html5-img
1 / 26

E80 Final Report

E80 Final Report. Section 4 Team 2 Student 1 Student 2 Student 3 Student 4 May 5, 2008. Introduction. Goals: Simulate rocket flights Analyze rocket flight data Compare simulation to analysis and explain discrepancies Three analyses Large Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU)

duer
Download Presentation

E80 Final Report

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. E80 Final Report Section 4 Team 2 Student 1 Student 2 Student 3 Student 4 May 5, 2008

  2. Introduction • Goals: • Simulate rocket flights • Analyze rocket flight data • Compare simulation to analysis and explain discrepancies • Three analyses • Large Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) • Large Vibration • Small IMU Rocket—fatal flat spin

  3. Background • IMU • Placed the IMU board on a turntable • Measured distance from center to IMU • Spun at several different frequencies • Plotted ADC values as a function of known angular velocity and linear acceleration

  4. Background • Vibration • Placed strain gauges on a hollow cylinder • Performed a tap test with an impulse hammer • Created Bode plots of output compared to force • Flight Modeling • Created 2-dimensional model of flight path using thrust curves and coefficient of drag • Predicted time to apogee and height at apogee

  5. Flight Preparation • Set the configuration on the R-DAS unit • Check transmission channel and settings • Checked R-DAS and video telemetry • Two flights did not have working video • Loaded parachute and wadding • Proctor loaded motor • Proctor loaded ejection charge • Loaded rocket on launch pad • Turned on R-DAS unit to transmit • Launch

  6. IMU Analysis Procedure • MATLAB code used calibration curves to convert ADC values to acceleration and angular velocity • Numerically integrate angular velocities to find angles at each time step • Create rotation matrix to convert local acceleration to global • Numerically integrate in 3-dimensions to find velocity and position

  7. Large IMU Analysis

  8. Large IMU Simulation • Analyzed and launched with G339N Motor • Rocksim predicted • Time to apogee: 6.627 s • Height at apogee: 701.7 ft • Burnout: 0.360 s • Distance from launch pad: 254.44 ft

  9. Large IMU Data—Flight 1 • Only able to analyze to apogee • Too much error accumulated past apogee to analyze the data • Time to apogee: 6.220 s • Height at apogee: 522.22 ft • Burnout: 0.35 s

  10. Large IMU Data—Flight 2 • Only able to analyze to apogee • Too much error accumulated past apogee to analyze the data • Time to apogee: 5.2150 s • Height at apogee: 454.35 ft • Burnout: 0.34 s

  11. Large IMU Analysis • Sensitivity to calibration curves • Bias changes due to temperature • Propagation of error

  12. 15 10 7 6 1 12 1.5” 13” 17” 33.25” Large Vibration Flight Data • Collected data for 6 sensors • Used the sensor closest to the motor as the input • Graphed plots of the output of each sensor vs. the designated input

  13. Large Vibration Analysis • Sampling at 200 Hz gave frequencies between 0 and 100 Hz • Based on Fourier transform and hollow cylinder results expected frequencies ~10 Hz and ~50 Hz within window • Observed frequencies matched expected frequencies at both liftoff and apogee • Mode shapes were arbitrary because of limited sensor resolution

  14. 3D Analysis

  15. Small IMU Simulation • Analyzed and flown with G104T motor • Analysis performed without parachute • Rocksim predicted: • Time to apogee: 7.864 s • Height at apogee: 938.31 ft • Burnout: 0.901 s • Distance from launch pad: 126.91 ft • Time to impact: 15.68 s

  16. Small IMU Flight Data • Data was corrupted throughout flight • No distinct impulse and landing curves as in other plots • Signal present only noise • MATLAB analysis gave useless data • From visual and video analysis: • Height at apogee: ~850 ft • Time at apogee: ~7.8 s

  17. Small IMU Analysis • Cause of data corruption may be low voltage to R-DAS and IMU • Could have also led to failure of parachute to open at apogee • From video, rocket experienced greater weather cocking than predicted by Rocksim • Traveled nearly twice the predicted distance from launch pad • Also likely due to higher wind gusts than predicted • Noise in acceleration signal prevents accurate numerical analysis of flight path

  18. Conclusions • RockSim Simulations were relatively accurate when compared to flight data • Variable winds and launch conditions contribute to discrepancies • High amount of error after apogee for all IMU flights • Resonant peaks for vibration rocket were observed during liftoff as expected • Mode shapes could not be resolved

  19. Acknowledgments • Professors Spjut, Wang, Cardenas, Miraghie, and Yang • Proctor A, Proctor B, Proctor C, and Proctor D

  20. Questions?

  21. Extra Figures

  22. Modal Shape Magnitude vs. Position, with theoretical mode on top Sensor 10 as input, 7, 6, 1 as outputs 80 Hz

  23. Large IMU Day 1 : Without Rotation

  24. VI Front Panel

  25. First Modal Shape Magnitude of Vibration (dB) Position along Rocket (in)

  26. Second Modal Shape Magnitude of Vibration (dB) Position along Rocket (in)

More Related