Critical Design Review Team Name

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
RockSat-C 2012 CoDR Minnesota Sound Wreckers Conceptual Design Review University of Minnesota Alexander Richman Jacob Schultz Justine Topel Will Thorson.
Advertisements

Protocol & Test Review Spaceport America Student Launch University/Institution Team Members Date.
Proposal Analysis Review NMSGC Student Launch University/Institution Team Members Date.
Data Test Review Spaceport America Student Launch University/Institution Team Members Date.
Critical Analysis Review NMSGC Student Launch Program University/Institution Team Members Date.
Flight Readiness Review New Mexico Space Grant Consortium University/Institution Team Members Date.
RockSat-C 2012 LRR Launch Readiness Review University/Institution Team Members Date.
Colorado Space Grant Consortium Virginia Space Grant Consortium 1 University A University B Team # Logo 1 Logo 2.
Full Mission Simulation Test Report UPR-R(river) P(rock) University of Puerto Rico Río Piedras Campus May 14, 2010.
Gary MKIII University of Central Florida Chris Valle, Braden Urban, John Rowe, and Tyler Yoemans.
RockSat-C 2012 SITR Full Mission Simulation Report University/Institution Team Members Date.
Preliminary Design Review Northwest Nazarene University Advisor: Dr. Lawrence Chad Larson Ben Gordon Seth Leija David Vinson Zach Thomas Drew Johnson.
Individual Subsystem Testing Report Team Name University/Institution Team Members Date.
Team Name Conceptual Design Review University/Institution Team Members Date.
RockSat-C 2011 SITR Payload Subsystem Integration and Testing Report University/Institution Team Members Date.
Team Name Final Presentation Team Members Date Fall 2010 Rev A
University of Wyoming Charles Galey, Nicholas Roder, Peter J. Jay, William Ryan 10/14/
RockSat-C 2011 ISTR Payload Subsystem Integration and Testing Report Universities/Institutions Team Members Date.
Rock Sat-C Conceptual Design Review The New Jersey Space Grant Consortium at Stevens Institute of Technology and Rutgers University Mike Giglia, Ethan.
Space Cowboys. Mission Overview Objective – Accurately measure flight parameters including ambient and skin temperatures, pressure, acceleration, spin.
Launch Readiness Review Team Name University/Institution Team Members Date.
Team Name Final Presentation Team Members Date Rev
2011 CoDR Team Name Conceptual Design Review University/Institution Team Members Date 1.
Payload Subsystem Integration and Testing Report Team Name 1 Team Name 2 Team Name N Universities/Institutions Team Members Date.
Conceptual Design Review Metro State College of Denver Daniel Bass, Matt Hanley
Launch Readiness Review MinnSpec University of Minnesota Bryce Schaefer, Chris Woerhle, Art Graf
(PDR ) University of Northern Colorado Nathan and Casey 11/14/08.
Critical Design Review Team Name University/Institution Team Members Date.
New Mexico Space Grant Consortium Student Launch Program Provide annual access to space for student experiments from Spaceport America.
RamRack Preliminary Design Review Colorado State University Zach Glueckert Christopher Reed Timothy Schneider Brendan Sheridan Christina Watanuki Advisor:
MINNROCK CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW University of Minnesota William Ung Scott Balaban Tom Thoe Bryce Doug Carlson 11/14/2008.
User notes: –Please use this template to create your Proposal Analysis Review –You may reformat this to fit your design, but make sure you cover the information.
Critical Design Review Team Name University/Institution Team Members Date.
User notes: –The purpose of the flight readiness review is to determine if your experiment is ready to fly. If it is not ready – it will not fly –You must.
The BRASS Project University of North Dakota Matthew Voigt Nathan Ambler Ron Fevig John Nordlie Tim Young Nirmal Patel (University of North Florida) Baike.
DINO PDR 23 October 2015 DINO Systems Team Jeff Parker Anthony Lowrey.
Individual Subsystem Testing Report New Jersey Space Grant Consortium with Rutgers University Stevens Institute of Technology 2/13/2012.
RockSat-C 2012 SITR Full Mission Simulation Report Harding University William Waldron, Joshua Griffith, Drew Cancienne, Edmond Wilson, David Stair 22 April.
Solar Probe Plus A NASA Mission to Touch the Sun March 2015 Instrument Suite Name Presenter's Name.
MNROCK CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW University of Minnesota William Ung Scott Balaban Bryce Schaefer Tom Thoe 11/3/2008.
Launch Readiness Review
2013 CoDR Team Name Conceptual Design Review University/Institution Team Members Date 1.
RockSat-C 2013 FMSTR Full Mission Simulation Report University/Institution Team Members Date.
Section 1: Mission Overview Mission Statement Mission Objectives Section 2: The Payload! User’s Guide Compliance Beta Prototype Testing Section 3: Check-In.
RequirementMethodStatus The payload must not exceed a weight of 1.45 Kgm.Design, Test The payload must conform to the WFF “no volt requirement”
RockSat-C 2012 LRR Launch Readiness Review University of Minnesota Alex Richman, Jacob Schultz, Justine Topel, Will Thorson 5/27/2012.
Colorado State University Paul Scholz, Tyler Faucett, Abby Wilbourn, Michael Somers June
2014 CoDR Team Name Conceptual Design Review University/Institution Team Members Date 1.
Preliminary Design Review Metro State College of Denver Matthew Hanley, Daniel Bass 14 November 2008.
Tethered Aerostat Program Concept Design Review Team Name Conceptual Design Review University/College Team Members Date.
Tethered Aerostat Program Concept Design Review College of Menominee Nation Conceptual Design Review College of Menominee Nation Marilyn Madosh, Larry.
RamRack Conceptual Design Review Colorado State University Zach Glueckert Christopher Reed Timothy Schneider Brendan Sheridan Christina Watanuki Advisor:
RockSat-C 2013 SITR Payload Subsystem Integration and Testing Report University/Institution Team Members Date.
Planetary Lander PDR Team Name
Team Name Preliminary Design Review
Skillz That Killz Team 3 Final Presentation
University of Colorado at Boulder January 21, 2004 Boulder, Colorado
Sounding Rocket PDR Team Name
Sounding Rocket CDR Team Name
Launch Readiness Review
Launch Readiness Review
Structures March 13, 2004.
Mars Rover CDR Team Name
Team Name Conceptual Design Review
Team Name Conceptual Design Review
Critical Design Review Team Durango
Launch Readiness Report West Virginia University
Command and Data Handling
<Your Team # > Your Team Name Here
<Your Team # > Your Team Name Here
Presentation transcript:

Critical Design Review Team Name University/Institution Team Members Date

User notes: This template shall be followed as closely as possible. Please follow this template as closely as possible. The grading metrics for both myself and Wallops will be based on this template.

Mission Overview What is your objective? What do you expect to prove, discover, or learn from your experiment? Brief overview of underlying science/theory What other related research/experimentation has been done in the past? Results? Please note that Wallops is not as familiar with your payloads, so please ensure this info is well presented. You can glaze over it during our teleconference to save time.

Concept of Operations Provide a high level overview of how your payload operates. Diagrams are an excellent way to convey the mechanics without cluttering a slide with lots of words. Show events such as: launch, G-switch activation, first accelerometer activated, at apogee first accelerometer deactivated and secondary becomes active, etc, etc, etc.

Expected Results Explain why your experiment is relevant and what you expect to find or discover.

Project and System Level Requirements What functional requirements must your payload conform to? Scientific requirements Mass, Volume, CG, No-Volt, etc. Usually presented in matrix form. Matrix can use a color to indicate current compliance with the requirement. Green: Compliant, Yellow: Partially Compliant, Red: Not Compliant SEE EXAMPLE ON NEXT SLIDE Your specific requirements will vary, but they should include the requirements in the RockSat Payload Canister User’s Guide

Example Top Level Requirements Matrix Method Status The spacecraft must not exceed a weight of 30 kg. Design, Test The spacecraft must operate on 30W or less. The spacecraft’s center of gravity (CG) shall be within 0.25” of the geometric central axis of the ICU. Design, Analysis The allowable static envelope of the spacecraft is a cylindrical right prism with a diameter of 18.7” (47.5 cm) and a height of 18.7” (47.5 cm). Design The spacecraft’s CG shall not lie more than 12” above the satellite interface plane (SIP) . The spacecraft shall have a fundamental frequency above 100 Hz given a fixed-base condition at the SIP. The spacecraft must be capable of meeting all mission objectives.

System Functional Block Diagrams A Functional block diagram of the entire system should be presented here. It is helpful to box individual subsystems to give reviewers a reference for future presented analysis. SEE EXAMPLES ON NEXT FEW SLIDES

Example of Good Functional Block Diagram Imaging Cam A Cam B Legend USB ADCS TR1 TR2 TR3 MAG Sun Sensors x6 Rate Gyro x3 Data Bus Power Lines Thermal +5V Line +/-12V Line MLI Blkts Therm x30 Data Line Comm Tx Ant / Radio / TNC Ext TNC Serial / I2C C&DH Flight Computer Interface Board Wireless Power Li-Poly Battery +15V Unreg. Line +28V Line Prim SA Body SA PCB Mechanisms EMC Hinges x4 HOP Tip-Mass Upper LB Tip-Mass TM Cam TM Comm Battery Tether Release Mech TM Lower LB MicroProc IB Rx Ant / Radio / TNC Tip-Mass Ant / Modem

Example Of Excellent Functional Block Diagram Notice Electrical Compliance with Wallops Power 2x9V Supply Batteries G-Switch RBF (Wallops) 5V Regulator X / Y Accelerometer Z Accelerometer Temperature Sensor AVR Board AirCore Board Flash Memory 6 channel ADC Control Circuit (NPN) AVR Microcontroller ADC Solenoid Valve AirCore Tubing Opening Junction Hand turn ball Valve Data Airflow Interface Outside of Rocket Pressure Sensor 3 Pressure Sensor 2 Pressure Sensor 1 2x9 V Supply Temperature Sensor 1 Temperature Sensor 2 Temperature Sensor 3

System Structural Drawings Solid models Integrated solid models Interfaces: To the can per the user guide requirements To your shared customer 2D drawings can be reserved for the backup slides (only show the most relevant) SEE EXAMPLES ON NEXT FEW SLIDES Solid model showing how the systems all fit together indicates a mature design that is truly at the Critical Design level.

Structural Drawing Examples Cup Cone Aerofin Side Panel IRS To HOP Release

Structural Drawing Examples

Shared Can Logistics Plan Update Chris and I on RSPC sharing logistics since PDR Pertains to Institutions/Universities sharing a can Descriptions of interfacing to each other Descriptions of interfacing to the top and bottom bulkheads

SEE EXAMPLES ON NEXT FEW SLIDES System Schematics Schematics are a key component of the CDR. You MUST submit full system schematics as part of your CDR package. Show the most relevant ones here. Wallops will be evaluating your schematics to determine your flight readiness. SEE EXAMPLES ON NEXT FEW SLIDES

Schematic Example Wallops Compliance

Subsystems Overview What subsystems do you have: power, C&DH, thermal, etc. What top level requirements do you have for each subsystem. Make requirements as quantifiable as possible. Power subsystem shall supply 2W to… Power subsystem shall remain at or above 72 F at all times during the flight. Which requirements are design drivers? Where is data stored? Be sure to include sensor specifications Any states that your payload may have: Active, Active/Safe, Idle…

Parts List MAJOR Components lists SEE EXAMPLE ON NEXT SLIDE Not at the nut and bolt level… just major hardware that will be purchased or built in house Lead times are an important consideration (This can make or break a project) Distributors Manufacturers Keep it top level and leave low level items for backup slides SEE EXAMPLE ON NEXT SLIDE

Example Parts List Parts Company Model Low range accelerometers x and y-axis Analog Devices ADXL 203 z-axis ADXL 103 High range accelerometers x and y-axis Analog Devices ADXL 278 z-axis ADXL 78 Microcontroller Atmel ATmega 32 ADC Analog Devices AD73360 Pressure Sensor Omega PX 209 Solenoid valve Parker 099-0167-900 Temperature sensor National LM50CIM3 Semiconductor Power Regulator Texas Instruments M2937IMP Flash memory Atmel AT26DF161A Transistors NMOS

Wallops Requirements Some customers have special needs that will levy requirements on Wallops. - Here is where you will identify any requirements that you might impose on Wallops. - These requirements will be incorporated into the Requirements Definition Meeting (RDM) - Not all teams will have Wallops requirements

RockSat Payload Canister User Guide Compliance Type of Restriction Restriction Status Mass allotment: <= your allotment Volume allotment: The payload’s center of gravity (CG): In 1”X1”X1” envelope of centroid? Wallops No-Volt Requirement Compliance: Yes? Structure mounts: Top and bottom bulkheads. No mounts to sides of cans. Sharing: Fully developed?

Test Plans What type of testing can be performed on your payload pre-flight? What is required to complete testing?: Support Hardware Purchase/produce? Software Purchase/in-house? Potential points of failure Testing/Troubleshooting/Modifications/Re-Testing Schedule

Safety Update What safety issues do you have that Wallops is concerned about? Has this issue been resolved? If yes… how? If no… what is being done to mitigate the safety concern? Don’t be too concerned about presenting every aspect of the issue here. Leave analysis for the backup slides or refer to an external document.

Management Updated Organizational Chart Updated Schedule Updated mass/monetary budgets

Conclusions Issues and concerns Closing remarks

Backup Slides Information and drawings not essential to the presentation, but that could be useful for tough questions Data sheets, 2D drawings, additional schematics/diagrams, any design analysis completed, additional trade studies not presented.