1. UCF_USLI 2010-2011 Critical Design Review David Cousin Freya Ford Md Arif Drew Dieckmann Stephen Hirst Mitra Mossaddad University of Central Florida 1

2. 2

3. 3 Payload: 33.22” Rocket Avionics: 24” Motor Length: 13.78” Propulsion: 30.78” Nosecone: 14” 4.545” OD Total Length of Rocket 97.5” Fin Tip: 7.6” Fin Root: 12” 4.5” ID

4. University of Central Florida 4

5. 5

6. 6

7.  The static stability margin for the prototype was calculated from RockSim to be 5.31 calibers  The Static Stability for the Prototype was calculated in RockSim to be 5.00 calibers University of Central Florida 7

8.  The Thrust to weight ratio for the Full- scale model engine Cesaroni L-585P is calculated to be 5. 5  The Thrust to weight ratio for the Prototype model engine Cesaroni L-585P is calculated to be 5.04 University of Central Florida 8

9. 9 Launch guide length:108.0000 In. Velocity at launch guide departure:50.6727 ft/s The launch guide was cleared at:0.346 Sec Minimum velocity for stable flight reached at: 73.0931 In.  Sub scale launch was seen to adhere to the simulation results  Stable flight was seen from launch to landing

10.  Sub scale launch was seen to adhere to the simulation results  Stable flight was seen from launch to landing University of Central Florida 10 Max. Time to landing:203.161 Sec. Max. Range at landing:604.43523 ft Max. Velocity at landing - Vertical:22.2138 ft/s 2*48’’ TAC-148’’ 1*60’’ TAC-1 Contingency Parachute60’’

11. University of Central Florida 11  Specifications Height: 84.5 in (~7 ft) Diameter: 4.5 in Weight: ~16 lbs Motor: Cesaroni K510-P – 2 Grain

12. University of Central Florida 12  Tested Components: Rocket Structure Rocket Avionics and GPS Tracking Video Camera One Dual Deployment SMD Payload was NOT tested on this flight.  Results Max Altitude: 4985 ft (295 ft below target) Landing Distance: < 1000 ft from launch pad.

13. University of Central Florida 13 Drogue Avionics/ GPS Main Parachute Rocket Motor

14. University of Central Florida 14 Lessons Learned  1. Drogue did not deploy. (Scheduled at apogee)  Charges blew but the nosecone did not separate and the drogue could not deploy.  At ~1100 ft, the main parachute deployed successfully despite the lack of a drogue. Action Items:  Do not pack the drogue too tightly.  Ensure friction fitting of nosecone is loose enough for deployment.  Test nosecone separation prior to launch.  2. GPS did not receive/transmit.  GPS board was on, although the carbon fiber walls were impenetrable to the GPS signals.  Received no lock on satellites and could not track rocket. Action Items:  Revise position of GPS and ensure antenna is external.  Test GPS with new setup prior to full scale launch.

15. University of Central Florida 15 Lessons Learned (cont.)  3. Camera did not record flight.  A 2 GB microSD card only recorded 20 minutes, which consisted only of the setup of the rocket and no video of the flight. Action Items:  Buy 16 GB microSD card for full scale launch, which will be capable of a 160 minutes.

16.  As explained in MAWD Manual: Flight computers were wired to ejection charges for both the drogue and the main while the rocket sat facing away from observers. Long hose connected to payload bay while a pressure differential was created by suction on the plastic hose. This initiated the drogue deployment, followed by the main deployment thereafter. Both successfully deployed for both flight computers (primary and secondary). University of Central Florida 16

17.  Prior to scale model test launch, the rocket was brought to a field assembled with 6g of black powder for the main and 3g for the drogue deployment.  Using different size canisters to house the black powder, each charge ignited successfully and deployed the respective parachutes from the rocket. University of Central Florida 17

18. University of Central Florida 18 SMD Payload Components Integrated onto Payload Bay

19. University of Central Florida 19 Payload Bay Integration into Launch Vehicle

20. University of Central Florida 20  Prediction Tables produced from 110 individual simulations.

21.  Based on weighted launch day performance, predicted by rocket simulation University of Central Florida 21

22. University of Central Florida 22

23. University of Central Florida 23

24. University of Central Florida 24

25.  Presentation at Oviedo High School for 2 physics classes 1-28-11 University of Central Florida 25

26. University of Central Florida 26 Back-up Slides

27. University of Central Florida 27 Breakdown of weights for all items used in the simulation of the rocket. Solid Model Used In Fluid Dynamics Analysis

28. University of Central Florida 28

29.  Carbon Fiber Sleeves & Rolls for custom body, nosecone, and fins.  Nomex Honeycomb for fin structure.  Epoxy/Hardener University of Central Florida 29

30. University of Central Florida 30

31. University of Central Florida 31 Fin Geometry Fin Trial Test Epoxied Fin for Prototype

32. University of Central Florida 32 Geometric Model of the Nosecone Construction Cut-Away view of the Nosecone

33. University of Central Florida 33

34. University of Central Florida 34

35. University of Central Florida 35

36.  Flight Specific Hazards Ammonium Perclorate (APCP) used for propellant in the motor Electronic match with pryogen coating to start the motor Hazard of premature ignition Gunpowder (Black powder)  Overall Risk Accepted University of Central Florida 36

37. University of Central Florida 37 RiskFailure ModeCauseEffectHazard Rating Preventative Measures STR R-001 Launches at extreme angle Launch lug detachmentOff course and ballistic1x5 Properly attach launch lugs STR R-002Vehicle break-upStructural failureTotal vehicle loss2x5 Use stress analysis programming and properly attach all airframe components STR R-003Nosecone detaches Improper nosecone installation Vehicle destabilization2x5 Ensure nosecone is snugly attached STR R-004Fin Failure Improper mounting to the airframe launch vehicle becomes unstable and veers off course 3x4 Use strong epoxy to attach fins, complete thorough launch testing STR R-005Buckling of airframe Airframe not epoxied properly or had pores Unstable flight, failure of multiple subsystems 3x4 Selection of firm material, proper STR R-006Shearing of airframe Material not strong enough to withstand the shearing forces Unstable flight, loss of vehicle airframe 3x4 Selection of a sturdy material, proper construction STR R-007Centering ring failure Loose centering rings, not appropriate diameter Decrease in stability of the launch vehicle 2x2 Proper ring size and installation STR R-008Bulkhead failure Loosened bulkhead during mission Unstable flight, damage to airframe 2x4 Proper construction and installation techniques STR R-009Coupler failureImproper installation Unstable flight, early rocket separation 2x5 Ensure that the coupler is intact with the airframes STR R-010Motor mount failureImproper installation Unstable flight, complete loss of motor 2x5 Proper installation of the motor mount

38. University of Central Florida 38 RiskFailure ModeCauseEffectHazard Rating Preventative Measures PROP R-001 Solid Motor internals not installed correctly Improper assembly or damaged components Motor failure2x3 Properly install and inspect motor PROP R-002 Motor casing / mounts not installed in the correct manner Improper assembly Dislodged / broken motor mounts 1x5 Properly install and inspect motor PROP R-005GSE bad wiringMishandlingPremature firing2x4 Inspect all wiring before connecting to launch vehicle PROP R-007 Launches at extreme angle Extreme launch rail angle during liftoff Off course and ballistic1x5 Inspect launch stand prior to launch PROP R-008Igniter failureDamaged ComponentsMotor does not fire4x2 Inspect igniter prior to launch, proper integration and setup PROP R-009Total motor failureOver pressurizationVehicle failure2x5 Check value and include vent for excess gas PROP R-010Limited combustion Under pressurization and/or misc. malfunction Limited thrust / potential ballistic trajectory 4x4 Complete static testing, inspect motor internals PROP R-011 Propellant burns through motor casing Damaged propellant components Loss of thrust, stability, and launch vehicle components 4x5 Do various static test firings of motor before launch PROP R-012 Propellant does not burn long enough Sudden cutoff of igniter grain Desired altitude will not be met by the launch vehicle 4x4 Static tests will be conducted before launch for verification PROP R-013 Explosion of propellant after ignition Broken or cracked propellant casing Destruction of the entire propulsion system 4x5 Proper motor/propellant setup

39. RiskFailure ModeCauseEffectHazard Rating Preventative Measures REC R- 001 Ejection charge not installed correctly Improper assemblyParachute malfunction3x4 Check lines leading to ejection charge REC R- 002 Heat shield not properly installed Improper assemblyBurned parachute2x4 Inspect heat shield before launch REC R- 003 Wind shear or crosswinds during glide stage Bad weather conditionsVeers off course1x4 Use of tracking equipment to locate vehicle, only launch in favorable conditions REC R- 004 Recovery charge failureDamaged chargeBallistic descent3x5 Check lines leading to ejection charge REC R- 005 Premature charge detonation Flight computer malfunction Veers off course1x4 Test flight computer deployment REC R- 006 Late charge detonation Flight computer malfunction Rapid descent, parachute failure 3x5 Test flight computer deployment REC R- 007 Burned or tangled parachute Poor installation Rapid descent, crash landing 1x5 Properly install parachute and heat shield REC R- 008 Recovery system failureBurned shroud lines Rapid descent, crash landing 1x5Properly install heat shield REC R- 009 Rough landingRecovery error Possible equipment damage 2x4 Ensure parachute properly ejects REC R- 010 Rocket driftWindy conditionsData and vehicle loss4x3 Use of tracking equipment to locate vehicle, only launch in favorable conditions REC R- 011 No line of sightCloudy conditionsData and vehicle loss3x3 Use of tracking equipment to locate vehicle, only launch in favorable conditions University of Central Florida 39

40.  Selection of Solid over Hybrid Motor Simple and easy start system Thrust schedule can be dictated by grain geometry Reasonably high specific impulse University of Central Florida 40

41. University of Central Florida 41 Trust curve for the Cesaroni Technologies Incorporated (CTI) K510-2G engine with a average thrust of 115.65 lb.

42. University of Central Florida 42 Trust curve for the Cesaroni Technologies Incorporated (CTI) L585-2G engine with a average thrust of 131.05 lb.

43.  Total weight of the simulated rocket With a payload of 160 oz. : 326.933 oz. With a payload of 200 oz. : 366.933 oz.  Cesaroni Technologies Incorporated (CTI) L585-2G engine Total impulse: 2653.40 Ns Maximum Thrust: 152.95 lbs (679.8 N) Average Thrust: 131.35 lbs (583.8 N) Max thrust to weight ratio  160 oz. payload: 152.95/20.433 = 7.49  200 oz. payload: 152.95/22.933 = 6.67 Average thrust to weight ratio  160 oz. payload: 131.35/20.433 = 6.43  200 oz. payload: 131.35/22.933 = 5.51 University of Central Florida 43

44.  Motor Purchase Plan NAR certified motors purchased by L2 certified TRA member from Giant Leap Rocketry  Motor Storage All components will be locked in a flammable marked cabinet  Motor Transportation Responsibility of TRA advisor to drive motors according to to rules and regulations mandated by DOT. University of Central Florida 44

45. Mode of VerificationDescription Functional Requirements Design Completed The Landing Stabilization system includes an “umbrella” system which is housed in the upper section of the launch vehicle and is deployed separation with the lower section of the launch vehicle. LSS FR-001 Separation Test The launch vehicle’s upper section will be assembled and the separation of the upper section with the lower section will be tested while housing the Landing Stabilization system. Separation and functionality of the upper section and Landing Stabilization ejection systems will be verified. LSS FR-002 LSS FR-004 Landing Test The rocket’s payload section will be assembled with the Landing Stabilization and Recovery systems. The rocket sub-section will be allowed to fall from a predetermined height. This will verify that the Landing Stabilization system will allow the camera system to perform as needed. LSS FR-002 LSS FR-003 LSS FR-004 University of Central Florida 45 Landing Stabilization Verification Plan

46. Avionics: University of Central Florida 46 ComponentModelQty.Image Flight Computer PerfectFlite MiniAlt/WD 2 GPS System Ozark Aerospace ARTS TT2 Ozark Aerospace ARTS RX-900 1111

47. Avionics Verification Plan: University of Central Florida 47 Mode of VerificationDescription Functional Requirements Design completed Programmable primary and secondary flight computers and external power switch have been included in the design. AVI FR-002 AVI FR-007 Parachute ejection test Primary and secondary flight computers ability to ignite e- matches will be verified in the parachute ejection test. AVI FR-001 GPS signal test The GPS system will be linked together, the receiver and transmitter will be separated by 5 miles. The link will be sustained for one hour to verify the system’s ability to be linked. AVI FR-003 Competition altimeter test The competition altimeter will be flown during the sub-scale launch. Recovery and successful operation of the altimeter will verify its abilities. AVI FR-004 Integration design The flight computer components have been drawn out to fit the dimensional constraints of the payload bay. All components of the flight computer system include mounting holes on their circuit boards. AVI FR-005 AVI FR-006

48. Sensors & Camera: University of Central Florida 48 ComponentModelImages Microcontroller Arduino Duemilanove 3-Axis AccelerometerADXL345 Pressure Transducer/ Temperature Sensor BMP085 Humidity SensorHIH-4030 Solar Irradiance Sensor BPW34 Silicon Photodiode Ultraviolet RadiationUV12-R1-A Magnetism SensorHMC5843 CameraVD80 Mini

49. University of Central Florida 49 Sensors & Camera Verification Plan: Mode of VerificationDescription Functional Requirements Design Completed A complete SMD payload including temperature, relative humidity, UV radiation, solar irradiance, pressure, acceleration, and magnetism sensors with a camera and GPS system has been designed. The Arduino has been designed for the addition of flash memory. Both the Arduino microcontroller and the camera system have USB connectivity capability for data recovery. SMD FR-001 SMD FR-002 SMD FR-003 SMD FR-005 Full Scale Test Launch The full scale test launch will include all SMD Payload components. If the SMD Payload is recovered in good working condition, it will be deemed structurally stable for reuse. If the data recorded during the launch is recoverable, the SMD Payload design will be verified. SMD FR-004 SMD FR-005 Panel Schematic A payload bay panel schematic has been drawn outlining the layout of the SMD Payload verifying that it can be integrated into the payload bay. SMD FR-006 Calibration and Testing All SMD Payload sensors and systems will be verified through calibration and testing. SMD FR-007

50.  Design Completed A complete recovery system including electric matches, a primary and secondary flight computer as well as drogue and main chutes has been designed.  Flight computer programming The primary and secondary flight computers will be programmed to eject the drogue chute at apogee and the main chute at 1000 ft.  Parachute ejection locations Structure design includes a separation point between the lower and mid sections for the main chute and another separation point between the mid and upper section for drogue. University of Central Florida 50

51.  Parachute ejection testing Recovery system shall be assembled to launch configuration. Static tests will be performed to verify that the ejection charges are capable of separating the structure sections and pushing out the parachute. Once verified on the ground, the parachute ejection system will be tested dynamically during the sub-scale launch.  Parachute descent rate test Both the drogue and main parachutes will be tested by securing a mass (equivalent to the launch vehicle and payload) to the chute and dropping it off a tall building. A stopwatch will be used to calculate the time to landing. The descent rate will then be calculated. University of Central Florida 51

52. University of Central Florida 52

53. University of Central Florida 53

54. University of Central Florida 54

55. University of Central Florida 55

56. University of Central Florida 56

57. University of Central Florida 57

58. University of Central Florida 58

59.  David Cousin: NASA Point of Contact/Group Lead Avionics Payload (Electrical)  Stephen Hirst: Chief Engineer Safety  Drew Dieckmann: Payload (Mechanical) Recovery  Mitra Mossaddad: Structure Recovery  Freya Ford: Finance Officer Systems Integration  Md. Arif: Propulsion University of Central Florida 59

60. University of Central Florida 60

61. University of Central Florida 61

62. 62

63. University of Central Florida 63 Top Level & Functional Requirements

64. University of Central Florida 64 Top Level & Functional Requirements

65. University of Central Florida 65 Top Level Requirements Functional Requirements

66. University of Central Florida 66 Top-Level Requirements Functional Requirements

67. University of Central Florida 67 Functional Requirements Top-Level Requirements

68. University of Central Florida 68 Functional Requirements Top-Level Requirements

69. University of Central Florida 69

70. University of Central Florida 70

71.  Required Section Status Before Flight: “Go Flight” On All Procedure Steps  Connect sensor package to microprocessor, insert into forward payload bay compartment, and secure; verification inspection by Payload Manager and Project Director.  Ensure secure connections between sensors and microprocessor; verification inspection by Payload Manager and Project Director.  Ensure connections from altimeters and payload breakwire location are functional; verification inspection by Project Director and NAR mentor. Disconnect breakwire apparatus for ejection charge prep. University of Central Florida 71

72.  Ensure correct wires are connected to altimeter and to e- matches in ejection charges; verification inspection by Project Director and NAR mentor.  Fill ejection charge capsules with explosive compound on parachute bulkheads.  Ensure main parachute retention is achieved with D-Link hooks connected to the eyebolt above the engine mount and lower eyebolt on the aft electronics bay.  Attach the drogue parachute harnesses to the eyebolt on the forward booster electronics bay bolt and to the aft payload electronics bay eyebolt on the recovery electronics bay.  Ensure payload main parachute retention is achieved with D-Link hooks connected to the eyebolt above the forward payload electronics bulkhead and lower eyebolt on the nose cone. Loosely pack cellulose insulation above the ejection charges. University of Central Florida 72

73.  Ensure main and drogue parachutes, shock cords, and protruding lines are protected with a Kevlar sheeting and that there is enough cellulose insulation separating all chutes and charges; inspection by Project Director. Z–fold, wrap with Kevlar, and push the main parachute into the aft booster body tube.  Z-fold, wrap with Kevlar, and push the drogue parachutes into the payload-booster coupler.  Z-fold, wrap with Kevlar, and push the payload main parachute into the payload-booster coupler.  Fit the nose section snuggly into the upper body tube, install shear pins. Fit the tail section of the rocket into the bottom of rocket body and install shear pins.  Check that all connections and load paths are strong and secure and that there are no new imperfections or new damage to the rocket resulting from travel. University of Central Florida 73

74.  Solid motor assembly by NAR mentor. Igniter installation pre-motor insertion by NAR mentor.  NAR mentor verification and approval of correctly installer igniters.  Placement of pre-assembled motor in motor mount assembly in booster section of rocket.  Secure engine with motor retention, inspection by Project Director and NAR mentor. University of Central Florida 74

75.  Slide the rocket onto the launch guide rail so that the guides insert into the launch rail with close tolerance and slide smoothly.  Activate break wire safe and arm mechanism to the “arm” position. Power of booster and payload electronics verified.  Verification of payload launch readiness. Battery connection and electronics are verified functional and armed.  Verification of competition provided perfect flight altimeter and payload dependent flight computers are armed and active. Verification of flight computer readiness to make accurate readings and fire charges is then confirmed; verification inspection by Project Director and NAR mentor.  Attachment of launch system leading to igniter is secure and verified by Project Director and NAR Mentor.  Recommended safe distance derived from the minimum safe distance tables is insured for all team personnel, NASA/NAR administrators and spectators.  Visual confirmation of complete launch pad readiness is verified by Project Director and NAR mentor.  Coordinate and announce to NASA “go flight” mission state is active and proceed to launch is active. University of Central Florida 75

76.  Photographs of rocket and payload are taken as it launches and reaches ground level.  At distance, verify that the ejection charges have ignited, and wait a 5 minutes for the rocket to cool.  Verify that the rocket break wires are to the “safe” position and shut down all recovery electronics is ensured. Rocket returns to the preparation area.  Removal and cleaning of motor to remove all dirt from closures is completed.  Disassembly of rocket airframe and retrieve payload data and return of Perfect Flight Altimeter to NASA Administration for verification of altitude.  Check all parts for damage, wear, corrosion, creep, stress fractures, etc and catalog any issues found so that they can be solved or parts can be replaced before future launches.  Download all flight data to the computer and commence detailed post-flight analyze. University of Central Florida 76