Functionality and Design ROLL FIN WILL BE PLACED INSIDE THE MAIN FIN AND FIXED TO SERVO SHAFT ROLL WILL BE INDUCED IN ROCKET BY DEFLECTING ROLL FINS INTO AIR STREAM AIR DRAG WILL CREATE ROLL MOMENT

Final Verification System Design DUAL SENSOR REDUNDANCY TO BE USED AS VERIFICATION METHOD DATA WILL BE RECORDED ONTO AN MICROSD CARD TO BE OBSERVED POST FLIGHT BOTH SENSORS SHOWING COMPLETION OF PAYLOAD OBJECTIVE WILL SERVE AS SUCCESS CRITERIA

Electrical Payload Components ARDUINO MEGA MICROCONTROLLER USED FOR SENSOR COMMUNICATION AND SERVO OUTPUT

Electrical Payload Components 10 DOF IMU BREAKOUT MAIN DATA COLLECTION DEVICE USED IN THE ROLL INDUCTION SYSTEM ROTATIONAL VELOCITY AND ORIENTATION DATA WILL BE USED TO GOVERN THE SERVO OUTPUT DATA WILL BE STORED ON A MICROSD FOR PAYLOAD OBJECTIVE COMPLETION VERIFICATION

Electrical Payload Components GPS BREAKOUT WILL PROVIDE A DATA TIMESTAMP TO BE USED IN THE VERIFICATION SYSTEM

Hardware Payload Components PAYLOAD COUPLER 10 INCH FIBERGLASS BAY 0.08 INCH WALL THICKNESS

Hardware Payload Components BULKHEAD END CAPS USED TO SEAL BOTH ENDS OF THE PAYLOAD COUPLER TUBE PROTECTS PAYLOAD FROM BLACKPOWDER EXPLOSIONS NECESSARY FOR CHUTE DEPLOYMENT

Hardware Payload Components ELECTRONICS SLED 3D PRINTED WITH MOUNTING HOLES COMPATIBLE WITH THE ARDUINO MEGA BATTERY COMPARTMENT WILL BE USED TO SECURE THE POWER SOURCE

Hardware Payload Components TOWER PRO MG995R HIGH TORQUE SERVO ONE SERVO WILL BE CONNECTED TO EACH OF THE TWO ROLL FINS SERVO HORN WILL BE MOUNTED DIRECTLY TO THE ROLL FIN

Payload Integration BULKHEAD CLOSES UP ONE END INSERT CENTER ROD INSERT ELECTRONICS SLED SEAL PAYLOAD WITH SECOND BULKHEAD

Payload Integration SERVO INSERTED INTO PLACE FROM INSIDE THE ROCKET BODY CENTERING PIN LINKING SERVO TO MAIN FIN

Payload Integration ASSEMBLED FROM OUTSIDE THE ROCKET INSERTED THROUGH THE REAR OF THE ROCKET

Payload Safety Design Criteria NET FORCE INDUCED IN THE ROCKET MUST BE ZERO THE ROLL MOMENT INDUCED BY THE ROLL FINS MUST BE A COUPLE MOMENT

Payload Safety Design Criteria SERVO HORN TO ROLL FIN CONNECTION THE CONNECTION MUST BE COMPLETELY RIGID SLIPPING COULD LEAD TO ANGULAR OFFSET RESULTING IN RESIDUAL FORCE SLIPPING BETWEEN THE SERVO SHAFT AND THE ROLL FIN WILL BE MINIMIZED USING A HEXAGONAL SHAFT

Payload Safety Design Criteria HEAT SHIELD TUBING HIGH HEAT EXPOSURE TO SERVO WIRES COULD LEAD TO ELECTRONIC MALFUNCTION ALUMINUM HEAT SHIELD TUBING WILL BE USED TO MINIMIZE THE HEAT EXPOSURE FROM THE MOTOR TO THE WIRES

Payload Mathematical Model ROCKWELL Step input of 0 or 1 from the command generator KP: proportional gain applied to the step signal : servo angle G: rocket φa: roll angle of the rocket

Payload Electronic Schematic

TESTING SERVO LOAD GPS - SERVO COMPATABILITY POWER COMSUMPTION BATTERY DURRATION

Testing of Staged Recovery System THE TEAM WILL UTILIZE THE SAME DUAL DEPLOY RECOVERY SYSTEM AS USED IN ROCKETS FOR PRELIMINARY ROCKETS ALTIMETERS HAVE BEEN TESTED FOR FUNCTIONALITY

Updated Team Derived Requirements Team must produce optimal roll fin system Verification: A square roll fin has been chosen as this design provides simplicity for airflow analysis

Updated Team Derived Requirements (cont.) Equalize Roll Fin Deflection Verification: Hexagonal cross section will be used for servo to roll fin shaft to minimize potential for angular offset between the servo and roll fin

Updated Team Derived Requirements (cont.) Implementation of derivative gain to reduce overshoot Verification: Team is pursuing an open loop control system as this should provide sufficient functionality

References 1) Time-Domain Characteristics on Response Plot. (2016). Retrieved from https://www.mathworks.com/help/control/ug/view-system-characteristics-on-response-plots.html 2) Fried, Limor.Adafruit. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 Nov. 2016. https://www.adafruit.com 3) Miguel, V. S. (2012). Mathematically Modeling Aeroelastic Flutter. Retrieved from http://www.personal.psu.edu/vjs5077/projects/fin-flutter.html