1. FLIGHT READINESS REVIEW
intro/foreplay

2. Agenda Vehicle Design Overview Flight Overview Stability
Recovery Subsystem
Payload Subsystem
Propulsion Subsystem
Motor Choice
Full Scale Test Flight
Current Status
Education Engagement
Budget
Future Work
Basically just read this stuffs as a list.

3. Vehicle Design Overview
Details
Length: 79.3 inches
Diameter: 4 inches
Weight at Liftoff: 10.28
Materials
Airframe: Phenolic Tubing
Fins: Fiberglass
Here we have the overview of the rocket design.
The body of the rocket is made of phenolic tubing with the fins being made out of fiberglass.
From left to right we have the nose cone, payload bay, the area the main chute will be placed, electronics bay,space for the drogue, the motor mount, and fins.
We’ve moved the location of the main and drogue chutes since CDR. The main chute is now at the top of the rocket closest to the nosecone with the drogue being near the rear of the rocket. This was done for safety reasons to reduce the chance of having the parachutes tangle. The weight of the rocket has also increased since CDR, since we’ve been able to get more accurate weight measurements that include the weight of the epoxy used during the building process as well as the new motor.
Inside the payload bay is where we will be conducting our liquid sloshing experiment and the atmospheric measurement experiment, and the electronics bay contains all of the electronics for our recovery system. The next slide is our flight overview.

4. Flight Overview J295 motor Expected altitude: 4623 ft
Max velocity: 626 ft/s
Mach number: 0.56
Max acceleration: 286 ft/s
TWR: 9.86:1
Drift distance:
5 mph: 180 ft
10 mph: 250 ft
15 mph: 700 ft
20 mph: 1025 ft
cesaroni J295 motor
On the slide you can see what our simulations have predicted with an expected altitude of about 4600 feet, a max velocity of 626 feet a second and max acceleration of 286 feet a second which will bring our speed down enough to keep from having to worry about fin fluttering. <explain that is why we are not reaching exactly 1 mile>
The thrust to weight ratio has decreased since CDR because of both the motor change and due to us gathering more accurate measurements for the weight of the rocket.
The next slide will be about the stability with Kevin.

5. Stability Center of Pressure: 64.374 inches
Center of Gravity: inches
Static Stability Margin: 4.02 Cal
Distance to stable velocity: feet
Rail exit velocity: 72.9 ft/s
Kevin
center of pressure is 64 inches from nose of rocket.
center of gravity is 38 inches from nose of rocket.
Static stability margin is 4 caliber, which is well above safe limits. Stability peaks at 5 calibers during flight, as shown on the graph.
rocket leaves launch rail at 73 ft/s, reaching stable velocity well before leaving the rod.

6. Recovery Subsystem 2 StratologgerCF altimeters
TeleGPS tracker in nosecone
12 inch drogue deploy at apogee
60 inch main parachute at 700 feet AGL
66 ft/s under drogue
Landing at 20.7 ft/s
Kinetic energy of sections at landing:
14 ft*lbs 13 ft*lbs 25 ft*lbs
Michael:
Two stratologgerCF altimeters, which both flew successfully on full-scale test
-12 inch drogue parachute will deploy at apogee, as was suggested during PDR to decrease our drift distance.
-60 inch main parachute will deploy at 700 feet, to ensure landing at 20 ft/s
-Both drogue and main parachutes will have backup charges that fire immediately after the primary charge, to ensure recovery devices deploy.
- both altimeters powered off 9v batteries, turned on by switches that are be accessible from outside the rocket. Wiring feed from the altimeters to a pair of terminal blocks on either end of the electronics bay.
-Terminal blocks allow for quick disassembly of the e-bay to facilitate maintenance, such as replacing batteries, and allow us to attach ematches later in assembly, for safety.
-E-matches will be connected to the terminal blocks and wired into the charge caps, which will be packed with 2 grams of black powder each.

7. Payload Subsystem 2 Raspberry Pi computers
Collecting atmospheric data during descent and landing
Video of liquid sloshing: distilled water, saline solution, vegetable oil
Michael:
This slide details our science payloads
Wooden sled where all computers and hardware are mounted.
3D printed mounts are attached to bottom of payload bay.
More 3d printed mounts on sides of sled.
The sled will slide into the payload bay and be seated inside the brackets at the base.
Nose cone will be attached with screws on top, which will hold the payload sled in place.
two raspberry pi computers
two payloads:
atmospheric measurement suite
liquid sloshing experiment
Computer hardware for each payload has been tested
One raspberry pi had a hardware failure during testing and has since been replaced.
All hardware and software development is complete.
Accelerometer data is used to detect the various stages of flight.
Data is successfully collected during simulated flight.
Data is stored in comma separated values file onboard.
Pictures are taken during descent and landing
Ten minutes after landing the atmospheric data csv and images are sent via a wireless serial connection between the XBee transceiver on the payload to a receiver at our groundstation computer.
Software testing:
Acceleration data was pulled from OpenRocket and stored as a CSV onboard the computer. For benchtop testing of code, data from the live accelerometer is replaced with data from the OpenRocket simulation. This provides a way to debug the code without flying the payload between software patches
Full scale testing:
during the full scale test, the atmospheric measurement suite was flown, along with a mass simulator.
payload failed to detect liftoff occurred and did not collect data from sensors or camera.
this was an oversight, the code checks for the amount of acceleration during a period of time, and the code wasn’t properly tuned for the lower powered motor we flew during the full-scale test flight.
However, the payload is designed to log the raw acceleration data for the duration the payload is active. This gave us a way to see exactly what the payload was experiencing during the flight and we were able to diagnose exactly what went wrong. So, while the payload didn’t complete its primary goal, with data and experience we gained through the test flight, and the benchtop simulations we have ran, we are confident in the ability of the payload to perform nominally in Huntsville.

8. Propulsion Subsystem Pro54 Cessaroni Reload engine mount
AeroPack engine retainer
Fins glued to motor mount tube for strength
Fiberglass fillets
Recovery harness mount
Peter
The propulsion subsystem is shown up on the slide. We are using a Cessaroni J295 motor. To help contain the motor we have chosen to use a Pro54 Cessaroni Reload engine mount and an AeroPack engine retainer. We believe this is sufficent in securing the motor during launch; both simulations and the full scale launch have proven these components to be safe. The fins are glued with epoxy to the motor mount tube for strength. We also have fiberlass fillets on the fins connecting them to the motor mount and the rocket body. Shock cable is connected to a welded eye-bolt that is connected to the side of the upper center ring.

9. Motor Choice Cesaroni J295 Max thrust: 101.4 lb Avg. Thrust: 68.3 lb
Total Impulse: lbf*s
Weight: 2.5 lb
Length: inches
Diameter: 2.13 inches
Burn time: 4.0 seconds
Peter
Simulations have shown that the rocket will have a max speed of 626 feet per second and give will off a max of pounds of thrust; this is slower and less powerful than our original motor choice due to NASA concerns. The new motor decreases max speed from 817 feet per second to 626 feet per second. This change helps us to clear out of the transonic range we will achieve .56 mach. To help contain the motor we have chosen to use a Pro54 Cessaroni Reload engine mount and an AeroPack engine retainer. This new motor fits well into the design of our rocket

10. Full Scale Test Flight Altitude Expected: 1875 ft Actual: 1972 ft
Two launches within an hour
Incomplete data from science payload
Kevin
Our expected altitude was 1875 ft according to OpenRocket simulations
During our second launch the rocket reached an altitude of 1972 ft as recorded by the onboard altimeter
The graph on the slide compares the profiles of the simulation and actual profiles.
Through strong team cooperation we managed to retrieve and re-set our rocket in order to get a second launch. This was done within 52 minutes and both flights were successful and the rocket sustained no damage. The onboard science payload unfortunately recorded incomplete data.

11. Current Status Built and ready to compete
Payload bay fully constructed
Recovery bay fully constructed
Awaiting final travel arrangements
Will
our payload is fully constructed, tested, and ready for launch
as well as our electronics bay which was tested and works properly to deploy our parachutes and safely recover our rocket
currently we are getting our travel arrangements together for alabama next month.

12. Educational Engagement
Multi-grade educational day at Oregon City Schools
126 middle schoolers given a presentation on rocketry and NASA
85 high schoolers shown a presentation and given a hands on rocket build in preparation for an April Launch day
Will
TALKED ABOUT:
we presented a rocket education day at Oregon City Schools
presented to 126 middle schoolers and 85 high schoolers
IN PRESENTATION:
Importance of rockets in today’s world
a How they take satellites into space
NASA’s Saturn V through Space X’s Falcon 9 rocket
Talked about our project and what we are working on
a Future plans for the club
i convert our rocket from solid fuel rocket to a hybrid rocket motor in future years
How rockets work, all the components and their functions
Space is a rapidly growing field and we are in need of math and science majors to continue our efforts in space

13. Aggregate Expected Costs
Budget
Aggregate Expected Costs
Payload
$338.88
Propulsion and Fuselage
$628.46
Recovery
$268.68
Sub-Scale
$59.48
Education
$100.00
Travel
$1,494.64
Total
$2,890.14
Andrew
This is a table of our aggregate expected costs. It has gone down slightly since our CDR because of decreases in travel costs and a slight decrease in our propulsion and fuselage section. This is because of choosing a slightly cheaper motor and getting the NASA rates for a hotel room.
We have also gotten a lot of small rocket components donated to us by local rocket hobbyists like our parachutes, our full scale test motors, and different smaller components.

14. Future Work Arrange transport to competition
Final rocket integration check over
Find sources for funding for future years
Paint the rocket
Name the rocket
Andrew
Explain each step of the future work

15. Questions?
This is where we cry RIP