University of Wyoming Dorin Blodgett, Kevin Brown, Heather Choi, Ben Lampe Eric Robinson, Michael Stephens, Patrick Weber October 7, 2010 1.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
2012 CoDR CoDR Mission Statements RocketSat 8 shall integrate and validate the Roll Out De-Orbiting Device (RODEO) developed by Composite Technology.
Advertisements

Critical Design Review ….. Royal Ordnance,Summerfield 17 th February 2001 National Rocketry Competition 2001 Open Rocketry Association Slide 1/14.
RockSat-C 2012 CoDR Minnesota Sound Wreckers Conceptual Design Review University of Minnesota Alexander Richman Jacob Schultz Justine Topel Will Thorson.
Preliminary Design Review Patrick Weber, Eric Robinson, Dorin Blodgett, Michael Stephens, Heather Choi, Kevin Brown, Ben Lampe November 1, /1/20101.
Charles Galey, Peter J. Jay, Nicholas Roder, William Ryan.
Individual Subsystem Testing Report Patrick Weber, Michael Stephens, Heather Choi, Kevin Brown, Ben Lampe, Anne-Marie Suriano, Eric Robinson, Dorin Blodgett.
Critical Design Review Patrick Weber, Dorin Blodgett, Michael Stephens, Heather Choi, Kevin Brown, Ben Lampe, Anne-Marie Suriano, Eric Robinson November.
University of Wyoming Michael Stephens, Eric Robinson, Alex Antonacci, Andrew Hellquist, Joe Backstrom, Bryan Overcast, Jeffrey Watters, Jonathan Melton,
Joe Mozloom Eric Marz Linda McLaughlin Swati Maini Swapnil Mengawade Advisor: Jin Kang, PhD.
Stevens Institute of Technology - New Jersey Space Grant Consortium with Rutgers University Critical Design Review Mike Giglia, Ethan Hayon Robert Hopkins.
Preliminary Design Review Northwest Nazarene University Advisor: Dr. Lawrence Chad Larson Ben Gordon Seth Leija David Vinson Zach Thomas Drew Johnson.
University of Wyoming Charles Galey, Nicholas Roder, Peter J. Jay, William Ryan 10/14/
2012 CoDR Nitric Oxide and Piezo Dust Detector Probe Conceptual Design Review Virginia Tech Presented by Stephen Noel November 18,
Good Vibrations Conceptual Design Review University of Wyoming James Richey, Justin Thornton, Luke Voss, Jake Thatcher, Tony Allais Oct 27, 2008.
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.
2011 CoDR Team Name Conceptual Design Review University/Institution Team Members Date 1.
NORTHWEST NAZARENE UNIVERSITY CHAD LARSON, BEN GORDON, DAVID VINSON, SETH LEIJA, ZACH THOMAS, DREW JOHNSON NNU Team Conceptual Design Review.
RockSat-C 2011 CoDR Harding Flying Bison ROCKSAT-C Team Conceptual Design Review Harding University Ed Wilson, Mentor, Will Waldron, Student 2, Student.
RockSat-C 2011 CoDR CSU RocketSat-C Conceptual Design Review Colorado State University Isaiah Franka Jordan Rath Abby Wilbourn Mike Yeager 10/1/10 1.
Team DSRO Critical Design Review Taylor Boe Andrew Buckner Andrew Gilbert Emily Howard Grace Harsha Bobby Stillwell October 14, 2008.
Design of a small instrumented atmospheric descent probe NASA Ames Research Center.
Conceptual Design Review Metro State College of Denver Daniel Bass, Matt Hanley
Full Mission Simulation Report New Jersey Space Grant Consortium at Stevens Institute of Technology and Rutgers University Ethan Hayon, Mark Siembab, Mike.
Critical Design Review Team Name University/Institution Team Members Date.
Hang Seven Launch Readiness Review Lucas Migliorini, Becca Lidvall, Paul Smith Chase Goodman, Ethan Hollenbach, Nikhil Desai, Abby Caballero, Sierra Williams.
Student Satellite Project University of Arizona Team Goals Design, Fabricate, and Analyze a Structure that will Support the Payload –Space Allocation of.
2014 CDR Team Name Critical Design Review CDR CDR Delieverables 1.Mechanical drawings in pdf format 2.Electrical schematics in pdf format 3.Completed.
RamRack Preliminary Design Review Colorado State University Zach Glueckert Christopher Reed Timothy Schneider Brendan Sheridan Christina Watanuki Advisor:
Flight Readiness Review Team Hawaii. Vehicle Properties Diameter (in)6 inches Length (in)127 inches Gross Liftoff Weight (lb)50.25 lb Launch Lug/button.
DemoSat IV Critical Design Review Metropolitan State College of Denver April 21, 2006.
MINNROCK CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW University of Minnesota William Ung Scott Balaban Tom Thoe Bryce Doug Carlson 11/14/2008.
RockSat-C 2012 CoDR Zero Tilt Conceptual Design Review Frostburg State University Michael Stevenson, Mayowa Ogundipe, Subhasis Ghosh, Andrew Huntley, Derek.
Hang Seven Critical Design Review Sierra Williams, Lucas Migliorini, Abby Caballero, Chase Goodman, Paul Smith, Becca Lidvall, Ethan Hollenbach, Nikhil.
University of Florida Rocket Team Critical Design Review Presentation.
Critical Design Review Presentation Jan. 20, 2011.
High Altitude Imaging and Atmospheric Data Collection Experiment by SABRE (Scientific Aerospace and Balloon Research Engineers) Team Advisor:Atin Sinha.
Hy-V.1 Skin Friction Sensor Experiment Presenters: Ryan F. Johnson Mitchell Foral-Systems November 24, 2008 University of Virginia.
MinnRock Design and Canister Layout Team members Bryce Schaefer (team coordinator)- AEM Cameron Japuntich- AEM Liz Sefkow- ME Mitch Andrus-
Wireless Test Instrumentation System for Rotating Parts ECE Team 167 Lawrence Bogan Jeremy Neaton Adam Bienkowski Michael Golob ME Team 29 Sean Handahl.
The BRASS Project University of North Dakota Matthew Voigt Nathan Ambler Ron Fevig John Nordlie Tim Young Nirmal Patel (University of North Florida) Baike.
Atomic Aggies CDR. Final Launch Vehicle Dimensions Diameter 5.5” Overall length: inches Approximate Loaded Weight: lb.
PACER Summer Program High-Altitude Thermodynamics Profile and Clarity Experiment (HATPaC) Johnte Bass, Herman Neal, Matthew Ware.
Napoleon Connor Strait | Chris Gray | Chad Alvarez Akeem Huggins | Ashley Zimmerer Tucker Emmett | Ginny Christiansen |Caleb Lipscomb Conceptual Design.
MNROCK CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW University of Minnesota William Ung Scott Balaban Bryce Schaefer Tom Thoe 11/3/2008.
2013 CoDR Team Name Conceptual Design Review University/Institution Team Members Date 1.
Team Honey Badger R.A.H.D. Critical Design Review October 18, 2012 Josh Power Karyn Science Kyle Team Leader C+DH Annie C+DH Zach Budget + Science C&DH.
Section 1: Mission Overview Mission Statement Mission Objectives Section 2: The Payload! User’s Guide Compliance Beta Prototype Testing Section 3: Check-In.
Metropolitan State University Isaac Hamilton Jordan Gallegos Christopher Olson McMillan Miskin Daniel Koch Thomas Mindenhall Cody Overcash March 9, 2009.
Section 1: Mission Overview Mission Statement Mission Objectives Expected Results System Modifications Functional Block Diagrams 2.
Colorado State University Paul Scholz, Tyler Faucett, Abby Wilbourn, Michael Somers June
2016 FMSR Team Name Full Mission Simulation Review (FMSR) University/Institution Team Members Date 1.
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.
SENSOR SELECTION CALIBRATION OVERVIEWOVERVIEW DESIGN ROADMAP ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The project would not have been possible without the extensive.
2016 PDR Team Name Preliminary Design Review University/Institution Team Members Date 1.
RamRack Conceptual Design Review Colorado State University Zach Glueckert Christopher Reed Timothy Schneider Brendan Sheridan Christina Watanuki Advisor:
Inertial Measurement Unit. Project Advisor: Dr. Basart Client: Matt Nelson Team Members (491): Matt Ulrich Luis Garcia Amardeep Jawandha Julian Currie.
SOAREX VII Mission Design, construct, test, and fly an ultralight (
Planetary Lander PDR Team Name
Modular R.O.V for Sub-Sea Operations
Team Name Preliminary Design Review
Project 250 High Altitude Challenge
CanSat Competition Competition Objectives Pre-Launch Launch
CSU DemoSAT-B 2010 DemoSat V: Colorado State University April 9, 2011
Launch Readiness Review
Image Acquisition and Processing of Remotely Sensed Data
Team Name Conceptual Design Review
Rocketry Trajectory Basics
Launch Readiness Report West Virginia University
Presentation transcript:

University of Wyoming Dorin Blodgett, Kevin Brown, Heather Choi, Ben Lampe Eric Robinson, Michael Stephens, Patrick Weber October 7,

Mission Overview

Scientific Objectives o Capture optical images of the earth. o Collect space dust. o Provide perspective of what is in our atmosphere. o Measure thermal, seismic and pressure effects throughout duration of launch. o Collect data for future projects 3

Engineering Objectives o Engineer electronics systems for capturing and storing images from optical devices. o Create extendable booms to mount imaging equipment and dust collector. o Use AeroGel to collect space dust. o Create protective water shield for housing data storage devices and encasing AeroGel collector during reentry and splashdown. o Record thermal, seismic and pressure data in real time throughout launch using electronic sensors and transmit recorded data via provided Wallops telemetry. 4

Mission Requirements The payload shall conform to the requirements set forth in the 2011 RockSat-X User Guide 5

TYPEQUANTITATIVE CONSTRAINT Physical Envelope Cylindrical**: Diameter: ~12 inches Height: ~12 inches ** Deployables and booms are permitted once skin has been ejected Weight Payload shall be: 30±1 lbf Center of GravityLies within a 1 inch square in the plane of the RockSat-X plate. Power and Telemetry Telemetry Ten (10) 0 – 5V 16 bit A/D Lines One (1) parallel line One (1) asynchronous line Power One (1) redundant power line (28V) Three (3) non-redundant power lines (28V) 1 Ah capacity High VoltageAll payloads utilizing higher voltage (>28V) shall conformal coat all electronics. 6 Specifications: Physical Constraints

Specifications: Performance Parameters KEY PERFORMANCE PARAMETERVALUE Altitude (km)≈ 160 km Spin Rate (Hz) at Burn-Out≈ 1.3 Hz at Terrier burn out; ≈ 4.8 at Orion burn out Maximum Ascent G-Load25 G (Sustained) (50+ G Impulses Possible) Rocket Sequence (Burn Timing)5.2 s Terrier burn—9.8 s coast—25.4 s Orion burn Chute Deploy (seconds)489.2 s Splash Down (seconds)933 s 7 (Source: RockSat Payload Canister User’s Guide 2010)

Success Criteria o At minimum, the payload shall gather data during launch, at apogee, and during reentry through the use of: o Thermocouples o 3-axis Accelerometers o Gyroscopes o Absolute Pressure Sensors o Ideally, the payload should also extend telescopic booms outside of the payload and: o Gather optical images of the Earth o Store photographs to on-board SD cards o Capture space dust using AeroGel 8

Expected Results o Space Dust Composition (10^-6) o Rocket Fuel o Meteor/ Metal Fragments o Gases o Earth/Payload Images o Detailed Data through Flight Duration o Thermal Data o Seismic Data o Pressure Data 9

Concept of Operations Circuits initialize and begin collecting and transmitting data. Data continues to be transmitted. Rocket skins are shed, pressure within canister drops, boom is extended and begins to collect samples/take photographs. Power and telemetry is shut down and data collection and transmission ceases. Splashdown. Payload hits atmosphere, pressure within canister rises, boom is retracted and AeroGel is sealed within shield. Data is still being collected and transmitted over telemetry. Samples/photographs continue to be collected/taken during descent. T = 0 min. T = 1.3 min. T = 2.8 min. T = 4.5 min. T = 5.5 min. T = 15 min.

Design Overview 11

RockSat 2010 Payload Structure 12 Factor of Safety = 1.5

Payload Functional Block Diagram 13 Power (NASA) Microcontroller X/Y Accelerometer Z Accelerometer Pressure Sensor Thermocouple 1 Thermocouple 2 Thermocouple n … ADC Microcontroller Solid State Storage Device G-SwitchRBF (Wallops) To Wallops Telemetry (10x 0-5V A/D 16-Bit, and Asynchronous) Optical Camera 1 Optical Camera 2 Pressure Sensor Boom Actuator Microcontroller ADC

Design Specifications, Mechanical o Water Shield o Material (weight, thermal conductivity, impact and vibration resistance) o Sealing around data connections o Dynamic sealing around AeroGel following successful data collection o Structure o Able to withstand 25G with 50G+ impulse loads o Harmonic Oscillations o Boom o Telescopic Mechanical Arm o Surviving launch and vibration loads o AeroGel retrieval 14

Design Specifications, Electrical o Automation o Booms, Control Motors o Timed Exposures – Gyroscope and Light sensors o Data Acquisition o Thermal (Thermocouples) o Seismic (Multi-Axis Accelerometers) o Pressure Measurements (Piezoelectric Strain Gage, Absolute) o Send Measurements through 10x 0-5V 16-bit A/D lines o Photo Capture o Optical Camera (~390 – 750nm) o Implementation o Photos stored on redundant SD cards (Multi-GB) o Data sent through NASA telemetry o Payload powered by NASA 15

AstroX Team 16

Management 17

Management o Schedule o See Attachment o Budget o Mass (15-30lbs) o Boom (7 lbs) o Circuits (1 lb) o Water Shield (2 lbs) o Camera (4 lbs) o Other Sensors (1 lb) o Monetary Budget o $850 18

Conclusions 19 o Mission Recap o Capture optical images of the earth. o Collect space dust via aerogel. o Measure thermal, seismic and pressure effects throughout duration of launch. o Issues o Sufficient funds o Engineering success o Waterproofing payload o Extreme vibrations

Questions? 20