2013-2014
Download
1 / 44

Critical Design Review Presentation - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 160 Views
  • Uploaded on

2013-2014 Project Nova. Critical Design Review Presentation. Final Launch Vehicle Dimensions. Final Launch Vehicle Dimensions. Nosecone. Final Launch Vehicle Dimensions. Recovery Section. Final Launch Vehicle Dimensions. Booster Section. Final Launch Vehicle Dimensions.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Critical Design Review Presentation' - juliet


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

2013-2014

Project Nova

Critical Design Review Presentation









Key design features
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 features1
Key Design Features

  • PASTE A PICTURE OF THE HEAT SHIELDS HERE


Key design features2
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 features3
Key Design Features

CG Position


Final motor choice
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 choice1
Final Motor Choice

Sellers: What’s Up Hobbies (Stockton, CA)

Wildman Rocketry (Van Orin, IL)


Final motor choice2
Final Motor Choice

Optimum Weight: 68.5 lbm

Mass margin: 22%

Apogee Achieved (ft): 15,508

Maximum Mach #: 1.02


Final motor choice3
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 choice4
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
Rocket Flight Stability

CG Location

CP Location

Stability caliber: 2.93






Simulated flight performance data2
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 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 margin2
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%.



Subscale test flight
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 flight1
Subscale Test Flight

Subscale Fin Dimensions



Subscale test flight3
Subscale Test Flight

Drogue Parachute

Main Parachute

Motor

Avionics Bay




Recovery
Recovery

  • Dual-Deploy System: Drogue and Main

  • Redundant Charges

  • Dual Altimeters



Recovery2
Recovery

  • Black Powder Charges

    • 1st Charge: 5 grams → 164 lbf

    • Backup Charge: 5.5 grams → 180 lbf

    • Ground Testing


Recovery3
Recovery

  • Shear Pins

    • #4-40 nylon machine screws

    • 10,000 psi shear strength

    • 2 pins connecting each section

    • Instron Tensile Stress Testing


Recovery4
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


Recovery5
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
Payload

  • Design Overview

    • TAP

      • Hardware Integration

      • Software Integration

      • Base Station


Payload1
Payload

  • Design Overview

    • BPAP

      • Hardware Data Collection

      • Software Processing

      • Data Collection Post Flight

      • Analysis


Payload2
Payload

  • Design Overview

    • CMP

      • Testing Verification

      • Integration


Requirement fufillment
Requirement Fufillment

  • Where we stand

    • CDR

  • Future Endevours


Closing
Closing

  • Summary

  • Questions


ad