AAE 450 Spring 2010 AAE 450 2/25/2010 Kathy Brumbaugh 612-860-2465 Chris Spreen 610-888-9521

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Advanced Energy Vehicle
Advertisements

Preliminary Design Review. Rocket & Payload Schematic.
Eddie McGovern, Adam Blake, Ryan Vogel, Alleyce Watts, and Jade O’Mara.
1 Air Launch System Project Proposal February 11, 2008 Dan Poniatowski (Team Lead) Matt Campbell Dan Cipera Pierre Dumas Boris Kaganovich Jason LaDoucer.
SATELLITES What They Do and How They Work Michael J. Mackowski Aerospace Engineer October 2013 With Updates from Shawn Shepherd.
CURIOSITY: Big Mars Rover for Big Mars Science! Artist’s Concept. NASA/JPL-Caltech.
High altitude airborne developments have presented huge advantages in the US military’s arsenal through: environmental monitoring precision navigation.
AAE450 Spring 2009 Final Presentation Draft Slides Description: Some draft slides and ideas 3/26/09 Kris Ezra Attitude 1.
AAE450 Spring 2009 Arbitrary Payload Cost Optimization to LLO Tasks: Payload Cost / Mass Optimization (Launch to LLO) Disprove Momentum Transfer Alternative.
The Lander is at a 25 km Lunar altitude and an orbital period of approximately 110 minutes. After separation occurs the Lander is completely self sufficient.
AAE450 Spring 2009 Slide 1 of 8 Orbital Transfer Vehicle (OTV) Masses and Costs Ian Meginnis March 12, 2009 Group Leader - Power Systems Phase Leader -
Project X pedition Spacecraft Senior Design – Spring 2009
Brynn Larson Trey Karsten Terek Campbell Marcus Flores Marcell Smalley Shunsuke Miyazaki 2015/6/10 Team Ochocinco.
Team R3D3 Final Presentation Devon Campbell Greg McQuie Kate Kennedy Henk Wolda Marisa Antuna Nicole Ela Tyler Smith 12/1/11.
GONS Final Presentation Steven Benedict Jake Danser Josh Hecht Brock Kowalchuk Erik Shuttlesworth Matthew Zemel December 4, 2007 Steven Benedict Jake Danser.
A Comparison of Nuclear Thermal to Nuclear Electric Propulsion for Interplanetary Missions Mike Osenar Mentor: LtCol Lawrence.
Team DSRO Critical Design Review Taylor Boe Andrew Buckner Andrew Gilbert Emily Howard Grace Harsha Bobby Stillwell October 14, 2008.
Thomas Jeffries, Anthony Anglin, Dylan Cooper, Dustin Fishelman, Colin Harkins, Joao Mansur, Starteya Pais, Andrew Trujillo 10/2/2012.
SPIRIT of the Koala Project VOLT Critical Design Review Anthony Anglin, Colin Harkins, Dylan Cooper, Thomas Jefferies, Starteya Pais, Joao Mansur, Andrew.
Today’s APODAPOD  Read NASA website:  solarsystem.nasa.gov solarsystem.nasa.gov  IN-CLASS QUIZ THIS FRIDAY!!  Solar Lab, Kirkwood, Rooftop this week.
1 Project Name Solar Sail Project Proposal February 7, 2007 Megan Williams (Team Lead) Eric Blake Jon Braam Raymond Haremza Michael Hiti Kory Jenkins Daniel.
A Simple Entry, Descent, and Floating System for Planetary Ballooning Daisuke Akita Tokyo Institute of Technology.
CanSat Interim Presentation II
Alternatives Concepts White Paper IPT 02E. Project Management The University of Alabama Huntsville Team LeaderEddie Kiessling StructuresNathan Coffee.
Titan Mariner Spacecraft Study Titan Team! IPPW-5 June 24, 2007.
1 Formation Flying Shunsuke Hirayama Tsutomu Hasegawa Aziatun Burhan Masao Shimada Tomo Sugano Rachel Winters Matt Whitten Kyle Tholen Matt Mueller Shelby.
Attitude Determination and Control System
Chapter 24 Space Vehicular Systems. Objectives After reading the chapter and reviewing the materials presented the students will be able to: Identify.
Common PDR Problems ACES Presentation T. Gregory Guzik March 6, 2003.
RockSat-C 2012 CoDR Zero Tilt Conceptual Design Review Frostburg State University Michael Stevenson, Mayowa Ogundipe, Subhasis Ghosh, Andrew Huntley, Derek.
© Lavochkin Association, 2013 Ganymede Lander mission overview.
Lunar Exploration Transportation System (LETS) MAE 491 / IPT Design Competition Instructors: Dr. P.J. Benfield and Dr. Matt Turner Team Frankenstein.
Critical Design Review- UCF Jeremy Young Anthony Liauppa Erica Terry, Emily Sachs Kristen Brightwell Gillian Smith 1.
Structures and Mechanisms Subsystems AERSP 401A. Introduction to Structural Estimation Primary Structure: load-bearing structure of the spacecraft Secondary.
Mars Exploration Rovers (MER) Entry, Descent, Landing, and Deployment.
COMPARISON OF THE HUYGENS MISSION AND THE SM2 TEST FLIGHT FOR HUYGENS ATTITUDE RECONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING PROPERTIES PROPERTIESHuygens Flight Module SM2.
MinnRock Design and Canister Layout Team members Bryce Schaefer (team coordinator)- AEM Cameron Japuntich- AEM Liz Sefkow- ME Mitch Andrus-
By: Christiano Daniel Abadi. Deliverables/Achievements in Spring 2000: 8 Systems Engineering Documents Overall and power budgets Gantt Chart for Preliminary.
AAE450 Spring 2009 Final Slide Concepts March 26, 2009 [Cory Alban] [Mission Ops] [Locomotion] 1.
1 Airship fo shizzle. Jon Anderson Team Lead Hours Worked: Team Member Jon Anderson.
STRATEGIES FOR MARS NETWORK MISSIONS VIA AN ALTERNATIVE ENTRY, DESCENT, AND LANDING ARCHITECTURE 10 TH INTERNATIONAL PLANETARY PROBE WORKSHOP June,
Minimalist Mars Mission Establishing a Human Toehold on the Red Planet Executive Summary DevelopSpace MinMars Team.
1 Jet Propulsion Laboratory JPL Flight Team Adam Nikolic Josh Ruggiero Bob Hoffman Dusty Terrill.
Team Magnaritaville Conceptual Design Review Zachary Cuseo, Andrew Fruge, Shweta Maurya, Sydni Smith, Christopher Nie, Tyler Knappe 9/22/09 Fall 2009 Rev.
Napoleon Connor Strait | Chris Gray | Chad Alvarez Akeem Huggins | Ashley Zimmerer Tucker Emmett | Ginny Christiansen |Caleb Lipscomb Conceptual Design.
LionSat Thermal Subsystem Team Members: Nathan Hermanson Adam McDonald Joel Thakker.
MNROCK CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW University of Minnesota William Ung Scott Balaban Bryce Schaefer Tom Thoe 11/3/2008.
ES 100 Micro Air Vehicle Project Montgomery College Professor: Dr. Charles Kung Summer I 2012 Team Members: Andrew Joe Laura Mohammed Nathelie Noella Stephanie.
ERV Team 2 Final Report Alicia Cole-Quigley James Gilson Erin Hammond Domenic Marcello Matt Miller Jeff Rosenberger.
Characteristics of remote sensing satellites. Satellites generally vary in their architecture Usually remote sensing satellites are having two plateforms.
Hillary Beltran, Edward Crawford, Nicole Harris, Edward Lowe, Emily Proano, and Kevin Wong 05 October 2010.
THEMIS MRRSystems - 1 GSFC, Jan 5, 2007 Systems Engineering.
AAE 450 Spring 2010 AAE 450 2/11/2010 Kathy Brumbaugh Chris Spreen
Lunar Exploration Transportation System (LETS) MAE 491 / IPT Design Competition Instructors: Dr. P.J. Benfield and Dr. Matt Turner Team Frankenstein.
The Principles of Space Instrument Design Lauren Shea Based on research completed at MSSL Alton Convent School.
AAE 450 Spring 2010 AAE 450 3/11/2010 Kathy Brumbaugh Chris Spreen
Planetary Lander PDR Team Name
AAE 450 1/14/2010 Kathy Brumbaugh Chris Spreen AAE 450 Spring 2010.
AAE 450 3/30/2010 Kathy Brumbaugh Chris Spreen AAE 450 Spring 2010.
Overview of the System Accommodation and Mission Design for a Fission Powered Titan Saturn System Mission (TSSM) Robert L. Cataldo1, Steve R. Oleson1,
Launch Readiness Review
Space Proximity Atmospheric Research above Tropospheric Altitudes
Sounding Rocket PDR Team Name
Lunar Descent Trajectory
Sounding Rocket CDR Team Name
Mars Rover CDR Team Name
[Solomon Westerman] [PM]
2019 TEKNOFEST ROCKET CONTEST PRELIMINARY DESİGN REPORT (PDR)
<Your Team # > Your Team Name Here
AAE 450 3/25/2010 Kathy Brumbaugh Chris Spreen AAE 450 Spring 2010.
Presentation transcript:

AAE 450 Spring 2010 AAE 450 2/25/2010 Kathy Brumbaugh Chris Spreen

AAE 450 Spring 2010

Agenda AAE 450 Spring 2010 TimeActivity 9:30am - 9:35amAnnouncements, Reminders 9:35am – 10:00amCDR Decisions 10:00am – 10:05amRace to the finish line… 10:05am – 10:15amConcerns

Presentation feedback  Great job!  Speak louder  Pictures, charts, anything visual  Cite all references  CAD models => Martin AAE 450 Spring 2010

Project timeline

Design Stages - Description StageDescription Mission Design Requirements (MDR) Identification of all subsystems for each group’s tasks. Tasks and steps that need to be accomplished for the subsystems identified Preliminary Design Review (PDR) Exploring all the options for each aspect of the design Generating numbers for each option Communicating these numbers between groups **At end of PDR => Mission architecture possibilities have been identified. Critical Design Review (CDR) Project Managers and Group Leaders will meet to discuss all options and make decision based upon group input and calculations. Choose one option for each aspect of the design (ex. Lake Lander = sub or boat) Investigate and generate numbers for options on that design aspect (ex. What type of propulsion for the Lake Lander?) Work numbers in great detail Communicate between groups with detailed analysis and numbers for each option **At end of CDR => Mission architecture is chosen (ex. Specific engines, propellants, launch vehicle and numbers, fly-by or no fly-by, lake lander & airship configuration) Final Design Review (FDR) Project Managers and Group Leaders meet to incorporate all group discussions into choosing the best overall design including specifics for each category and aspect. Numbers and analysis are now completed in great detail. AAE 450 Spring 2010 Project Managers

Critical Design Review Launch & Entry Configuration Ballute Orbiter Airship Lake Lander AAE 450 Spring 2010

Andrew Rettenmaier 2 3 rd stage booster Orbiter Airship LL 5m 2.5m 2.95m 1m 4.0m Let’s attempt to stay within this envelope. Maximum diameter set at 4.0m. Current total height of 11.45m. This gives us 0.65 m of vertical clearance + 4 m of tapered clearance above the total 12.1 m payload cylindrical envelope. Revolved shell structure connects orbiter to gondola of airship – (gondola ideally needs to be round) 3 rd stage = RL-10A Ballute Parachutes shown as purple blocks

AAE 450 Spring 2010 Aerocapture Method  Ballute –2% mass fraction –99.99% probability of capture –Peak g’s: -2.7(axial), -0.1(lateral) –FPA = degrees –Never been done  Aeroshell –30% mass fraction for entire vehicle –99.99% probability of capture – Never been done Group Name (i.e.Trajectory Optimization)

 (A) Single-use ballute dropping off orbiter, airship, and lake lander directly after capture  (B) Dual-use ballute dropping off orbiter after capture, carrying lake lander and airship down to ~400km Entry Configuration / Separation Group Name (i.e.Trajectory Optimization) AAE 450 Spring 2010 (A) (B) 2. Ballute releases O into its 1 st orbit, LL and A into separate descents. A begins to inflate. 3. A is fully inflated & releases parachute. LL descends into lake. 2. Ballute releases O into its 1 st orbit, LL and A remain attached. A begins to inflate. 3. LL and A released from ballute. A is inflated (?). LL descends into lake with parachute. 1. Enter atmosphere O O A A A A, LL A, LL, O LL A, LL, O

Configuration of orbiter scan platform booms and moving components AAE 450 Spring 2010 Andrew Rettenmaier 3 10m magnetometer boom 2x 20m boom perpendicular to path Instrumentation scan platform can spin and tilt up to 8 deg in any direction 4m deployable/gi mbaled HGA Direction of movement ACS configured in staggered- symmetric pattern

AAE 450 Spring 2010 Joe Buckley Orbiter Propulsion and Power  Propulsion –2 HiPAT 445 N with Hydrazine/N2O4  Power –5 ASRGs, 3 Li Ion batteries (1 spare of each)

Orbiter Thermal Management  MLI and heating tape Orbiter Attitude Determination and Control  Determination: Star cameras, sun sensors, gyros  Control: Thrusters, reaction wheels AAE 450 Spring 2010 Joe Buckley

Orbiter Control Issues  Controlling vehicle stack during Titan Entry  Blackout during atmospheric entry AAE 450 Spring 2010 Joe Buckley Orbiter Communications  0.1 degree pointing error  2 antennas –One fixed, One gimbaled  6 hours/ day communication to earth –6 hour continuous block possible

AAE 450 Spring 2010 Scientific Payload Airship Decisions  Driven by 4 propeller engines that are electrically powered by ASRGs  Everything except the propulsion system will be powered by 1 MMRTG, and 6 lithium ion batteries  Sun sensors, and a radar altimeter pointed forward will be added to provide position information and collision avoidance  The balloon has been proven to be able to withstand the heatloss to the atmosphere and able to sustain prolonged flight

Airship Decisions AAE 450 Spring 2010 Scientific Payload  Communications will be done with 1 gimbaled antenna  Drop probes will be the previously proposed pyramid design and will be dropped by parachutes from the exterior of the airship  The surface scoop will be the “claw” design which includes a drill and a suction system By Friday  Finalize a cruising altitude / flight path  Determine ASRGs required for propulsion

Lake Lander – Configuration Overview  Proceed as Planned  Payload –Submersible Probe Designed –Battery Powered –Communications by Cable  Propulsion –(2) Ducted Propellers on each Pontoon –Electrical Propulsion  Power –(4) ASRGs –(7) Li-Ion Rechargeable Batteries AAE 450 Spring 2010

Lake Lander – Configuration Overview  Structures –Kevlar Cable to lower submersible probe –Winch Motor –Spanning Structures Deck Spars  Communication –Gimbaled Antenna – to orbiter –Cryogenic Cable Intertwined into Kevlar – to submersible probe  Controls –Rudder –Servos, Accelerometers, Gyroscopes, Stepper Motors AAE 450 Spring 2010

Lake Lander – Unknowns  Trajectory – entry into atmosphere  Thermal Management –Insulation to maintain necessary temperature – endoatmospheric –Interplanetary cooling – exoatmospheric AAE 450 Spring 2010 Current Lake Lander Configuration Image by Alex Brunk

Race to the Finish Line…  Final Design Review: –Wed. March 10 th 7:30pm ARMS B071 –All team members welcome  Action Items: –Final Design Review decisions to be made (ongoing): –Current design decision document by Sunday 5pm d1JhZUg&hl=en –Project/vehicle names (each brainstorm a name with reasoning) Fri. March 5 th by 5pm &hl=en AAE 450 Spring 2010

Final Reminders  Section 1 – Final Design slides due Sun. by 5pm  CAD group – send Martin image files by Fri. 5pm AAE 450 Spring 2010

Concerns AAE 450 Spring 2010