Transcript Presentation

Critical Design Review
Presentation
2013-2014
Project Nova
Final Launch Vehicle Dimensions
Size and Mass
Length
108 in
Diameter
5 in
Dry Weight (Without Motor)
31.1 lbm
Wet Weight
56.1 lbm
Nosecone
Final Launch Vehicle Dimensions
Recovery Section
Final Launch Vehicle Dimensions
Booster Section
Final Launch Vehicle Dimensions
Final Launch Vehicle Dimensions
Fin Dimensions
Root Chord
8.40 in
Tip Chord
4.00 in
Height
5.50 in
Sweep Length
5.00 in
Sweep Angle
42.5°
Final Launch Vehicle Design
Final Launch Vehicle Dimensions
Key Design Features
•
The Threat Analysis Payload system has
aerodynamically shaped heat shields to
protect the camera hardware from the
forces the rocket will experience passing
through transonic conditions into
supersonic conditions.
Key Design Features
•
PASTE A PICTURE OF THE HEAT
SHIELDS HERE
Key Design Features
•
A ballast tank has been incorporated into
the overall design of the rocket to combat
two things:
•
•
Differentiating stability calibers thru design
and manufacturing phases due to imprecise
mass measurements done during design
To increase the weight of the vehicle without
having large affects on the stability caliber
should our final vehicle weight fall below the
optimum calculated weight
Key Design Features
CG Position
Final Motor Choice
•
Motor selection was accomplished using the criteria
needed for mission success, specifically the motor had to
meet the following requirements:
•
•
•
The motor had to have enough total impulse to accelerate the
rocket up to supersonic speeds without going to far outside
of the transonic region, ideally around Mach 1.0 – 1.2.
The motor could not deliver the rocket past the designated
altitude limit of 20,000 feet, as set by the USLI competition
rules.
The motor had to deliver the payload to teams target altitude
of 15,500 feet given any mass increases on the order of
~20%.
Final Motor Choice
Total Impulse
Cesaroni N2200 Data
2712.6 lb-s
Maximum Thrust
647.3 lbf
Average Thrust
488.8 lbf
Specific Impulse
201.0 s
Burntime
5.55 s
Sellers: What’s Up Hobbies (Stockton, CA)
Wildman Rocketry (Van Orin, IL)
Final Motor Choice
Simulated Apogees with Probable Mass Increases
0% Mass
25% Mass
33% Mass
Increase
Increase
Increase
Total Mass @ Liftoff (lbm)
56.1
70.1
74.6
Apogee Achieved (ft)
Highest Mach #
18169
15179
14211
1.25
1.00
0.93
Optimum Weight: 68.5 lbm
Mass margin:
22%
Apogee Achieved (ft): 15,508
Maximum Mach #: 1.02
Final Motor Choice
•
It should be noted that the optimum weight as
calculated and simulated in various rocketry
programs is not 100% accurate. Given the high
velocity of the rocket, these programs do not
simulate transonic and supersonic flight well.
Therefore, the optimum weight will be
significantly less than 68.5 lbm. Testing will be
done using the full-scale rocket to gather data
that will be used to precisely identify the
correct optimum weight.
Final Motor Choice
•
If the launch site is changed resulting in a
ceiling limit of 10,000 feet, the alternate
motor will be a Cesaroni M1830.
•
•
•
Estimated altitude: 9174 feet
Estimated Mach achievable: 0.80
The CMP will be unachievable, however,
due to lack of distance and minimized
burntime of motor.
Rocket Flight Stability
CG and CP Locations (as measured from the tip of the nose)
CG Location
67.356 in
CP Location
82.024 in
CG Location
Stability caliber: 2.93
CP Location
Rocket Flight Stability
Rocket Flight Stability
Simulated Flight Performance Data
Simulated Flight Performance Data @ 56.1 lbm
Altitude (ft)
Max Velocity
(ft/s)
Max Acceleration
(ft/s^2)
Average Thrust (lbf)
T/W Ratio
18184
1378
324
488
Velocity off
rod (ft/s)
Time to
Apogee (s)
Flight Time (s)
Velocity at Main
Deployment (ft/s)
8.70
Velocity at
Ground
Impact (ft/s)
66
32.3
419
68.8
11.7
Simulated Flight Performance Data
Simulated Flight Performance Data @ 56.1 lbm
Altitude (ft)
Max Velocity
(ft/s)
Max Acceleration
(ft/s^2)
Average Thrust (lbf)
T/W Ratio
15519
1127
258
488
Velocity off
rod (ft/s)
Time to
Apogee (s)
Flight Time (s)
Velocity at Main
Deployment (ft/s)
7.12
Velocity at
Ground
Impact (ft/s)
57.2
31.1
347
78.3
13.1
Simulated Flight Performance Data
•
It should also be noted that with the given
configuration of the recovery system, the rocket
still generates less than 75 lbf-ft of kinetic
energy upon ground landing. This is
ascertained by making the assumption that the
rocket has fully separated into its three
separate sections and that each section weighs
less than 27.7 lbm, which if each section
increases in weight by 22%, they will be below
that mark.
Mass Statement and Mass Margin
•
Mass estimations were performed using OpenRocket,
which allows:
•
•
•
All components to be assigned material specifications with
designated densities for each material.
By inputting the lengths and thicknesses for each
component, the software calculates the total mass accurately.
Mass calculations for electronic systems and payloads are
estimations currently, and will change as systems are
defined, received, and tested throughout the
manufacturing process of the rocket.
Mass Statement and Mass Margin
Mass Estimations
Nose Cone
1.7
Recovery Section
15.2
Bulkheads
1.0
Electronics Bay #1
5.0
Recovery System
5.0
Booster Section
16.0
Bulkheads
2.0
Motor Mounting System
1.0
Electronics Bay #2
3.9
Total Weight (without motor) 31.1
Motor
25.0
Total Weight (with motor)
56.1
Mass Statement and Mass Margin
•
•
If the final weight of the rocket exceeds the
current calculated estimation, the rocket
will have a simulated mass margin of 22%
before it will no longer be able to achieve
mission requirements.
Given the inaccuracies of simulations at
supersonic speeds, the mass margin will be
much lower, approximately around ~15%.
Predicted Drift from Launch Pad
Drift Estimations
Wind Speed (mph)
Drift Distance (ft)
Altitude (ft)
0
41.8
18184
5
1717.8
18152
10
3372.5
18051
15
5507.0
17953
20
7579.3
17803
Subscale Test Flight
•
•
The subscale rocket had a structure that
was an 80% scale of the full-scale vehicle.
This scale was chosen to simulate the
stability conditions predicted through
computer simulations to insure the overall
structure of the rocket would be suitable
for full-scale flight and would be able
maintain the predicted stability.
Subscale Test Flight
Subscale Fin Dimensions
Subscale Test Flight
Subscale Size and Mass
Length
86.4 in
Subscale Motor
Manufacturer
Aerotech
Diameter
4 in
Designation
J270W
Dry Weight (no motor)
10.3 lbm
Loaded Weight
1.42 lbm
Wet Weight
11.7 lbm
Total Impulse
158.04 lbf–s
Average Thrust
60.70 lbf
Burntime
2.6 s
Subscale Test Flight
Drogue Parachute
Main Parachute
Avionics Bay
Motor
Subscale Test Flight
Simulated Flight Data
Actual Flight Data
Apogee (ft)
2094
2006.8
Max Velocity (ft/s)
353
352.7
Max Acceleration (ft/s2)
186
283.9
Time to Apogee (s)
12.1
11.1
Flight Time (s)
128
91.7
Subscale Test Flight
Recovery
•
•
•
Dual-Deploy System: Drogue and Main
Redundant Charges
Dual Altimeters
Recovery
Recovery
•
Black Powder Charges
1st Charge: 5 grams → 164 lbf
• Backup Charge: 5.5 grams → 180 lbf
• Ground Testing
•
Recovery
•
Shear Pins
#4-40 nylon machine screws
• 10,000 psi shear strength
• 2 pins connecting each section
• Instron Tensile Stress Testing
•
Recovery
•
Drogue Specifications
Parachute Diameter: 17.3 in
• Parachute Material: Ripstop Nylon
• Shock Cord Length: 300 in
• Shock Cord Specification: 1 in diameter
tubular nylon
•
Recovery
•
Main Specifications
•
•
•
•
•
Parachute Diameter: 138 in
Parachute Material: Ripstop Nylon
Shock Cord Length: 300 in
Shock Cord Specification: 1.5 in diameter
tubular nylon
Testing
Payload
•
Design Overview
•
TAP
•
•
•
Hardware Integration
Software Integration
Base Station
Payload
•
Design Overview
•
BPAP
•
•
•
•
Hardware Data Collection
Software Processing
Data Collection Post Flight
Analysis
Payload
•
Design Overview
•
CMP
•
•
Testing Verification
Integration
Requirement Fufillment
•
Where we stand
•
•
CDR
Future Endevours
Closing
•
•
Summary
Questions