RASC-AL Forum May 21-24, 2007
Economical Surface Balloon Inflation System for
Future Scout Class Mars Missions
Multidisciplinary Engineering Design Team
Shaneen Braswell1
Andrew Huang2
Elizabeth Jones1
Paul Kuhlman3
Ryan Kurkul2
Shintaro Taniguchi1,3
Fei Xu4
Faculty Advisor
Professor Nilton Renno1, Ph.D.
1 Department of Atmospheric, Oceanic, & Space Science, 2Department of Mechanical Engineering, 3Department of Aerospace Engineering, 4Department of Electrical Engineering & Computer Science
University of Michigan
Mars Balloon Team
• UM Multidisciplinary Engineering Design Team
(Four Departments are Represented: 1Atmospheric, Oceanic & Space Science,
2Mechanical, 3Aerospace, and 4Electrical Engineering & Computer Science)
– Elizabeth Jones1 Mars Balloon Team
Mars Balloon Team at the
– Andrew Huang2 Opening of the E/PO
science exhibit “Feel the
– Fei Xu4 Solar System”. The new
science exhibit was
– Ryan Kurkul2 designed & developed by
– Paul Kuhlman3 UM Mars Balloon Team
members. We hope to
– Shintaro Taniguchi1,3 continue developing
innovative science exhibits
– Shaneen Braswell1 to inspire young students
to pursue a careers in
science and engineering.
• “Economical Surface Balloon Inflation System” concept
study started in January 2007 (Winter 2007 Term) at the
University of Michigan -Ann Arbor- as a capstone
multidisciplinary engineering design project under the
mentorship of Professor Nilton Renno (Faculty Advisor).
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 2
1.0 Background
United States Vision for Space Exploration
• In January 2004, the United States announced a new vision
for space exploration that will lead to human missions to
the Moon and eventually to Mars.
• In order to the vision for exploration of Mars to became a
reality, the Martian environment must be understood.
• Many scientific investigations, including in-situ
measurements of the Martian atmosphere, must be carried
out to assure that humans will be able to explore Mars and
return to Earth safely.
• Therefore, Robotic Human Precursor Missions are key to
the success of Human Exploration of Mars.
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 4
What Has Been Done on Mars?
Space Imaging, Mapping etc…
• Orbiters
– Global Surveyor
Mars Global
– 2001 Mars Odyssey Odyssey Surveyor MRO
– 2005 MRO Atmosphere
Search for Organics & Toxic
Elements, and Atmosphere Studies of
• Aerial Robots (Not flown yet) Meteorology, and Dust electrification.
– Balloons, Airships, Airplanes, etc
• Landers & Rovers Su
rf
– Two Vikings Landers ac
e Surface Exploration
– Mars Pathfinder Rover
– 2003 MER Viking MPF MER
– 2007 Phoenix Lander
– 2009 Mars Science Laboratory Phoenix MSL
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 5
Limitations of Current Martian Science
• Currently, we do not have adequate information to assess
all risks to human exploration of Mars. In particular, in-
situ atmospheric measurements over large areas has not
been done yet.
• Orbiters and rovers do not provide a good balance between
mobility/coverage and in-situ exploration.
In-situ measurements Mobility / Coverage
Orbiters No Global Coverage
Rovers Yes Local (MER, 6 km)
Aerobots Yes Planetary Scale
• Aerobots can fill-in the gap between orbiters and rovers.
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 6
Among Aerobots, Why are Balloons the
Best Choice?
Balloon Option
• Simplest design (consequently, cost effective).
• Ability to perform in-situ atmospheric measurements
over large areas.
• Ability to survey the surface.
• Relatively long mission lifespan (compared to airplanes).
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 7
Among Balloon Concepts, Why is the
Superpressure Balloon the best Choice?
• Superpressure balloons outrank other
balloon concepts because of:
– Long mission duration.
– Ability to survey large areas.
– Good flight heritage (from
Spherical Superpressure Balloon on Mars
terrestrial stratospheric balloons). (Courtesy of JPL)
– Several balloon design options are
available to optimize the mission:
Spherical, Pumpkin Designs (Ultra
Long Duration Balloons).
Pumpkin Shape Balloon Design
(Courtesy of ULDB Program)
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 8
Summary of Balloon Concepts
Advantage Disadvantage
Superpressure • Long mission duration •Maintains constant altitude during flight
• Survey most Martian region which reduces the possibility of scientific
Balloon Concept • Good flight heritage* from operations measurements at various altitudes.
in Earth’s stratosphere, a flight record of
744 days in GHOST.
•Various balloon designs available for
Zero-pressure • Good flight heritage* from successful •Short Mission Duration (few days), requires
operations in Earth’s stratosphere. significant amount of ballast to maintain
Balloon Concept altitude during each day-to-night cycle.
Solar Montgolfier • Long mission duration possible •Mission only possible in Polar regions
during solstice when solar energy is available
Balloon Concept continuously.
Infrared Montgolfier •N/A •Not Possible, because the colder planetary
surface does not provide adequate infrared
Balloon Concept flux to keep the balloon aloft at night.
Balloon Plus •Posses the capability to fly long •High risk in balloon survivability
duration missions other than polar- •Challenges in mitigating risk items
Guiderope Hybrid regions •Technology not mature yet
Vehicle Concept
*Earth’s stratosphere is comparable to Martian Atmosphere
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 9
2.0 Challenges to Mars Balloon Missions
Challenges to Balloon Missions to Mars
• Aerial robots, including balloons, have not been used to
explore Mars yet.
1. The perception of risk is high
– No heritage on Mars
2. The technological risk is high
– In the conventional Mars balloon deployment
strategy, deployment is done during the Entry,
Descent and Landing (EDL) Phase.
– EDL is the riskiest part of any Mars mission, except
orbiters.
– Adding another risk item to EDL such a balloon
deployment is extremely challenging.
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 11
Conventional Balloon Deployment
Strategy (Previously Proposed)
1. Entry
Interface
2. Parachute
Deployment
3. Heat Shield
Jettison
4. Balloon
Deployment
5. Start of Balloon
Inflation
6. Parachute
Release
7. Release Inflation
Module
8. Balloon Floating
Courtesy of JPL
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 12
Technological Risks Associated with
Conventional Balloon Deployment
Four main technological risks associated with Conventional
Balloon Deployment Strategy
1. EDL is known as the “Six Minutes of Terror”
• Limits balloon inflation time to 2-3 minutes.
2. High descent velocities (430 m/s to 85 m/s) and high
lifting gas flow rates during inflation adds
aerodynamic loads to the balloon envelope.
• Risks rupturing the envelope.
3. Balloon material needs to be light enough for balloon
to float but strong enough to overcome the stresses.
• Low TRL Nano-film technology may be necessary.
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 13
Technological Risk Continue…
4. Conventional deployment strategy also faces a dilemma
because it is difficult to accurately model and analyze
deployment data.
• Numerical models of deployment are currently not available
(this a complex aeroelastic problem).
The technology can only mature with trials & errors.
Demands many costly stratospheric tests.
• The high cost of the tests limits our ability to conduct
the many tests necessary for the maturation of the
technology with current budgets (Tests have been
conducted only few times per year).
Delays in technology maturation. The minimum
Technology Readiness Level has not been reached yet.
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 14
New Balloon Deployment Concept
• Conventional balloon deployment Balloon
strategy requires expensive Rupture
stratospheric tests that prevents the
maturation of the technology.
• This has led the University of
Michigan students to investigate a new
balloon deployment strategy that can
be tested more economically.
– The technology can be matured with
current budgets for Mars Scout missions.
– This makes balloon missions to Mars
possible and contribute to the vision for
Unsuccessful Deployment of the Balloon
space exploration. (Courtesy of Wallop Flight Facility)
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 15
3.0 Balloon Inflation at the Ground
Balloon Inflation at the Ground
• In order to a Balloon Mission to Mars to be possible, the
cost of each critical test must be reasonable.
• Our solution to this is the balloon deployment at the
ground, after the critical EDL Phase.
Advantages
1. The time for balloon inflation is independent of the EDL phase
(Reduce Risk).
2. Existing film technology such as Mylar can be used for the balloon
envelope because of its lower stress requirements.
3. Stratospheric tests are eliminated (Cost Reduction).
4. The cost of each deployment test is reduced dramatically and
therefore a larger number of tests can be done with limited budget.
5. The technology can maturated in a short amount of time.
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 17
Why Surface Inflation of Balloons Were
NOT Considered Before?
• On Earth, scientific balloons are inflated and launched from
the ground, but by a large team. Absolutely no human-
assistance would be available on Mars.
• Aerodynamic forces due to wind (gust) may cause the
balloon to make contact with the rocky Martian surface,
resulting in the balloon rupture.
• Autonomous balloon launch technology is not currently
available.
• The Soviet VEGA balloons to Venus were the first and only
successful planetary balloon missions.
THIS IS NOT CONCLUSIVE ENOUGH TO ELIMINATE
THE SURFACE BALLOON INFLATION STRATEGY
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 18
Surface Inflation Should be Investigated
1. Although the VEGA balloon deployment strategy
has flight heritage, it was designed for Venus.
Mars has a much less dense atmosphere, making
it harder for a balloon to float. Flight heritage on
Venus does not translate into “Heritage” for
Mars.
2. With our new surface inflation concept, it may be
possible to launch a balloon without human
assistance, while preventing the balloon from
contacting the ground.
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 19
New Surface Balloon Deployment
Strategy
1) Atmospheric Entry, 2) Parachute Deployment, 3) Heat Shield Jettison, Parachute Descent & Landing
4) Balloon Deployment, 5) Balloon Release, 6) Balloon Floating Phase
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 20
4.0 Surface Inflation Concept
Surface Balloon Inflation Concept
Preliminary Design Requirements
A Surface Balloon Inflation Concept must
1. Be capable of autonomous inflation.
2. Protect the balloon from the rocky Martian surface.
3. Work with typical Martian winds of about 5 m/s.
4. Be robust enough to work under uncertain environmental
conditions.
We investigated four design concepts
1. Small Balloon Concept.
2. Lilypad Concept.
3. Electrostatic Concept.
4. Funnel Concept.
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 22
Small Balloon Concept
Design Concept
– Small Balloon inflates first, lifts
large balloon by the top.
– Prevents large balloon from making
contact with the ground
D
Inflation Tube
Disadvantages / Problems
O
1. Presents similar challenges –the
O
diameter of small balloon must be
G
60% of that of the larger balloon.
T
2. Routing helium to the small balloon
O
adds complexity, weight, and
N
additional mechanisms to cut the
inflation tube. Small Balloon Conceptual Design
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 23
Lilypad Concept
Design Concept
– Inflatable lilypad deploys
around the lander.
D
– Provides cushion between
O
balloon and ground.
Disadvantages / Problems
O
G
1. Must be made of puncture-
T
resistance material. High mass.
O
N
2. High mass due to large area
Lilypad
coverage, large gas volume is Lilypad Conceptual Design
required.
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 24
Electrostatic Concept
Design Concept
+ + +
– Electrostatic charges generated on + +
+ +
balloon and lander.
+ +
– Charges of same polarity repel each other. +
– Lander structure designed such +
G ely
+
D
that balloon is contained within
+ +
T it
O
structure through repulsion.
O in
O + +
Disadvantage / Problems
N ef
+ + + +
1. Charge generation systems add mass. + + + +
D
+
2. Difficult to test and verify. + + +
+ +
3. Mars electrostatic conditions not well known. + + +
Electrostatic Conceptual Design
4. May affect science payload measurements.
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 25
Funnel Concept
Design Concept
– Inflatable funnel deploys then balloon is
deployed through Funnel.
– Balloon is packaged inside the funnel.
g
– Funnel guide balloon during early
in
inflation.
at
ig
Advantages / Merits
st
ve
1. Offers good protection from ground
In
hazards.
2. Simple and mass efficient. M
th
3. Robust design (mechanically deployed
or
or inflated).
W
Funnel Conceptual Design
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 26
Inflatable Funnel Deployment Animation
Animation of Inflatable Funnel Concept (Developed by UM Student Artist Allan Edwards)
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 27
5.0 Design Details of the Inflatable Funnel
Height Restrictions
• Funnel must not compromise balloon system
performance.
• Three Possible Risk Items:
1. Balloon touches ground during inflation.
2. Gondola contacts ground during launch.
3. Lander tips over due to wind drag.
Wind Wind Wind
0–10 m/s 0–10 m/s 0–10 m/s
Risk 1 Risk 2 Risk 3
Balloon Touches Ground Gondola Contacts Ground Lander Tips Over
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 29
Preliminary Height Design
• Minimum funnel height driven
by balloon/gondola ground
contact failure modes.
• Maximum funnel height
driven by lander stability
failure mode.
Note:
It is very difficult to analyze the launch conditions and how the balloon will inflate
because this is a complex aeroelastic problem. Thus, tests are needed to
determine the optimum height for the funnel (The balloon inflation technology
must be matured with trials and errors). However, surface inflation eliminates
stratospheric test and enable large reduction of the cost of each test.
Consequently, more tests can be conducted with limited budgets.
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 30
Packaging
• Several options exist for balloon packing
• Two primary packing schemes:
– Folding (small volume).
– Spiral (good airflow).
• Folding the balloon leads to bottlenecks, helium
does not reach the top of the balloon.
• Slack balloon material is pushed out of the funnel.
• Spiral packing allows good helium flow with
flexible packing dimensions.
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 31
6.0 Economical Prototype Development &
Concept Demonstration
Polyethylene Balloon Prototype
Hands-On Custom Made Balloon
Step 3: Attaching Valve
• Constructed using a
Monokote iron.
• Diameter of 0.95 m.
• Polyethylene balloon
envelope 41 g/m2
(within desired range
of 40-50 g/m2).
Step 1: Cutting Gores Step 2: Attaching Gores Together
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 33
FEP Balloon Prototype
• Prototype was constructed from fluorinated ethylene
propylene (FEP) in order to simulate envelope strength
behavior.
• However, due to our construction methods, FEP balloon
was extremely fragile and could only be used for post
inflation phase tests.
• Further tests must be conducted in future.
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 34
Funnel Prototype
• Inflatable cylindrical funnel
was constructed from
polyethylene.
• The funnel height is 31.5 cm
in order to simulate worst
case scenario at Martian
winds of 5 m/s.
• Funnel is deployed first,
then balloon inflates.
Inflatable Funnel Prototype
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 35
7.0 Scaling & Economical Testing
Scaling
• In order to simulate the behavior of our system on
Mars here on Earth, we determined the
dimensionless parameters that must be matched.
• The Reynolds and Froude numbers were matched,
and we invented three other new numbers.
Aerokinetic Bouyancy Envelope Strength
Parameter Parameter Parameter
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 37
Results of Non-Dimensional Analysis
• After developing the non-dimensional numbers, we
obtained the values of the important parameters for
our experiments.
• The results were expressed in terms of the ratio
between the Mars and Earth values.
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 38
Polyethylene Tests
• Preliminary Tests
conducted using
No Wind
polyethylene balloons, and
Condition
both solid and inflatable
cylindrical funnels were
successful.
• Tests were conducted in a
wide range of conditions, 5 m/s Wind
with wind speeds ranging
from 0 to10 m/s.
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 39
Inflatable Funnel
Step 1: Inflate the Funnel Step 2: Funnel Inflation Complete
Step 3: Initiate Balloon Inflation Step 4: Balloon Inflation Complete
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 40
8.0 Technology Development Plan to
Improve Technology Readiness Level
(Schedule and Budget: Year 2007 – 2016 and Beyond)
8.1 Technology Development Plan
• Phase A: Feasibility Analysis • Phase B:
– Feasibility of the concept will (Stage Two)
be developed and evaluated – Feasibility of the design of a
through sub-scale wind tunnel, full-scale system
vacuum chamber, out-door (TRL 6).
ground tests (TRL 1 – TRL 3).
• Phase C/D: Flight System
• Phase B: Feasibility Development
Demonstration
– Practicability of the design will
(Stage One) be studied and validated using
– Evaluate the viability of the a full-scale system.
design & validate the concept – The goal of this phase is to
through sub-scale and full- demonstrate the performance
scale wind tunnel, vacuum of a full-scale prototype.
chamber, & ground tests
(TRL 7-8).
(TRL 4 – TRL 5).
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 42
8.1 Technology Development Schedule
• Mars Scout Mission Development Cycle
– Phase A (10/2011), Phase B (10/2012-10/2013), Phase C/D
(10/2013-10/2016), Technology Cut-off (2013), Launch (2016).
• Balloon Inflation Technology Development Cycle
– Phase A (10/2007 – 10/2009), Phase B (10/2009 – 10/2012),
Phase C/D (10/2012 -10/2014).
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 43
8.2 Technology Development Cost
Development Cost by Phase
• Phase A (Duration 2 years) Note: Labor Estimate
– 1, NASA FTE 1 FTE NASA = $100,000/yr
– 1, University Researcher 1 University Researcher = $100,000/yr
– 1, Graduate Student 1 Graduate Student = $50,000/yr
– $50,000/yr, Material & Tests
The cost estimate is based on the case
• Phase B (Duration 3 years)
that the technology development is
– 3, NASA FTE
done through strategic partnership
– 2, University Researcher
with a US University such as U of M.
– 2, Graduate Student
– $150,000/yr, Material & Tests
• Phase C/D (Duration 2-3 years) Phase A 0.60M USD
– 5, NASA FTE Phase B 2.25M USD
– 3, University Researcher
– 3, Graduate Student Phase C/D Total 4.65M USD
– $1.375M/yr, Material & Tests
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 44
8.2 First Order Technology Development
Cost Estimate Breakdown Table
Million Dollars Percent
• Project Management and (FY$2007 USD) (%)
Project System Engineering Phase A 0.60M USD 4.0%
cost are estimated by
typical percentage Phase B 2.25M USD 18.0%
allocation from total Phase C/D Total 4.65M USD 37.2%
development cost 4.0% Ea.
Project Management 0.50M USD 4.0%
• 30% kept as Reserves;
0.50M USD 4.0%
– NASA Standard Project System Engineering
• 2% allocated to E/PO. Education & Public Outreach 0.25M USD 2.0%
• Total Development Cost of Reserves (NASA Standard) 3.75M USD 30.0%
the Technology 12.5 M
Total Development Cost 12.50M USD 100.0%
USD in FY$2007
Total Development Cost Breakdown
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 45
9.0 Preliminary Risk Analysis
Preliminary Risk Analysis
• A preliminary risk analysis was performed to compare two deployment
strategies; the conventional balloon deployment and the new surface
balloon deployment.
Red Zone – Major Risk
Rating Likelihood Rating Consequence Yellow Zone – Moderate Risk
1 Not a Issue 1 Very Low Green Zone – Low Risk
2 Unlikely 2 Low
3 Likely 3 Medium
4 Highly Likely 4 High
5 Near 100 % 5 Very High
Qualitative Rating of Likelihood Qualitative Rating of Consequence
• Three types of risks were considered in the risk chart:
– Technical, Schedule, and Cost.
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 47
Risk
Technical Schedule
A. Balloon rupture due to E. Balloon technology does not meet
minimum TRL 7 required for
aerodynamic loads. flight project by 2013
B. Envelope material does not (Note: 2016 is the next realistic
meet stress requirements. launch window for a balloon
mission to Mars. The technology
C. Lost of control of the
Cutoff deadline 2013.)
balloon inflation.
Cost
D. Balloon does not fully F. Development cost needed to
inflate. mature technology exceeds
allocated budget resulting delay in
technology development.
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 48
Conventional Aerial Balloon Deployment
vs. New Surface Balloon Deployment
• The new surface balloon inflation system makes a
compelling case for future Mars Balloon
deployment strategy.
C A, B, D
E F
E
B C F A, D
Risks Associated with the Conventional Risks Associated with the
Aerial Balloon Deployment Strategy New Surface Balloon Deployment Strategy
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 49
10.0 Education and Public Outreach
(EPO)
Education and Public Outreach
The University of Michigan Mars Balloon Team members
have been participating of a variety of Education and
Public Outreach activities. This includes:
• Outreach Efforts to General Public.
• Outreach Efforts at the University.
• Outreach Efforts to the Local Community.
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 51
Outreach Efforts to General Public
The University of Michigan Mars Balloon Team has
partnered with the local science museum, The Ann Arbor
Hands-On Museum, to design and develop a new space
science exhibit, Feel the Solar System. Our goal was to
inspire the public and get them interested in space science
and engineering.
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 52
Prototype Assessment
•Assembly
Physical -Color scheme, unique design,
- Attractive to all ages.
child proof, repairable
- Promotes knowledge •Physical interaction
retainability. •Formative Evaluation
Cognitive - Improve usability, redesign
- Understand the proposed •Formative Evaluation
space science concepts. - Text conventions
- Relate and build upon prior - Scientific Accuracy
knowledge. - Layout and Ergonomics
Affective - Organization
-Develop and hold user’s
•Formative Evaluation
interest.
- Hold Time
-Stimulate curiosity.
- Customer Satisfaction
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 53
“Feel the Solar System” Exhibit
• Eight models to represent the
planets of the solar system
• Publicize the fact that Pluto is no
longer classified as a planet.
• Allow users to have a hands-on
experience to feel the differences
in gravitational force between the
planets by having them use a piece
of metal to touch on the magnetic
surface of each planet model.
• Permanent magnets are placed Picture from:
inside each planet model. http://www.enchantedlearning.com/subjects/astronomy/planets/
• Magnets provide forces proportional
to their gravitational accelerations.
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 54
Outreach Efforts to General Public
• On Saturday, May 12, 2007, our
group unveiled the Feel the Solar
System science exhibit at the Ann
Arbor Hands-On Science Museum.
• Visitors were also informed about
the Mars Balloon project in order to
simulate their curiosity.
• We performed surveys to determine
their impression of the exhibit:
– Did users understand the
concepts presented?
– What could we improve?
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 55
Survey Results
Holding Time Histogram
12 120.00%
Frequency of Users
10 100.00%
Frequency
8 80.00%
6 60.00% Cumulative %
4 40.00%
2 20.00%
0 0.00%
e
0
0
13 0
0
0
10 0
0
0
0
12 0
00
M 0
60
80
90
20
10
30
40
50
70
or
0
0
Bin (seconds)
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 56
Survey Results
planet?
Do you think Pluto is aDo You Think Pluto is a Planet?
Maybe = 2
13 = Yes 12 = No Yes = 5
No = 17
Pre-exhibit Post-exhibit
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 57
Outreach to K-12 &
College Community
• Presented project to the public
– Design Expo (April 2007).
• Developed an outreach website
to K-12, college and local
community.
Mars Balloon Team at Design Expo
• Produced video documentary of our design project. We plan
to use it to inspire high school and college students to work
on multidisciplinary engineering design projects.
• Participated in 5th Annual K-Grams Kids Fair on March
13th, 2007. Inflated large weather balloon and attached a
webcam to it. Had Kids draw pictures of space ships.
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 58
Outreach to Local Community
• Strong relationship with a local company
– Cameron Balloons, US.
• Cameron Balloon Owner, Mr. Andrew Baird, came to
University of Michigan to give a guest lecture and share his
joy of ballooning.
• The majority of our prototype engineering design parts
were purchased from our local community in order to
support small business owners.
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 59
Questions?
Backup Slides
AAHOM’s Mission Statement
The Mission of the Ann Arbor Hands-On
Museum is to inspire people to discover the
wonder of science, math and technology.
Our Vision is to be the leader in
imaginative and interactive learning
experiences.
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 62
“Feel the Solar System” Design
1” Russian Birch Side View Roundhead
Plywood screws
magnet
polycarbonate
Design from
Foto1
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 63
Not to scale . . . Top half: whole side; bottom half: close up of one side
“Feel the Solar System” Budget
Venues Total Cost
Foto1: Design Fabrication $350.86
Burt Forest Products: Wood $199.00
Storch: Magnets $63.45
McMaster Carr: Steel $34.35
McMaster Carr: Polycarbonate Sheet $178.81
Student artist Allan C. Edwards: Designs $150.00
Home Depot Hardware Store: Paint $20.00
Most Updated Total Cost: $996.47
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 64
Pre-Evaluation Surveys
for “Feel the Solar System”
1. How familiar are you with the term
“Gravity”?
Very Familiar
Somewhat Familiar
Children Adults
Not Familiar
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 66
2. How familiar are you with the term
“Solar System”?
Very Familiar
Somewhat Familiar
Children Adults
Not Familiar
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 67
3. Pluto is a planet. T/F
Children Adults
6
5 8
6
FALSE TRUE FALSE TRUE
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 68
4. Sun is a star. T/F
Children Adults
9 13
2
1
TRUE FALSE TRUE FALSE
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 69
5. How familiar are you with the term
“Asteroid Belt“?
Very Familiar
Somewhat Familiar
Adults
Children Not Familiar
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 70
6. How familiar are you with the term
“Great Red Spot”?
Very Familiar
Children
Somewhat Familiar Adults
Not Familiar
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 71
8. What would you like to know about
the Sun or the planets?
• Is there a such thing as Planet X
• Habitable planets? –Only Earth so far
• How dark is Pluto? – Pluto is not a planet
anymore.
• Atmosphere on other planets
• Solar system history
• More planet details
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 72
Pre-Evaluation Survey Results
• Provided a poster each
person had to name all the
objects they could
recognize
• RESULTS:
- Most Adults and
Children assume Pluto was
in the picture
- Very few recognize Pluto
was missing
- At least everyone
recognized Earth!!!
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 73
Post Evaluation Surveys
for “Feel the Solar System”
Survey Results
Gender and Age Distribution
12
10
8
Frequency
6
4
2
0
1 2 3 4
M F B G b5 g6
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 75
Survey Results
Participants for Exhibit
Adult = 10
Child = 14
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 76
Survey Results
Does This Exhibit Look Attractive To You?
Which Planet Feels the Strongest?
(Not including the Sun)
Somewhat = 2
Not at all = 0
No answer = 1
Pluto = 1
Mars = 1
A lot = 22
Jupiter = 21
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 77
Survey Results
Which Planet Feels the Lightest? Do You Recognize the Planets?
Saturn = 1
Venus = 1
Earth = 1
Pluto = 1
Maybe = 5
No answer = 2 No = 1
Yes = 18
Mercury = 17
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 78
What would you like to learn about the
planets?
• Atmospheric properties
• What makes the gravity on each planet different?
• Mass and size of each planet
• What happened to Pluto?
• Why doesn’t the Sun pull all the planets in?
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 79
Appendix D: Results of the Preliminary
Risk Analysis
D-1: Conventional Aerial Balloon Deployment D-2: New Surface Balloon Deployment
• A - Risk Score 25 (Maximum Risk Rating) • A - Risk Score 5
– Both, likelihood and consequence is at highest. Balloon has the – Balloon will be deployed after landing thus, it will not experience
highest risk of experiencing rupture due to fast descent aerodynamic loading that conventional system experience during
velocity. Consequence of this would be total mission failure. descent phase. The only aerodynamic load which may cause to
rupture the balloon would be in situation where gust winds blow the
• B - Risk Score 25 (Maximum Risk Rating) balloon to the ground and surface friction causes balloon to rupture.
– Both, likelihood and consequence is at highest. Balloon Consequence of the balloon rupture will result in unsuccessful
envelope material has high stress requirements due to fast balloon deployment. However, this risk can be mitigated with our
descent velocity. The advancement in thin film technology is deployable cylinder system concept.
needed. Consequence of not meeting the requirements would
result in total mission failure. • B - Risk Score 1
– The surface balloon inflation system can meet the envelope stress
• C - Risk Score 15 requirements because existing film materials meet this requirement.
– Likelihood is highest due to limited inflation time available for
balloon deployment (Maximum 2-3 minutes during EDL). • C - Risk Score 2
Lifting gas flow rate is at close to maximum thus, it is not – It is in green zone. Inflation of the balloon is done after landing thus
possible to control the inflation depending on the inflation can be done anytime without a deployment-time constraint.
environmental input. Assuming that technology is fully flight Various sensors including wind sensors onboard can be used to
ready, it will still give significant amount of uncertainties in the monitors the environmental conditions before starting the balloon
system. deployment. These metrological data could be used to analyze wind
pattern at the landing site, helping operators and scientists to decide
• D - Risk Score 25 (Maximum Risk Rating) when the most appropriate time to start inflation is therefore
– Both, likelihood and consequence is highest. Many minimizing the risks.
environmental conditions may effect the inflation resulting
balloon to not fully inflate. Consequence of this would be total • D - Risk Score 5
mission failure. – The likelihood of the balloon not being inflated fully is low since
surface balloon deployment can easily control the balloon inflation.
• E - Risk Score 16
– Both, Likelihood and consequence is in the red zone. Only a • E - Risk Score 12
few stratospheric tests can be conducted each year and this – The risk is in yellow zone because the concept is new. Balloon
technology can only mature by trial and error. Thus, there is a development may experience delay because the current TRL is low.
high risk of not enough tests/trials being conducted to mature Unforeseen problems may arise during the development. Delays
this technology. Since, the deployment technology is the key might cause the technology cutoff deadline to be missed.
for mission success, the risk is high.
• F- Risk Score 4
• F - Risk Score 16 – The risk is in green zone because the costs of ground deployment
– Both, likelihood and consequence is in the red zone. Due to tests are low. Most tests can be done on the ground in existing test
small funding allocation, the technology development has not facilities at NASA, Industry, and University laboratories.
progressed enough. The delay in technology development may
imply that the technology cut off is not reached.
May 21-24, 2007 Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept – Academic Linkage 80