Critical Design Review - CAL POLY POMONA · PDF fileCritical Design Review ... Pomona, CA...
-
Upload
vuongnguyet -
Category
Documents
-
view
219 -
download
0
Transcript of Critical Design Review - CAL POLY POMONA · PDF fileCritical Design Review ... Pomona, CA...
Critical Design Review
1/27/2017
NASA Student Launch Competition 2016-2017
California State Polytechnic University, Pomona
3801 W Temple Ave, Pomona, CA 91768
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 1
Agenda
Subscale Model Overview
Final Primary Payload Overview (RIS)
Final Secondary Payload Overview (FMP)
Launch Vehicle Interfaces
Project Plan
Probability of Success
Introduction
Final Launch Vehicle Overview
Launch Vehicle Performance
Recovery Subsystem
Mission Performance Predictions
Test Plans and Procedures
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 2
Introduction
Subscale Model Overview
Final Primary Payload Overview (RIS)
Final Secondary Payload Overview (FMP)
Launch Vehicle Interfaces
Project Plan
Probability of Success
Introduction
Final Launch Vehicle Overview
Launch Vehicle Performance
Recovery Subsystem
Mission Performance Predictions
Test Plans and Procedures
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 3
Introduction
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 4
Advisors and Mentors
Dr. Donald L. Edberg•Faculty advisor•Professor of Aerospace Engineering
Dr. Todd Coburn•Structural mentor•Professor of Aerospace Engineering
Rick Maschek•Rocketry mentor•Tripoli Rocketry Association level 2 certification
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 5
Team WBS
• Team lead
• Deputy/systems engineer
• Safety officer
• Structures sub-team
• Aerodynamics sub-team
• Avionics sub-team
• Support sub-team
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 6
Task Force WBS
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 7
Final Launch Vehicle Overview
Subscale Model Overview
Final Primary Payload Overview (RIS)
Final Secondary Payload Overview (FMP)
Launch Vehicle Interfaces
Project Plan
Probability of Success
Introduction
Final Launch Vehicle Overview
Launch Vehicle Performance
Recovery Subsystem
Mission Performance Predictions
Test Plans and Procedures
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 8
Major Changes Since PDR
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 9
Nose Cone
• Parabolic nose cone to Elliptical nose cone
Weight and length
• Length increased from 7.3 ft. to 8.92 ft.
• Weight increased from 28.1 lb. to 48.38 lb.
Coupler size
• Increased from 7 in. to 13.5 in.
Main parachute
• Increased from 27.4 ft2 to 80 ft2
Drogue Parachute
• Decreased from 11.25 ft2 to 5 ft2
Avionics, Recovery Bay
• Redundant GPS systems in nose cone
• Recovery Avionics and Payload Electronics Sleds Redesigned
Motor Bay
• Motor changed from L1150P to L1120W-O
• Size of motor bay slightly increased to accommodate new motor
Final Launch Vehicle
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 10
Final Launch Vehicle
1/27/2017 11California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR
Final Launch Vehicle
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 12
Final Launch Vehicle
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 13
Final Launch Vehicle
Elliptical Nose Cone:
•Offers highest structural Integrity compared to previous Parabolic Design
•Aerodynamic blunt tip design offers low Cd
•Housed GPS sled for tracking
•3D printed using 100% fill PLA plastic
GPS Sled
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 14
Final Launch Vehicle
Recovery Sub Systems:
• This encompasses the Main Parachute Bay, Recovery Bay, and Drogue Bay
• Recovery bay includes the flight altimeters
Main Parachute Bay Drogue Parachute Bay
Access to
Outside
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 15
Final Launch Vehicle
Fragile Materials Protection Bay (FMP):
•Secondary payload we are testing
•The “Pill” will contain packing material for fragile object
•It will be suspended by surgical tubing within a custom frame within the body tube to dampen oscillations
•Entirely self contained, assembled outside body tube and inserted within the tube when ready for flight
The “Pill”
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 16
Final Launch Vehicle
RIS Payload/ Observation Bay and Motor Bay:
•Most technically complex section of rocket
•Fin Integration of the rocket Including attachments
•Motor Integration and Retention for structural integrity
•RIS Payload accomplishing roll of rocket
•Observation system for visual confirmation of roll of rocket
Fin Integration
Motor
Integration
RIS Payload
Observation
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 17
Payload Dimensions
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 18
Design Features
Elliptical Nose
Cone: Greater
Structural Integrity
Piston recovery
System: Offers a
more reliable
parachute ejection
FMP Bay: Secondary payload for
more scientific data
Fins: 3D printed material with
actual NACA airfoil design for
optimum Cd and Cl
Motor Bay: Hand made
carbon fiber composite
motor tube
RIS Bay: Main payload
for roll induction using
coupled servo design
Aileron: Used to
create lift with
varied angle of
attacks
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 19
Final Motor Selection and Justification
Aerotech L1120W
Performance
• 5148 feet simulated
• 92% L motor
• Thrust-to-weight ratio: 4.60
• Rail Exit Velocity: 55.52 fps
Propellant Weight 6.08 lbm
Total Weight 10.27 lbm
Average Thrust 220.91 lbf
Peak Thrust 349.57 lbf
Total Impulse 4922.22 Ns
Burn Time 5.01 s
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 20
Launch Vehicle Performance
Subscale Model Overview
Final Primary Payload Overview (RIS)
Final Secondary Payload Overview (FMP)
Launch Vehicle Interfaces
Project Plan
Probability of Success
Introduction
Final Launch Vehicle Overview
Launch Vehicle Performance
Recovery Subsystem
Mission Performance Predictions
Test Plans and Procedures
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 21
Launch Vehicle Performance
Stability Analysis
OpenRocket Hand Calculations
Stability Margin 2.65 Calibers 3.00 Calibers
Center of Gravity (from Nose Cone) 66.62 in 66.98
Center of Pressure (from Nose Cone) 82.95 in 85.51
Outer Diameter 6.16 in
Total Length 107 in
Apogee: 5148
Max. velocity: 574 ft/s
Mach number= 0.52
1/27/2017California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR
22
Launch Vehicle Mass Statement
Mass Statement
Component Total Mass
(lbs.)
Mass
Margin %
Module 1: Nose cone, GPS 2.53 5.22%
Module 2: Main and Drogue
Parachutes, Avionic Bay,
FMP
11.55 23.85
Module 3: Payload Bay,
Observation Bay, Motor Bay34.36 70.95%
Total 48.43 100%
After Burnout 42.24 -12%
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 23
Recovery Subsystem
Subscale Model Overview
Final Primary Payload Overview (RIS)
Final Secondary Payload Overview (FMP)
Launch Vehicle Interfaces
Project Plan
Probability of Success
Introduction
Final Launch Vehicle Overview
Launch Vehicle Performance
Recovery Subsystem
Mission Performance Predictions
Test Plans and Procedures
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 24
Parachute OverviewMain Parachute Drogue Parachute
• Toroidal Parachute
• 80 ft2 effective area
• 400 lb paraline
• Manufactured by Fruity Chutes
• Cruciform Parachute
• 5 ft2 effective area
• 550 lb paraline
• Manufactured in-house
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 25
Parachute Sizes
Main Parachute Drogue Parachute
• 80 ft2 effective area
• 120’’ Do
• 36 oz
• 200 in3 packing volume
• 5 ft2 effective area
• 3.0’ Do
• 3.90 oz
• 14 in3 packing volume
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 26
Recovery Harnesses
Main Parachute Drogue Parachute
• 40 ft. length
• Τ1 2 ’’ Kevlar 2200 lb.
cord
• Τ1 4’’ Steel Quicklinks
at all 3 attach points
• Attaches to 3000 lb.
swivel linking to
main
• Mounted to rocket
by Τ1 3’’ Steel U-bolt
• 40 ft. length
• Τ1 2’’ Kevlar 2200 lb.
cord
• Τ1 4’’ Steel Quicklinks
at all 3 attach points
• Attaches to 1500 lb.
swivel linking to
drogue
• Mounted to rocket by
Τ1 3’’ Steel U-bolt
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 27
Recovery Avionics: GPS and Altimeters
Major components•Primary PerfectFlite stratologgerCF
•Secondary PerfectFlite StratologgerCF
•Two 1000 Mah Lipo batteries
StratologgerCF Primary Secondary
Deployment of
drogue
Apogee (5280 ft) One second post
Apogee
Deployment of
Main
700 ft 500 ft
Subscale Assembly1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 28
Recovery Avionics: GPS and Altimeters
Ejection Charges- Fore Charge:
•Ejects main Parachute
•Attached to fore Bulkhead of recovery bay
- Aft Charges:
•Ejects drogue parachute
•Attached to aft bulkhead of recovery bay
- Recovery Bay EMI shielded with copper foil tape
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 29
Recovery Avionics: GPS and Altimeters
Major components• BRB900
• Trackimo
GPS Operating
frequency
Operating range
BRB900 900 MHz 6 miles
Trackimo 850/1900MHz Indefinite (Requires cell
reception)
BRB900 Trackimo
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 30
Recovery Avionics: GPS and Altimeters
GPS Specifications
BRB900
•850 mAh single cell LiPo
•ublox 7 GPS chipset
•XBee pro HP S3B – 900 MHz
Trackimo
•600 mAh Li-ion battery
•Quad Band frequency – In US 850 and 1900 MHz
GPS sled fitted in nose cone
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 31
Mission Performance Predictions
Subscale Model Overview
Final Primary Payload Overview (RIS)
Final Secondary Payload Overview (FMP)
Launch Vehicle Interfaces
Project Plan
Probability of Success
Introduction
Final Launch Vehicle Overview
Launch Vehicle Performance
Recovery Subsystem
Mission Performance Predictions
Test Plans and Procedures
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 32
Descent Rates
•Post burn rocket weight is 42.24 lb
•Main chute area is 80 ft2
•Drogue chute are is 5 ft2
Component Max Velocity
Terminal Main
Velocity
Terminal Drogue
Velocity
(ft/s) (ft/s) (ft/s)
Nose Cone 55.0 13.5 76.6
Forward Rocket Section 21.4 13.5 76.6
Aft Rocket Section 13.5 13.5 76.6
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 33
Kinetic energy at key phases of the mission
•Main Parachute area is 80 ft2
•75 ft-lbf Max Kinetic energy of module at touch down
Component MassMax
Velocity
Terminal
Main
Velocity
Terminal
Main KE
Terminal
Drogue
Velocity
Terminal
Drogue KE
(slugs) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft-lbf) (ft/s) (ft-lbf)
Nose Cone 0.049 55.0 13.5 4.56 76.6 145
Forward
Rocket
Section
0.329 21.4 13.5 30.2 76.6 965
Aft Rocket
Section0.814 13.5 13.5 74.7 76.6 2391
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 34
Predicted drift from the launch pad with 5, 10, 15, 20 mph wind
•Note: For the 20 mph condition Main parachute deployment at 500 ft will cause drift outside of desired zone. To keep the rocket within the 2500 ft drift limit deployment of the main has to be reduced to 325 ft.
Wind Velocity (mph) Drift Distance (ft)
0 0
5 728
10 1456
15 2184
20 2912
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 35
Test Plans and Procedures
Subscale Model Overview
Final Primary Payload Overview (RIS)
Final Secondary Payload Overview (FMP)
Launch Vehicle Interfaces
Project Plan
Probability of Success
Introduction
Final Launch Vehicle Overview
Launch Vehicle Performance
Recovery Subsystem
Mission Performance Predictions
Test Plans and Procedures
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 36
Test Plan Matrix
#Test
Requirement
Fulfilled
Team
ResponsibleTest Planned Status
Actual Test
CompletedVerification Method Success Criteria
1
Subscale
Launch
VR1.2.5, VR1.4,
VR1.9, VR1.16,
VR1.16.1.
VR1.17.1,
RSR2.10
ALL 12/10/2016 Done 12/10/2016
The launch of the subscale rocket is a
holistic overview of procedures. The
subscale launch was intended to be a half-
scaled model of the full-scale launch
vehicle and was designed as such. To that
effect, the launch of the subscale is
primarily intended as a proof of concept for
the stability margin of the full-scale design.
(1) After launch, the launch will be
recoverable and reusable (2) Subscale
launch successful (3) On-board
altimeter capable of recording peak
altitude (4) recovery system functions
as designed
2
Full-scale
Launch
VR1.1, VR1.4,
VR1.17, VR1.17,
RSR2.10
ALL2/11/2017,
2/18/2017Not Done TBD
The team will run through the entire launch
procedure and analyze the resulting data
to determine what changes must be made,
if any, to the full-scale launch vehicle prior
to the competition
(1) Launch vehicle reaches an apogee
of 5,280 ft. 75 ft (2) Launch vehicle is
recoverable and usable after launch.
(3) Full scale test launch occurs prior
to FRR. (4) Recovery system functions
as designed.
3
Drogue
Parachute
Test
RSR2.1 Aerodynamics 1/28/2017 Not Done TBD
Attach a 5lb weight to the parachute and
view performance of parachute and take
measurements
(1) Inflation of Drogue (2) Matching
estimated drop test specimen descent
time
4
Main
Parachute
Test
RSR2.1 Aerodynamics 1/28/2017 Not Done TBD
Attach a 10lb weight to the parachute and
view performance of parachute and take
measurements
(1) Inflation of Drogue (2) Matching
estimated drop test specimen descent
time
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 37
Test Plan Matrix Continued
TestRequirement
Fulfilled
Team
ResponsibleTest Planned Status
Actual Test
CompletedVerification Method Success Criteria
5
Ejection Charge
TestRSR2.2 Avionics 1/29/2017 Not Done TBD
Ejection charge is sufficient to deploy
the recovery system
(1) The sections separate with enough energy to
break shear pins and pull the entire length of the
shock cord taunt (2) The body tube does not rip or
tear near shear pin interface or bulkhead screw
interface (3) Parachute and shock cord undamaged
from ejection charge hot gasses
6
Recovery Avionics VR1.3, RSR2.12 Avionics 1/29/2017 Not Done TBD
Recovery shielding must be capable
to blocking radio frequency
transmissions
(1) Radio frequency signals substantially reduced
within the recovery bay
7
RIS Test: Wind
Tunnel
ER3.3.1, ER3.3.1.1,
ER3.3.1.2, DR1.0ALLRIS 2/4/2017 Not Done TBD
Measure the side force and
moments experienced by the RIS at
a zero-degree deflection then at a
deflected position
(1) Accurate data for Normal force, pitching
moment, yawing moment, rolling moment, drag is
collected at different speeds and angles of attach
(2) Flow conditions are matched to subscale wind
tunnel testing
8
FMP TestER3.4.1, ER3.4.1.1,
ER3.4.1.2, ER3.4.1.6FMP 2/4/2017 Not Done TBD
Drop fragile material system from
height of 68 ft. to mimic max impulse
experienced during rocket flight.
(1) Fragile material unbroken (2) Fragile material
system re-usable
9
Body Tube
Materials
Properties Test for
Crippling
DR4.1 Structures 1/21/2017 Not Done TBD
(1) Static Load Test: load applied to
continuous section of a body tube (2)
Dynamics Drop Test: simulate same
impulse during launch on body
section
(1) The body tube will experience absolutely no
localized crippling (2) The body tube will maintain
its structural integrity with no permanent
deformations to the material (3) Fastener bulkhead
attachment point holes located on body tube will
show no signs of tearing, ripping, or shearing at
these specified locations
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 38
Test Plan Matrix Continued
TestRequirement
Fulfilled
Team
ResponsibleTest Planned Status
Actual Test
CompletedVerification Method Success Criteria
10
Bulkhead Shear
and Shear Tear-
Out Test
DR4.2 Structures 1/21/2017 Not Done TBD
(1) Static Load Test: load applied to
bulkhead (2) Dynamics Drop Test:
simulate same impulse during
launch on bulkhead
(1) The bulkhead will experience no shearing at fastener
locations (2) The bulkhead will maintain its structural integrity,
meaning the material the bulkhead is made from will not show
any sign of damage or material degradation (3) Fastener
bulkhead attachment point holes will show no signs of yielding
due to bearing stress thus deforming the area around the
fastener
11
PLA Shear Test DR4.3 Structures 1/21/2017 Not Done TBD
verify the impulse force caused by
the main parachute does not cause
the screws to shear through the
nosecone during midflight
(1) The PLA will experience no shearing at the fastener
locations (2) The PLA will maintain its structural integrity, with
no permanent deformation or any signs of damage to the
material
12
Water Tunnel
TestDR4.4 Aerodynamics 1/25/2017 Not Done TBD
Full scale test models of nose cone
and fins will be placed in water
tunnel
(1) Tests show flow is turbulent as is expected (2) No
separation occurs during the simulated flight envelope (3) No
vortices or other disturbances form on the rocket that degrade
performance (4) Clear and useable data can be drawn from
the tests
13
Wind Tunnel
TestDR4.5 Aerodynamics 1/23/2017 Not Done TBD
Compare theoretical data
calculated for the full-scale rocket
with experimental data from wind
tunnel; forces, moments, and drag
are reasonable
(1) Useable data is recovered from the testing (2) Data from
the test matches with models and known results
14
GPS Test DR5.3 Avionics 1/28/2017 Not Done TBD
Run the GPS and see if it performs
properly, determining the accuracy
of the coordinates and proper
transmission
(1) Both systems still transmit properly when placed next to
one another (2) Both of the transmitted coordinates received
are similar to each other.
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 39
Test Plan Matrix ContinuedTest
Requirement
Fulfilled
Team
ResponsibleTest Planned Status
Actual Test
CompletedVerification Method Success Criteria
15
Observation
Subsystem TestER6.1.2, DR5.2 Avionics 1/28/2017 Not Done TBD
Recording for 20 minutes, extract the
video and watch to verify camera
record video. Follow same steps but
place the camera in the rocket at an
angle to view downwards
(1) Clear video recorded (2) Video
recorded for full duration
16
Arduino MEGA
2560 TestDR5.5 Avionics 1/28/2017 Not Done TBD
After circuit and code baseline
functionality established, system will
be attached to the rotation table at a
measured radius. Data points will be
taken at (1) Constant angular
velocities (2) Changing angular
velocities (angular acceleration)
(1) MEGA outputs viable data at 10
samples per second (2) 10 DOF
acceleration/gyroscope data matches
specifications within 5% (3) Rotation
table angular velocity (4) Rotation table
angular acceleration
17
10 DOF Test DR5.1 Avionics 1/28/2017 Not Done TBD
After circuit and code baseline
functionality established, system will
be attached to the rotation table at a
measured radius. Data points will be
taken at (1) Constant angular
velocities (2) Changing angular
velocities (angular acceleration)
(1) MEGA outputs viable data at 10
samples per second (2) 10 DOF
acceleration/gyroscope data matches
specifications within 5% (3) Rotation
table angular velocity (4) Rotation table
angular acceleration
18
Xbee Pro 900HP
TestDR5.4 Avionics 1/28/2017 Not Done TBD
A 2 mile distance test for data
transmission
The Xbee transmitting data at over 2
miles
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 40
Safety Plan
Personal HazardsHazard Cause Effect Pre –
Mitigation RAC
Mitigation Post - Risk
Personnel injury when working with chemicals
Chemical spill/splash
Exposure to chemical fumes
Skin, eye, and lung irritation
Mild to serve skin burns
Lung damage or asthma
3C – Medium
MSDS will be readily available in all labs at all times. They will be reviewed prior to working with any chemicals
Gloves and safety glasses will be worn when handling hazardous chemicals
All personnel will be familiar with locations of safety equipment including chemical showers and eye wash stations
4C – Minimal
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 41
Safety Plan
Launch Vehicle Failure Modes and Effects Analysis
Hazard Cause Effect Pre –
Mitigation
RAC
Mitigation Post – Mitigation
Rocket is
pitched in an
unwanted
direction
Aileron rotating in
the same
direction
• Personnel
Hazard
• Potential hazard
to surrounding
property
2B –
High
• Number of actuated
ailerons reduced from
four to two
• Ailerons mechanically
constrained to only
induce roll
2E – Low
Divergent
oscillation
around roll
axis
Payload control
system
malfunction
• Ground hazard
• Personnel
Hazard
• Loss of rocket
2B –
High
• Open loop control
system
• Autonomous control
2E – Low
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 42
Environmental Hazards
From
Environment:
To
Environment:
Safety Plan
Hazard Cause Effect Pre –Mitigation
RAC Mitigation Post –
Mitigation
Blue Tube
Warping ● Moisture
Absorption
● Heat
● Swelling 3C - Medium
● Avoid rainy weather ● Avoid transonic
velocities
4D -
Minimal
PLA Warping ● Heat ● Part
Deformation
2D - Medium ● Avoid surrounding
heat source
● Avoid transonic
velocities
4E -
Minimal
Wood
Warping ● Moisture
Absorption
● Swelling 3D - Low ● Avoid rainy weather 4E -
Minimal
Hazard Cause Effect Pre –Mitigation
RAC Mitigation Post –
Mitigation
Ammonium
Perchlorate ● Storage
Malpractice
● Contamination
● Wildlife
development
retardation
2B - High ● Store in designated
box ● Avoid unnecessary
transportation and
contact
2E - Low
Hydrochloric
Acid
● Motor
byproduct
● Corrosion
● Toxicities in
wildlife
2B - High ● Test in desolate
areas 2E - Low
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 43
Subscale Model Overview
Subscale Model Overview
Final Primary Payload Overview (RIS)
Final Secondary Payload Overview (FMP)
Launch Vehicle Interfaces
Project Plan
Probability of Success
Introduction
Final Launch Vehicle Overview
Launch Vehicle Performance
Recovery Subsystem
Mission Performance Predictions
Test Plans and Procedures
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 44
Subscale Launch Vehicle Scaling
•Diameter of Subscale was created to be ½ scale
•Subscale had a larger stability margin, but is still within the same range and greater than 2.0
•Lengths were not scaled
•Velocity values were not scaled either
•Acceleration values were higher to try to simulate larger loads on the rocket Scale Diameter Stability
Margin
Length Velocity Acceleration
Subscale 3” 3.3 77” 460 ft/s 11.3 (g)
Full Scale 6” 2.65 107” 574 ft/s 6.40 (g)
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 45
Subscale Flight Test Results
•All flight test data came from altimeter
•Apogee – 3122 ft
•Velocity profile came from altitude data, but extrapolated acceleration data was too noisy
•Velocity profile is a little noisy, but a curve fit helps get a better idea of the velocity profile
•Max Velocity about 460 ft/s
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 46
Predicted Flight vs True
•The predicted model for subscale performance is based on data obtained from open rocket
•The Matlab predictions are based upon an average thrust approximation for the J460 engine used
•The actual flight data is based on the position and time data collected from the Strattologger CF, velocity was then calculated
•The velocity data was very noisy so a curve fit can seen in red for better approximation
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 47
Predicted Flight vs True
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 48
Predicted Flight vs Actual Flight
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 49
Predicted Flight vs True
Drogue Video
Descent Time 36 s
Main Video
Descent Time 29 s
Drogue Predicted
Descent Time 38 s
Main Predicted
Descent Tine 26 s
Error 5.26 % Error 10.34 %
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 50
Drag Coefficient Models
Sub-Scale Full-Scale
Open Rocket 0.46 0.52
Excel 0.73 0.44
% Error 58.70 -15.38
Matlab 0.51 0.55
% Error 10.87 5.771/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 51
Lessons Learned
•All models assume vertical flight and don’t account for disturbances or weather cocking
•The Cd obtained from the subscale launch is higher from than the predicted models due the weather cocking experienced by the subscale
•The discrepancy shows that simplistic models are good for initial estimates but ultimately wind tunnel testing and CFD analysis are needed for accurate calculations
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 52
Lessons Learned Continued
•Hand calculations are a necessity the teams initial open rocket model underestimated the height achieved, this was later corrected
•Pointed nose cones do not handle impacts well as a result the design was changed to a blunter elliptical
• Coupler size will be increased to reduce bending moments
•PLA plastic performed well and exceeded durability expectations
•Better planning for screw locations for body
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 53
Final Primary Payload Overview (RIS)
Subscale Model Overview
Final Primary Payload Overview (RIS)
Final Secondary Payload Overview (FMP)
Launch Vehicle Interfaces
Project Plan
Probability of Success
Introduction
Final Launch Vehicle Overview
Launch Vehicle Performance
Recovery Subsystem
Mission Performance Predictions
Test Plans and Procedures
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 54
Final Design: RIS-B
• Minimizes mass burden on the
vehicle by taking advantage of the
low altitude flight profile of our
mission
• Challenging servo-mechanical
design and execution; yet within our
capabilities
• Design features mitigate chances of
erratic trajectories
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 55
Final Design: RIS
Overall Design Features:
• “Pull-pull” servo configuration
utilizing stranded steel cables
• Single set of actuating ailerons;
±24 deflection range
• Two physically coupled servos
1/27/2017California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR
56
Servo Block Assembly: Design Features
• Servos receive the same electrical
signal
• Configuration constrains ailerons to
counter-rotating motion
• (2) HS-7955TG Servos: operational
redundancy and double effective
torque
• Pulleys provide cable redirection
and allow lateral movement
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 57
1/27/2017 58
Hitec HS-7955TG Servos
Specifications
Motor Type: Coreless
Bearing Type: Dual Ball Bearing
Speed (4.8V/6.0V): 0.19 / 0.15
Torque oz-in. (4.8V/6.0V): 250 / 333
Torque lbf-in. (4.8V/6.0V): 15.6 / 20.8
Weight ounces: 2.29
Weight grams: 64.92
Justification
Aileron Area 8 in2
Max. Airspeed 750 ft/s
Max. Deflection 25
Torque Needed 220 oz-in (13.8 lbf-in)1/27/2017 59
Aileron Assembly
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 60
Torque Needed Using
Method Moment of Inertia Value (lbm*ft2)
I = mr2, r = 3.0 in 2.6
I = mr2, r = 3.5 in 3.6
OpenRocket 3.7
Assumed Value 4.0
𝜏 = 𝐼𝛼
𝜃 = 𝜔0𝑡 +1
2𝛼𝑡2
𝜃 = 4𝜋;𝜔0 = 0; 𝑡 = 5𝑠,
⇒ 𝛼 = 1.0𝑟𝑎𝑑
𝑠2
∴ 𝜏 = 4.0 𝑙𝑏𝑓 ∗ 𝑓𝑡
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 61
𝑑′ = 𝑟𝑏𝑑𝑦 + 𝑑0 + 0.5𝓁
⇒ 𝑑′ = 0.5 𝑓𝑡
𝐿 = 𝐹 =𝜏
𝑑′
⇒ 𝑳 = 𝟖 𝒍𝒃𝒇
Lift Provided by Aileron
1/27/2017California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR
62
0-5s post-burnout Vavg = 425 ft/s
Payload Bay Electronic Systems
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 63
PBE Block Diagram Overview
1/27/2017California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR
64
Payload Control System (PCS)
•Small and efficient open-loop servo control
•70+ Hz sampling rate
•Offloads data points to DCS
LIS331HH Accelerometer Operating Voltage 2.16 – 3.6 V
Current Consumption < 0.25 mA (normal mode)
Detection Range ±6g/±12g/±24g
Data Output 16 bit
Survivability 10,000g shock resistance
(for 0.1ms)
Operating
Temperature Range
-40 C to 85 C
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 65
Payload Control System Schematic
1/27/2017 66California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR
Data Collection System
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 67
Observation System: Raspberry Pi Zero
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 68
60W Power Switch; Power Consumption
System Microprocessor Expected Current Draw
Payload Control System
(PCS)
Arduino Nano v3.0 100 – 200 mA
Data Collection System
(DCS)
Arduino Mega R3 2560 350 - 500 mA
Observation System
(OS)
Raspberry Pi Zero v1.3 160 – 300 mA
Expected System Power Consumption Table (Battery #1)
1/27/2017 69California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR
Payload Integration
Aileron Section
attachment to axle
Fin with Airfoil
design and
aileron section
cut out
Integration of aileron
section with fin
Servo Arm used for
actuation
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 70
Payload Integration
Aileron has the
ability to turn up to
plus or minus 24
degrees
Lubricated joints
will offer low
friction for
maneuver
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 71
Payload Integration
Fin section
integrates with
bulkheads 1
through 4
Hose clamp holds the fins
in place and allows easy
removalCut away segments
for cabling
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 72
Payload Integration
Sled Integration for
RIS Electronics
(not shown here)Mounting attachment for
sled, allowing sled to be
removable
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 73
Payload Integration
Mounting attachment for
servos pulleys and cable
attachment
Mounting occurs on the
top end of the motor
block bulkhead
Note: More detailed
Drawings of system
present in previous
sections
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 74
Payload Dimensions and Mass Statement
Items Mass (oz)
Electronics associated with
Payload and Observation 26.096RMS-75/5120 Casing w/ forward
seal disk 45.630
75 mm aft closure 2.580
75 mm Forward Closure 12.125
Aeropack 75 mm Retainer 4.225
Motor 168.000
Motor Bay + RIS/Obs Bays + Fins 251.450
Total 510.106
Items Purpose Number of items Mass (oz)
HS-7955TG Servo Servos for Roll Induction System 2 4.586
4-40 Mounting Hardware Servo cabling, mounting hardware 2 1.764
11.1V, 2200mAh LiPo Payload Bay power supplies 2 14.010
Arduino Micro Controls Roll Induction System 1 0.230
Arduino MEGA 2560 Controls Data Collection System 1 1.306
Adafruit 10 DOF IMU DCS sensor 1 0.099
XBee Pro 900HP DCS transmitter 1 0.299
High Gain Antenna For XBee (adds 15mi+ range) 1 0.458
XBee Adapter For XBee 1 0.320
SD Breakout + Card DCS local data storage 1 0.130
Raspberry Pi Zero v1.3 Controls Observation System 1 0.300
Pi Camera v2 Camera for Observation System 1 0.180
Switch Switch for entire payload system 1 0.415
Misc. mounting hardware - Approx 2.000
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 75
Primary Payload Test Plans
• Objective: Develop Cl vs AoA relationship for aileron• Low speed wind tunnel tests; scale up results
• Objective: Verify strength and determine proper diameter of stranded steel cabling• Stress, tension tests
• Objective: Ensure proper detection of motor burnout• Accelerometer and various scenario testing
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 76
Final Secondary Payload Overview (FMP)
Subscale Model Overview
Final Primary Payload Overview (RIS)
Final Secondary Payload Overview (FMP)
Launch Vehicle Interfaces
Project Plan
Probability of Success
Introduction
Final Launch Vehicle Overview
Launch Vehicle Performance
Recovery Subsystem
Mission Performance Predictions
Test Plans and Procedures
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 77
• 3D Printed Plastic Container; “Pill”
• Filled with foam• Suspended in surgical tubing
net• Secured to removable
bulkhead
Final Secondary Payload Overview
78
• Central ring changed to separate into two pieces for easy removal of pill.
• Number of surgical tubes from 24 to 10.• Coupler enlarged to 12” allowing for more room.• Frame Design
• Steel instead of plywood• Two beams instead of four
Payload Design Changes from PDR
79
• Steel U-shaped frame attached to removable bulkhead
• Bulkhead attached to body tube with bolts
• Tied to an eye-bolt, surgical tubing will suspend the pill which holds fragile material
Payload Integration
80
• Final design allows for:• Lightweight structure that doesn’t
compromise the strength.• Simple integration of pill and collar.• Maintains easy access to pill and
frame.• Increase in size of coupler allows for
more room for vertical deflection
• Dimensions • Total Bay length - 12”• Total weight - 2 lbs• Width of Pill - 4”• Height of Pill - 6.5”
FMP Operations Summary
81
Launch Vehicle Interfaces
Subscale Model Overview
Final Primary Payload Overview (RIS)
Final Secondary Payload Overview (FMP)
Launch Vehicle Interfaces
Project Plan
Probability of Success
Introduction
Final Launch Vehicle Overview
Launch Vehicle Performance
Recovery Subsystem
Mission Performance Predictions
Test Plans and Procedures
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 82
Internal Interfaces with Launch Vehicle
GPS System Parachute
Charges
Recovery Bay Payload
Bay
Pulley System Ailerons
GPS System Self-Enclosed
System of
GPS/Battery
No interface No interface No interface No interface No interface
Parachute
Charges
No interface Set of dual
charges for
main/drogue
Ignites the
parachute
charges
No interface No interface No interface
Recovery Bay No interface Ignites the
parachute
charges
Altimeter/
Charge Igniter
No interface No interface No interface
Payload Bay No interface No interface No interface PCS/DCS/OS Controls the
pulley system
Controls the
ailerons
Pulley System No interface No interface No interface Controls the
pulley systemCable system
to control
ailerons
Controls the
ailerons
Ailerons No interface No interface No interface Controls the
ailerons
Controls the
ailerons
Two actuating
ailerons1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 83
External Interfaces with Launch Vehicle
Ailerons
• Generate CL and rotate rocket post burnout and interfaces with RIS
Payload
Launch Lug
• Connects launch rail to launch lug
Launch Rail
• Slides over the launch lug to guide rocket
Igniter
• Interfaces with motor to initiate launch
Rotary Key
• Interfaces with recovery avionics
12 V Battery
• Interfaces with igniter for direct launch1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 84
Project Plan
Subscale Model Overview
Final Primary Payload Overview (RIS)
Final Secondary Payload Overview (FMP)
Launch Vehicle Interfaces
Project Plan
Probability of Success
Introduction
Final Launch Vehicle Overview
Launch Vehicle Performance
Recovery Subsystem
Mission Performance Predictions
Test Plans and Procedures
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 85
Educational Engagement•Charter Oaks Elementary
•iPoly High School
•Country Springs Elementary
•Tustin High School
•Almondale Elementary
1/27/2017 86
Requirements Status
Requirement Verified In Progress Not Verified
Vehicle 27 4 7
Recovery System 5 13 0
Experiment 4 12 0
Safety 4 11 2
General 7 6 1
Derived 2 24 0
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 87
Timeline
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 88
Timeline Continued
Current
Team
Focused
Milestones
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 89
Timeline Continued
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 90
Probability of Success
Subscale Model Overview
Final Primary Payload Overview (RIS)
Final Secondary Payload Overview (FMP)
Launch Vehicle Interfaces
Project Plan
Probability of Success
Introduction
Final Launch Vehicle Overview
Launch Vehicle Performance
Recovery Subsystem
Mission Performance Predictions
Test Plans and Procedures
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 91
Probability of Success
Leading Design
Subscale Manufacturing
TestingSubscale Launch
Evaluation Final Design
1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 92
2016-2017 CPP NSL Team CDR Presentation
Thank You!
Questions?1/27/2017 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona CDR 93