LionTech Rocket Labs Project Phoenix Flight Readiness Review

Speakers Russell Moore…………………………………………………………………Project Manager Adam Covino…………………………………………Co-Project Manager/Payload Lead Tony Maurer……………………………………………………………………….Structures Lead Matt Hanna………………………………………………………………………..Structures Lead Eric Gilligan……………………………………………………………………………Avionics Lead Lawrence DiGirolamo…………………………………………………………….Avionics Lead Heather Dawe…………………………………………………………………..Propulsion Lead Rob Algazi………………………………………………………………………….Propulsion Lead Brian Lani………………………………………………………………………………Payload Lead Brian Taylor…………………………………………………………………….Systems Engineer Tom Letarte………………………………………………………………………....Safety Officer Megan Kwolek…………………………………………………………………Financial Officer 2

4.5 inch diameter G12 fiberglass Modular design to simplify assembly, redesign, and repair Redundant motor retention system Structural Overview 3

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 Fin Brackets 4

Machined aluminum forward motor retainer Attaches to motor casing via bolt Screwed into airframe – No epoxy or other permanent bonds Acts as an avionics bay aft bulk plate and main parachute anchor point Aeropack motor retainer is used for redundancy Motor Retention 5

A tensile test of G12 fiberglass provided verification that the forward motor retainer would function safely. A factor-of-safety exceeding 20 was measured. Failure occurred as planned, signaling that proper manufacturing processes were used Structural Testing 6

Removal of Tailcone – Availability of new motor reduced need for drag reduction – Manufacturing knowledge and contacts gained for future use – Redundant motor retention remains through the use of a traditional flange motor retainer (far right) [aeropack.net/motorretainers.asp] Structural Changes Made 7

Final Motor Choice – Animal Works L777 Total impulse: N Peak thrust: N  s Burn Time: 4.05 seconds Average thrust: N Animal Works L777 Motor CasingPropulsion 8

Motor Selection – Maximum height Desired Apogee: ft. AMW L777 Apogee: 5256 ft – Effects on structural integrity Dry mass :21.3 lbs Loaded mass: 29.4 lbs Length: in – Rail exit velocity Safe rail exit velocity > 50 ft/s AMW L777 rail exit velocity: 54.8 ft/s – Maximum Velocity Max velocity must be < ft/s AMW L777 Max velocity: 640 ft/s – Drift Max drift < 2628 ft Drift due to wind speed chartPropulsion 9

Motor Choices in Proposal AeroTech K700W Cesaroni K815-SK Cesaroni K750 Cesaroni K820-BS Cesaronie K1440WT Motor Choices in PDR AeroTech K780 AeroTech K560 Cesaroni L820-BS Cesaroni L585 Motor Choices in CDR Animal Works L777 Cesaroni 995 Motor Choice for FRR Animal Works L777 Motor Choice Progression Design modifications Weight increase, Vendor availability, competition rules Finalization of weight and project constructionPropulsion 10

Full Scale Flight Results 11

Avionics & Recovery 12 PerfectFlite Stratologger (Altimeter 1) PerfectFlite Stratologger (Altimeter 2) AftForward GPS Transmitter 9V Altimeter Battery Rotary Switch (Altimeter 1) Rotary Switch (Altimeter 2) Note: Not pictured is a Faraday cage to prevent GPS Transmitter RF interference from unintentionally igniting e-matches.

Main Parachute Containment Harness Black Powder Ejection Canister CD3 Ejection System Terminal Blocks Tender- Descender Forward Aft Avionics & Recovery 13

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. – The drogue and nosecone then completely separate from the main and booster section Tender-Descender Avionics & Recovery 14 [Adapted from EuroRocketry.org] [AeroconSystems.com]

Avionics & Recovery 15 Apogee – Nosecone – Descent Rate: ft/s – KE: 635 ft-lbs – Booster – Descent Rate: ft/s – KE: 3340 ft-lbs 750 ft AGL – Nosecone – Descent Rate: 13.1 ft/s – KE: ft-lbs – Booster – Descent Rate: 13.1 ft/s – KE: 53.3 ft-lbs 20 mph Wind Drift – 2240 ft

Maryland-Delaware Rocket Association Launch (Price, MD) – Saturday 3/10: Failure Mode: Intricate deployment scheme with a lot of recovery harness resulted in tangling of chutes/harness. Main parachute did not fully deploy. Mitigation: Reduced amount of harness by separating the vehicle into drogue/nosecone and main/booster sections at 750ft AGL. No longer have a cord connecting the drogue and main lines. Bag stays with drogue. Avionics & Recovery 16 [Adapted from EuroRocketry.org]

Maryland-Delaware Rocket Association Launch (Price, MD) – Sunday 3/11: Failure Mode: At apogee, black powder ejection charge impinged on the Tender-Descender, igniting the b.p. charge inside. This released the main parachute and separated the vehicle into the two sections at apogee, resulting in excessive drift. Mitigation: Lengthened the black powder ejection canister such that impingement on the Tender-Descender was not possible. This was tested at the High-Pressure Combustion Lab three times with positive results. Black Powder Ejection Canister Tender Descender Avionics & Recovery 17

Team Ohio Rocketry Club (TORC – South Charleston, OH) – Saturday 3/18: Failure Mode: At apogee, the drogue was released and the main parachute containment harness went taut. The main chute deployment bag protruded from the airframe approx. ~4 in. Later investigation determined that this protrusion allowed the bag to invert its orientation, exposing the open end of the bag to the airflow, which could then pull the chute and bag apart. Mitigation: The main parachute containment harness is being shortened such that there is no protrusion of the deployment bag. In this configuration, it is highly unlikely the bag could reorient itself. Avionics & Recovery 18

Team Ohio Rocketry Club (TORC – South Charleston, OH) – Saturday 3/17: Failure Mode: At apogee, the drogue was released and the main parachute containment harness allowed the deployment bag to protrude from the airframe approx. ~4 in. This protrusion allowed the bag to bend and invert its orientation, exposing the open end of the bag to the airflow, which then pulled the chute and bag apart. Mitigation: The main parachute containment harness was shortened such that there is no protrusion of the deployment bag. Recovery system worked successfully on 3/25 at Mantua Township Missile Agency (MTMA – Middlefield, OH) Avionics & Recovery Bag protrudes ~4” 2. Pressure forces bag to flip 3. Open end exposed, turbulent air pulls main out

Objective: Set forth by NASA Science Mission Directorate Collect following atmospheric data: – Pressure/Temperature – Relative Humidity – Solar Irradiance – Ultraviolet RadiationPayload 20

Hollow aluminum core bolted to forward and aft bulkplates Electronics and wires easily accessed by removal of L-brackets Structurally secured by high strength steel all threads – Steel to resist impact damage Wooden bulkplates with threaded inserts in forward plate to attach to nosecone – Wood instead of G10 fiberglass to minimize failure pointsPayload 21

Single Payload System SchematicPayload 22

Primary Components: Arduino Pro 3.3V/ 8MHz – Programmed microcontroller for each measurement system. XBee 900MHz Transmitter – Transmits data collection to ground station. High Altitude Sensing Board (HASB) – All encompassing weather board. Ultraviolet Sensor – Measures harmful UV-A and UV-B radiation [ 23

Payload Mission ArchitecturePayload 24

Scientific Value: Determine stability of atmospheric boundary layer Analyze collected information to profile atmospheric boundary layer Construct Skew-T Log-P diagram of boundary layer diagram to determine weather severityPayload 25 Dew Point Temperature Pressure (bars) [ Isotherms (Celsius)

Entering Operational Phase of Project – Focus on launch safety – Identification of new personnel hazards Assembly and Safety Checklists for use at launch – Help ensure safety and rocket success Team Safety 26

Most Severe Risks RiskDescription Likelihood 5=most likely Impact 5=most harmful Mitigation Drogue chute fails to deploy Drogue chute either does not leave the tube or doesn't unravel 23 Ground test recovery system for optimal ejection strength Main chute fails to deploy Main chute either does not leave the tube or doesn't unravel 24 Test ability for airflow to deploy main chute from deployment bag Main chute deploys first Main chute deploys at apogee 33 Tender Descender testing, Flight testing of recovery system Main and drogue get tangled Main chute gets deployed below drogue and tangles 24 Two separate descending components Project falls behind schedule Major milestones are not met in time 43 Weekly status meetings, project plan Labor leaves/graduates Seniors graduate or students stop attending meetings 53 Recruitment at beginning of each semester. Team building activities Project is over budget Test/travel/fabrication costs exceed expectations 44Compare prices from different vendors, avoid excess shipping costs Risk Analysis 27

“Involve the entire Penn State USLI team in multiple, quality outreach events engaging the surrounding elementary, middle and high school’s in Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics topics.” Educational Engagement 28

SubsystemTotal Structures & Aerodynamics $ 1, Avionics & Recovery $ Payload $ 1, Propulsion $ Miscellaneous $ 4.21 Total $ 4, Cost Summary 29

Structural Components selected and tested Flight tests and ground tests fixed cause of recovery error Finalized motor selection Testing and modeling confidence in vehicle performance parameters for successful flight for competitionConclusion 30