critical design review presentation 2013-2014 project nova
DESCRIPTION
Final Launch Vehicle Dimensions NoseconeTRANSCRIPT
Critical Design Review Presentation
2013-2014 Project Nova
Final Launch Vehicle DimensionsFinal Launch Vehicle Dimensions
Size and MassLength 108 in
Diameter 5 in
Dry Weight (Without Motor) 31.1 lbm
Wet Weight 56.1 lbm
Final Launch Vehicle DimensionsFinal Launch Vehicle DimensionsN
osec
one
Final Launch Vehicle DimensionsFinal Launch Vehicle DimensionsR
ecov
ery
Sect
ion
Final Launch Vehicle DimensionsFinal Launch Vehicle Dimensions
Boo
ster
Sec
tion
Final Launch Vehicle DimensionsFinal Launch Vehicle DimensionsFin Dimensions
Root Chord 8.40 in
Tip Chord 4.00 in
Height 5.50 in
Sweep Length 5.00 in
Sweep Angle 42.5°
Final Launch Vehicle DesignFinal Launch Vehicle Design
Final Launch Vehicle DimensionsFinal Launch Vehicle Dimensions
Key Design FeaturesKey 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 FeaturesKey Design Features
• PASTE A PICTURE OF THE HEAT SHIELDS HERE
Key Design FeaturesKey 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 FeaturesKey Design Features
CG Position
Final Motor ChoiceFinal 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 ChoiceFinal Motor Choice
Cesaroni N2200 DataTotal Impulse 2712.6 lb-s
Maximum Thrust 647.3 lbf
Average Thrust 488.8 lbf
Specific Impulse 201.0 s
Burntime 5.55 s
Sellers: What’s Up Hobbies (Stockton, CA) Wildman Rocketry (Van Orin, IL)
Final Motor ChoiceFinal Motor Choice
Simulated Apogees with Probable Mass Increases 0% Mass
Increase25% Mass Increase
33% Mass Increase
Total Mass @ Liftoff (lbm) 56.1 70.1 74.6
Apogee Achieved (ft) 18169 15179 14211
Highest Mach # 1.25 1.00 0.93
Optimum Weight: 68.5 lbmMass margin: 22%
Apogee Achieved (ft): 15,508Maximum Mach #: 1.02
Final Motor ChoiceFinal 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 ChoiceFinal 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 StabilityRocket Flight StabilityCG and CP Locations (as measured from the tip of the nose)
CG Location 67.356 in
CP Location 82.024 in
CG Location CP Location
Stability caliber: 2.93
Rocket Flight StabilityRocket Flight Stability
Rocket Flight StabilityRocket Flight Stability
Simulated Flight Performance DataSimulated Flight Performance Data
Simulated Flight Performance Data @ 56.1 lbm
Altitude (ft) Max Velocity (ft/s)
Max Acceleration (ft/s^2) Average Thrust (lbf) T/W Ratio
18184 1378 324 488 8.70
Velocity off rod (ft/s)
Time to Apogee (s) Flight Time (s) Velocity at Main
Deployment (ft/s)
Velocity at Ground
Impact (ft/s)
66 32.3 419 68.8 11.7
Simulated Flight Performance DataSimulated Flight Performance Data
Simulated Flight Performance Data @ 56.1 lbm
Altitude (ft) Max Velocity (ft/s)
Max Acceleration (ft/s^2) Average Thrust (lbf) T/W Ratio
15519 1127 258 488 7.12
Velocity off rod (ft/s)
Time to Apogee (s) Flight Time (s) Velocity at Main
Deployment (ft/s)
Velocity at Ground
Impact (ft/s)
57.2 31.1 347 78.3 13.1
Simulated Flight Performance DataSimulated 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 MarginMass 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 MarginMass Statement and Mass Margin
Mass EstimationsNose Cone 1.7Recovery Section 15.2Bulkheads 1.0Electronics Bay #1 5.0Recovery System 5.0Booster Section 16.0Bulkheads 2.0Motor Mounting System 1.0Electronics Bay #2 3.9Total Weight (without motor) 31.1
Motor 25.0Total Weight (with motor) 56.1
Mass Statement and Mass MarginMass 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%.
Predicted Drift from Launch PadPredicted Drift from Launch Pad
Drift Estimations
Wind Speed (mph) Drift Distance (ft) Altitude (ft)
0 41.8 18184
5 1717.8 18152
10 3372.5 18051
15 5507.0 17953
20 7579.3 17803
Subscale Test FlightSubscale 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 FlightSubscale Test Flight
Subscale Fin Dimensions
Subscale Test FlightSubscale Test FlightSubscale Size and MassLength 86.4 in
Diameter 4 in
Dry Weight (no motor) 10.3 lbm
Wet Weight 11.7 lbm
Subscale MotorManufacturer Aerotech
Designation J270W
Loaded Weight 1.42 lbm
Total Impulse 158.04 lbf–s
Average Thrust 60.70 lbf
Burntime 2.6 s
Subscale Test FlightSubscale Test Flight
Main Parachute
Avionics Bay
Drogue Parachute
Motor
Subscale Test FlightSubscale Test Flight Simulated Flight Data Actual Flight DataApogee (ft) 2094 2006.8
Max Velocity (ft/s) 353 352.7
Max Acceleration (ft/s2) 186 283.9
Time to Apogee (s) 12.1 11.1
Flight Time (s) 128 91.7
Subscale Test FlightSubscale Test Flight
RecoveryRecovery
• Dual-Deploy System: Drogue and Main• Redundant Charges• Dual Altimeters
RecoveryRecovery
RecoveryRecovery
• Black Powder Charges• 1st Charge: 5 grams → 164 lbf • Backup Charge: 5.5 grams → 180 lbf• Ground Testing
RecoveryRecovery
• Shear Pins• #4-40 nylon machine screws• 10,000 psi shear strength• 2 pins connecting each section• Instron Tensile Stress Testing
RecoveryRecovery
• Drogue Specifications• Parachute Diameter: 17.3 in• Parachute Material: Ripstop Nylon• Shock Cord Length: 300 in• Shock Cord Specification: 1 in diameter
tubular nylon
RecoveryRecovery
• 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
PayloadPayload
• Design Overview• BPAP
• Hardware Data Collection• Software Processing• Data Collection Post Flight• Analysis
PayloadPayload
• Design Overview• CMP
• Testing Verification• Integration
Requirement FufillmentRequirement Fufillment
• Where we stand• CDR
• Future Endevours
ClosingClosing
• Summary• Questions