Document Sample
CDR_Presentation Powered By Docstoc
					University of Central Florida
Critical Design Review (CDR)                       UCF USLI 2009-2010

January 29th, 2010

                                NASA University
                                Student Launch
                                Students for the Exploration and
                                Development of Space (SEDS-UCF)
Changes to Launch Vehicle
                                         UCF USLI 2009-2010

•   Completed critical dynamic structure tests
•   Completed critical dynamic recovery tests
•   Completed critical dynamic propulsion tests
•   Completed critical dynamic integrated system
Changes to Payload
                                    UCF USLI 2009-2010

• Tested and verified functionality of ARTS 2
  in static and dynamic tests
• More research being performed and
  mathematical models soon to be under
Changes to Activity Plan
                                       UCF USLI 2009-2010

• Test launches moved from second to third
  Saturday of every month due to a change in
  launch site
• CDR Presentation date and time scheduled,
  1/29/2010 12:00 PM CT
• Outreach set to take place within next month
• Outreach with science students at Oviedo High
  School added to activity plan.
Launch Vehicle Summary
                                                                UCF USLI 2009-2010

Characteristic         Value           Characteristic            Value

Total Length           106.65 in.      Motor                     SkyRipper K257

Airframe Diameter      3.065 in.       Average Thrust            285 N

Span Diameter          8.065 in.       Maximum Thrust            2461 N

Gross Liftoff Weight   243.983 oz      Drogue                    At Apogee

CG Location            57.3929 in.     Main Parachute            1000 ft.

CP Location            71.3471 in.     Velocity at Guide         55.488 ft/s
Stability Margin       4.65 Calibers   Velocity at Deployment    48.1673 ft/s

Maximum Acceleration   506.707         Time to landing:          193.924 Sec.
Maximum Velocity       593.1766 ft/s   Range at landing:         2173.80946 ft

Maximum Altitude       5366.42196 ft   Velocity at landing:      20.9014 ft/s
Payload Summary
                                                                           UCF USLI 2009-2010

  •The payload is an Environmental Sensor Analysis Package (ESAP) which
  measures and records 3-axis acceleration, acoustic levels, pressure, and
  temperature. A primary and secondary flight computer, competition altimeter,
  and GPS transmitter and receiver will also be implemented

Science Payload                                Flight Computer

Microcontroller          Arduino Duemilanove   Primary Flight Computer       Ozark ARTS 2

3-Axis Accelerometer     LIS302DL              Secondary Flight Computer     Ozark ARTS 2
Pressure Transducer      MPXA6115AC7U          Competition Altimeter         PerfectFlite ALT15
Temperature Sensor       DS1624                GPS Transmitter               ARTS TX-900G
Acoustic Data Recorder   Digitalease1023       GPS Receiver                  ARTS RX-900
Condenser Microphone     Omnidirectional
Contact Microphone       Piezoelectric
Power Supply             9.6V Ni-Cd
Mission Profile Chart
                        UCF USLI 2009-2010
Vehicle Dimensions
                     UCF USLI 2009-2010
Stability Margin Analysis
                                                  UCF USLI 2009-2010

Charactaristic                    Dimension
CG Location                       57.3929 in.
CP Location                       71.3471 in.
Stability Margin                  4.65 Calibers
Required Velocity for Stability   44 ft/s
Velocity at Guide Departure       55.488 ft/s
Stability Hieght                  28.3583”

•Vehicle is statically stable and dynamically
stable prior to leaving the launch rail
Prototype Launch
Structure Analysis                            UCF USLI 2009-2010

 • Structure performed very well overall
    • Most all of the mission objectives were met
 • Two minor failures occurred upon touchdown
 of the vehicle
    • Fin to separated completely from the airframe
    • Bending stress caused 1.5” rip around the
      circumference of the airframe.
Prototype Launch
Structure Analysis – Fin Separation     UCF USLI 2009-2010

• Fin remained undamaged
• Failure occurred within the bead
of epoxy along the fin to airframe
• This problem was troubleshot at
the launch site by using quick
curing 5-minute epoxy to secure
the fin back into its position in the
fin slot.
• This connection was sufficient
and lasted through the second
Prototype Launch
Structure Analysis – Airframe rip   UCF USLI 2009-2010

• Failure occurred within the
airframe body above the
leading edge of one of the fin
• Bending stress caused
failure of the airframe in a
1.5” rip around the
circumference of the
• This rip was sealed with
Propulsion Overview
                                                     UCF USLI 2009-2010

• SkyRipper was chosen because
    • High reliability of their motors
    • Relative simplicity of their use
    • Price
    • Attainability
    • Capability
• Same grain reloads used for all SkyRipper 54mm motors

Motor Case   Designation          Fuel            Project Usage
54/550        SR J348 B    ABS Plastic Reloads         None
54/550        SR J263 G    ABS Plastic Reloads   Prototype Launch
54/1130       SR K347 B    ABS Plastic Reloads         None
54/1130       SR K257 G    ABS Plastic Reloads   Full-Scale Launch
Sub-Scale Thrust Curve
                                                         UCF USLI 2009-2010

      Characteristic                  Value
     Prototype Weight                         13.2 lbs
     Prototype Max Thrust                     529 lbs
     Max Thrust to Weight Ratio               40.0 lbs
     Prototype Average Thrust                 53.1 lbs
     Average Thrust to Weight Ratio            4.0221
Full Scale Thrust Curve
                                                        UCF USLI 2009-2010

           Characteristic                  Value
          Full Scale Wieght                  16.6 lbs
          Full Scale Max Thrust               553 lbs
          Max Thrust to Weight Ratio         33.3 lbs
          Full Scale Average Thrust          64.1 lbs
          Average Thrust to Weight Ratio        3.86
Prototype Launch
Propulsion Analysis                              UCF USLI 2009-2010

• Propulsion system achieved much progress
but performed very limited
   • Most mission objectives were met
• The oxidizer tank was filled with a very
small amount of oxidizer
• This limited the thrust performance of the
motor greatly Propulsion Performance Characteristics
                  Event             Launch 1   Launch 2
                  Burn Time         2.35 s     .79 s
                  Maximum Thrust    193 N      251 N
                  Average Thrust    40 N       25 N
                  Total Impulse     71 N*s     40 N*s
                  Rating            F30        E25
Prototype Launch                                UCF USLI 2009-2010

Propulsion Analysis – Component verification
•Launch site ignition system provided enough power to
start ignition sequence.
•The igniter provided enough energy to ignite the starter
•The starter grain provided enough energy to sever the fill
line and release oxidizer to combustion chamber
•Oxidizer tank was not successfully topped off and a “full
indicating” vent stream was not identified
•The solid fuel grain was burned with oxidizer to produce
Prototype Launch                         UCF USLI 2009-2010

Propulsion Analysis – Thrust Curves

        Launch 1                  Launch 2
Recovery Overview
                                                      UCF USLI 2009-2010

• 36” drogue deployed at apogee
• 72” main parachute deployed at 1000 feet

Descent rate calculations:
            Recovery Analysis Results Table

                 Chute              Velocity (ft/s)
                Drogue                   33.9
                 Main                    18.8
Primary Parachute Black Powder Calculations
Deployment Charge Timeline
Table 37: Drogue Black Powder Calculations

        Recovery Overview
        Black Powder and Deployment
                                                                                     UCF USLI 2009-2010

         Item                Altitude/ Black Powder Details
                               Time       Charge
         Flight Computer “A” Apogee     0.80 grams  Deploy the drogue.
         Drogue Deployment
         Flight Computer                      Apogee +    1.00 grams   Act as backup to deploy the
         “B” Drogue                            2 sec.                  drogue. Slight delay from first
         Deployment                                                    charge and includes more
                                                                       black powder.
         Flight Computer “A”                  1000 feet   2.50 grams   Deploy the primary parachute.
         Primary Parachute                      AGL
         Flight Computer                      950 feet    3.00 grams   Act as backup to deploy the
         “B” Primary                            AGL                    main. Slight delay from first
         Parachute                                                     charge and includes more
         Deployment                                                    black powder.
Prototype Launch                                               UCF USLI 2009-2010

Recovery Analysis
•The recovery system performed very well overall
    • Most all of the mission objectives were met
• There were no critical failures of the recovery system
• The deployment occurred as planned and the descent
rate on both launches was acceptable.
•A summary of parachute deployment times and descent
rates can be found in the recovery performance
characteristics table below.
 Recovery Performance Characteristics
 Event          Launch 1     Deployment - MET   Launch 2   Deployment - MET
 Descent Rate   18 ft/s      4.75 s             17 ft/s    2.42 s
Prototype Launch                             UCF USLI 2009-2010

Recovery Analysis – Parachute Damage
• Recovery system successfully deployed the parachute
with all shroud lines untangled
• Slight damage to the nylon parachute surface
• Parachute packing methods and thermal protection is
under investigation

                      Rip damage       Burn damage
Flight Computer Overview
                                              UCF USLI 2009-2010
• Flight Computer System
   • Primary and Secondary Ozark ARTS2
   • Ozark TX-900G and RX900 GPS System
   • PerfectFlite ALT15 Recording Altimeter
Prototype Launch                                       UCF USLI 2009-2010

Flight Computer Analysis
• Flight computer system performed very well
• Proved ability to fire e-matches and ejection charges
• Tested safety ejection feature of ARTS 2
    • Main and back-up fired at apogee when vehicle did
      not reached programmed altitude
• Did not test programmability abilities
Flight Computer Performance Characteristics
Event                     Launch 1 – MET      Launch 2 – MET
Main Deployment           4.74 s              2.41 s

Back-up Deployment        4.75 s              2.42 s
ESAP Payload Objectives
                                                       UCF USLI 2009-2010

• Payload success is measured by the degree of fulfillment of the
  three main payload objectives.
• The three main payload objectives are:
   • Complete vibration models and acoustic environment predictions
      prior to competition launch.
   • Successfully recover acoustic and vibration data of launch
   • Correlate flight data to models and predictions.
• There are four levels of success for the ESAP payload. The
  definitions of all four levels are presented below:
   • Unsuccessful – None of the objectives were met or fulfilled.
   • Moderately Successful - 1 of 3 objectives are met and fulfilled.
   • Successful – 2 of 3 objectives are met and fulfilled.
   • Highly Successful – All objectives were met and completely
ESAP Payload
Method of Investigation
                                                 UCF USLI 2009-2010

• Preliminary research revealed two main sources of
  sound generation during rocket flight;
   • Motor firing
   • Turbulently fluctuating air pressures along the outer
     skin of the airframe.
• If the excitation vibration and acoustic patterns of these
  two sources are known then a more accurate payload
  response model can be developed along side.
ESAP Payload                                     UCF USLI 2009-2010

Method of Investigation – Motor Noise
• To determine the acoustic and vibration patterns of the
  motor during firing, the ESAP payload will be tested at
  the same time as the static motor firing.
• The ESAP testing will include recording the acoustic and
  vibration environments produced by the motor during
  test firing.
• This will serve to begin a database of acoustic and
  vibration excitation forces created by the motor.
• These excitation trends will be analyzed and are critical
  in the development of a model.
ESAP Payload                                     UCF USLI 2009-2010

Method of Investigation – Airframe Noise
• The airframe noise patterns will not be experienced in
  any static testing but will be experienced during the
  coming test launches.
• The first ESAP dynamic test will record the acoustic and
  vibration environments produced by the airframe during
  test launch.
• Computational Fluid Dynamics analysis using ANSYS
  FLUENT is being investigated for its ability in obtaining a
  prediction of the excitation modes caused by turbulent
  flow along the outside of the airframe.
LV Safety and Environment
                                                           UCF USLI 2009-2010

• Hazards:
   •   Nitrous Oxide
   •   Electric matches
   •   Premature Ignition
• Materials:
   •   Nitrous Oxide
   •   Blackpowder
   •   Igniter grain
• Safety Concerns:
   •   Wearing eye protection when cutting
   •   Wearing gloves when using adhesives
   •   Proper ventilation when toxic fumes are present
   •   Following launch range and NAR/Tripoli procedures
LV Risk Analysis Summary
                                         UCF USLI 2009-2010

   Structures        Propulsion         Recovery

  Total Risks: 4    Total Risks: 10   Total Risks: 11
  Green Risks: 0    Green Risks: 2    Green Risks: 2
  Yellow Risks: 4   Yellow Risks: 7   Yellow Risks: 7
   Red Risks: 0      Red Risks: 1      Red Risks: 2
Payload Risk Analysis Summary
                                       UCF USLI 2009-2010

      Flight Computer       ESAP Payload

       Total Risks: 7       Total Risks: 5

       Green Risks: 3       Green Risks: 1

       Yellow Risks: 3      Yellow Risks: 4

        Red Risks: 1         Red Risks: 0
Mission Budget
                                  UCF USLI 2009-2010

 Item                          Total Cost
 Structure                       $590.66
 Propulsion                      $761.73
 Recovery                        $432.63
 Payload                         $902.53
 Misc.                           $303.92
 Transportation                $6,528.60

 TOTAL (rockets)               $2,991.47
 TOTAL (inc. transportation)   $9,520.07
 Funding and Expenses
                                               UCF USLI 2009-2010

                              Spent       Initial         Balance
Daedalus Account Total:      $799.90    $799.90            $0.00
FSGC USLI Account Total:     $256.24   $1,000.00        $743.76
Arrow Dynamics               $694.97   $2,427.20       $1,732.23
SGA FAO Account Total:       $979.03 $1,000.00    $20.97
TOTAL                      $2,730.14 $5,227.10 $2,496.96
Major Milestone Schedule
                                                            UCF USLI 2009-2010

16             Prototype Launch
20             CDR presentation slides and CDR report due
28 to Feb. 5   CDR presentations

13             Complete all static testing by this date
20             Full Scale Launch

13             Full Scale Launch
17             Flight Readiness Review (FRR) due
25             FRR presentations begin

10             Full Scale Launch
14             Travel to Huntsville
15             Rocket Fair/hardware and safety check
17 - 18        Launch weekend
19             Return home

7              Post-Launch Assessment Review (PLAR) Due
21             Announcement of winning USLI team
                                                        UCF USLI 2009-2010

• 37 failure modes and risks to the mission
       •4 are red
       •25 are yellow
       •8 are green.
• Mitigation of these risks and failure modes will be accomplished
through testing and analysis

•If analysis or testing cannot prove to mitigate a specific risk or
failure mode, its probability of occurrence and impact upon the
overall mission will be discussed internally and checked with
NASA and NAR officials to determine whether or not the mission is
go for launch.

Shared By: