Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Critical Design Review 02/02/ 2012 Project Phoenix 2011-2012 The Pennsylvania State University 1.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Critical Design Review 02/02/ 2012 Project Phoenix 2011-2012 The Pennsylvania State University 1."— Presentation transcript:

1 Critical Design Review 02/02/ 2012 Project Phoenix The Pennsylvania State University 1

2 Russell Moore – Project Manager Brian Taylor – Systems Engineer Matt Hanna – Structures & Aerodynamics Lead Tony Maurer – Structures & Aerodynamics Lead Heather Dawe – Propulsion Lead Rob Algazi – Propulsion Lead Adam Covino – Payload Lead Brian Lani – Payload Lead Eric Gilligan – Avionics & Recovery Lead Lawrence Digirolamo – Avionics & Recovery Lead Tom Letarte – Safety Officer Presenters 2

3 Overview Structures & Aerodynamics Avionics & Recovery Propulsion Payload Safety and Quality Assurance Outreach Conclusion Discussion Topics 3

4 Rocket is 92.2” in length, 4.5” in diameter (OD) ” (ID)- and weighs 29 lbs. Uses machined fin brackets, motor retainer and tail cone. Recovery System is Single Ejection (CO 2 )/Dual Deployment Overview (Project/Vehicle) 4

5 Fin Bracket Allows for easy replacement of damaged fins Allows experimentation of fin design (to alter the CP and therefore Static Stability) CNC machined aluminum – No epoxy or other permanent bond Screws into fin and through body tube 5

6 Motor Retainer Machined Aluminum forward motor retainer Attaches to motor casing Screwed into airframe – No epoxy or other permanent bonds Acts as an Av bay aft bulk plate 6

7 Tail Cone CNC machined aluminum aft motor retainer Reduces drag up to 50% for subsonic flight [1] Threads onto aft of booster section – No epoxy or other permanent bonds Opens up more room in airframe 7

8 Structures Rocket Flight Static Stability – 1.4 Current Simulated Mass: 29.3 pounds Mass Margin: 2.6 pounds Predicted Drift 8 Predicted drift as a function of wind speed for the current mass estimate (483 ounces).

9 Motor choice: AMW L777 Thrust-to-weight ratio: 5.96 (average) Rail exit velocity: ft/s Propulsion 9

10 Full Scale Motor: Animal Works L777 (75mm) Determined By Open Rocket Models Propulsion 10

11 Sub-Scale Motor: Aerotech J315 (54mm) Determined By Open Rocket Models Propulsion 11

12 Full Scale Contingency Motor: Cesaroni L935 Propulsion 12

13 Full Scale Contingency Motor: Cesaroni L935 Propulsion 13

14 – Main Parachute: Fruity Chutes 84” Iris Ultra – Drogue Parachute: Rocketman 3’ Ballistic Mach II Chute – Recovery Harness: 50’ of ½” tubular Kevlar – Altimeters: 2x PerfectFlite StratoLogger – Down-body Camera: PD80 – Recovery Aids: Garmin Astro DC-20 GPS System BeepX Sonic Beacon Avionics & Recovery 14

15 Sled and Bay Design Avionics & Recovery 15 BeepX Sonic Beacon Altimeters BeepX 12V 23A Battery CO 2 Canister 9V Battery Holders BP Ejection Canister CD3 Ejection System Switches Note: Aft Bulkhead is actually an aluminum bulkhead that interfaces with the motor casing and screws into the airframe

16 – Apogee CD3 CO 2 ejection device Black powder ejection charge Drogue is released and main is held within the airframe by the main parachute containment harness. – 750 ft AGL Tender Descender releases the main and the drogue pulls it out of the airframe and deployment bag Avionics & Recovery 16

17 – Descent Rate 64 ft/s under drogue 15 ft/s under main – Kinetic Energy Booster Section: 73.8 ft-lbs Nosecone/Payload: 15.6 ft-lbs Avionics & Recovery

18 – Altimeter test Tested functionality of altimeters and ability to fire e-matches – CD3 independent test Tested stand-alone functionality of CD3 system – Sub-scale ground test Tested the ability of the CD3 system to eject the nosecone Avionics & Recovery 18

19 Payload NASA SMD Mission Payload: Measure atmospheric parameters Will collect following data: – Pressure – Temperature – Relative Humidity – Solar Irradiance – Ultra-violet Radiation

20 Payload NameModelQuantity Ultra-Violet Light SensorSU-1102 Logomatic v2 Serial SD DataloggerWIG Arduino Pro 3.3V/ 8MhzDEV Polymer Lithium Ion Battery mAh PRT XBee Pro 900 XSC Wire AntennaWRL GB microSD CardSDSDQ-4096-E11M2 High Altitude Sensing BoardSEN ~Ambient Light SensorTEMT ~Humidity SensorHIH ~Pressure SensorBMP-0852 ~AccelerometerADXl3452 ~Temperature SensorTMP-1022 Arduino Control Data Logger Power Supply HASB Light Sensor Arduino Control Data Logger Power Supply HASB Light Sensor 900MHz Transmitter

21 Payload

22 Scientific Value: Analyze collected information to profile atmospheric boundary layer Determine stability and depth of atmospheric boundary layer Construct a Skew-T diagram of the boundary layer as visual aid to determine weather severity []

23 CO 2 Canisters for CD3 System – Manufactured to UL1191 Standard – Burst pressure: 7000psi – 75% Fill – ⁰C, 150 ⁰C Safety & Quality Assurance 23 Pressure vs %Fill for varying Temperature

24 Safety & Quality Assurance 24 SubsystemComponentVerification Test Structures Shear PinsGround Testing (Feb.) Forward Motor Retainer Static Fire (Feb.) Avionics & RecoveryRecovery SystemGround Testing (Feb.) PropulsionMotorStatic Fire (Feb.)

25 Verification Testing as in explained in Appendix D: Test Matrix (February) MDRA Launch (March 10-11) METRA Launch (March 24) FRR (March 26) Upcoming Milestones 25

26 Discovery Space Museum Workshops – January 27, February 8 & 22, March 21 Spikes Fest – February 12 Park Forest Middle School STEM Fair – March 14 Educational Engagement 26

27 SectionTotal Full Scale $ 4, Subscale $ 2, Testing $ 1, Ground Support Equipment $ 2, Travel $ 3, Outreach $ Total $ 14, Expenses 27 SubsystemTotal Structures & Aerodynamics $ 1, Avionics & Recovery $ Payload $ 1, Propulsion $ Total $ 4, Overall Club Expenses Full Scale Rocket Expenses by Subsystem

28 Conclusion Tests show that rocket is structurally sound and ejection/internal circuitry works. Further testing for drogue parachute size, landing radius distance, and motor performance. 28

29 [1] Fleeman, l.E., Tactical Missile Design – Second Edition, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., VA 2006 [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] References 29

Download ppt "Critical Design Review 02/02/ 2012 Project Phoenix 2011-2012 The Pennsylvania State University 1."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google