Launch Readiness Review MinnSpec University of Minnesota Bryce Schaefer, Chris Woerhle, Art Graf 6-14-10.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
RockOn! Canister Integration RockOn! 2009.
Advertisements

A QUICK OVERVIEW OF LAB REPORT 0 GRADER COMMENTS Physics 119 Lab 0 Rubric Commentary.
Full Mission Simulation Report Temple University Fred Avery, Gene Council, Ny’Jaa Bobo, Salvatore Giorgi, Jay Shukla 4/21/12.
RockSat-C 2012 CoDR Minnesota Sound Wreckers Conceptual Design Review University of Minnesota Alexander Richman Jacob Schultz Justine Topel Will Thorson.
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.
Full Mission Simulation Test Report UPR-R(river) P(rock) University of Puerto Rico Río Piedras Campus May 14, 2010.
MinnSpec Conceptual Design Review University of Minnesota / Augsburg College Douglas Carlson (Overall Team Lead), Bryce Schaefer (MinnRock II), Chris Woehrle.
RockSat-C 2012 SITR Full Mission Simulation Report University/Institution Team Members Date.
Brynn Larson Trey Karsten Terek Campbell Marcus Flores Marcell Smalley Shunsuke Miyazaki 2015/6/10 Team Ochocinco.
Paul “Trey” Karsten Marcell Smalley Shunsuke Miyazaki Brynn Larson Terek Campbell Marcus Flores 11/25/09 Final Revision.
Launch Readiness Review SloshSAT University of Northern Colorado Sage Andorka Dan Welsh Maurice Woods III Motoaki Honda Zach Sears 6/11/2010.
RockSat-C 2011 SITR Payload Subsystem Integration and Testing Report University/Institution Team Members Date.
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.
Good Vibrations Conceptual Design Review University of Wyoming James Richey, Justin Thornton, Luke Voss, Jake Thatcher, Tony Allais Oct 27, 2008.
Launch Readiness Review JASMM Virginia Tech Team Members: Robbie Robertson Zack HarlowJeremiah Shiflet Daniel Martin Matt James Anthony Rinaldi Senior.
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.
Launch Readiness Review River Rock 2010 University of Puerto Rico June 9, 2010.
MinnSpec University of Minnesota and Augsburg College.
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
University of Pennsylvania Department of Electrical and Systems Engineering ABSTRACT: Quantifying and measuring certain aspects of a golf swing is a helpful.
Full Mission Simulation Report New Jersey Space Grant Consortium at Stevens Institute of Technology and Rutgers University Ethan Hayon, Mark Siembab, Mike.
What to do when you are done. PRINTING WITH PHOTOSHOP.
Critical Design Review Team Name University/Institution Team Members Date.
Miscellaneous Notes: This is a bare-bones template – make it fancier if you wish, but be sure to address at least the items listed here. Basically this.
Guidelines for Visual Aids and Presentations Suggestions for Presenters Society of Quality Assurance 2004 Annual Meeting Guidance M. Rosenberg/L. KvasnickaJune.
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.
Where No One Has Gone Before… E80: The Next Generation Section 1, Team 1 Student 1, Student 2, Student 3, and Student 4 May 5, 2008.
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.
MinnRock Design and Canister Layout Team members Bryce Schaefer (team coordinator)- AEM Cameron Japuntich- AEM Liz Sefkow- ME Mitch Andrus-
Individual Subsystem Testing Report New Jersey Space Grant Consortium with Rutgers University Stevens Institute of Technology 2/13/2012.
RockSat-C 2012 ISTR Individual Subsystem Testing Report Minnesota Sound Wreckers University of Minnesota 2/13/12 1 Alexander Richman Jacob Schultz Justine.
RockSat-C 2012 SITR Full Mission Simulation Report Harding University William Waldron, Joshua Griffith, Drew Cancienne, Edmond Wilson, David Stair 22 April.
RockSat-C 2012 SITR Full Mission Simulation Report University of Minnesota Alexander Richman Jacob Schultz Justine Topel Will Thorson 4/23/2012.
Full Mission Simulation Test Report SloshSAT University of Northern Colorado Team Members: Sage Andorka Dan Welsh Motoaki Honda Maurice Woods III Zach.
MNROCK CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW University of Minnesota William Ung Scott Balaban Bryce Schaefer Tom Thoe 11/3/2008.
Launch Readiness Review
Northwest Nazarene University Chad Larson, Ben Gordon, Seth Leija, David Vinson, Drew Johnson, Zach Thomas June 1 st, 2012.
University Student Launch Initiative Preliminary Design Review University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Team Rocket.
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.
Surviving FlightSurviving Flight  28zn0&NR=1 28zn0&NR=1.
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.
Section 1: Mission Overview Mission Statement Mission Objectives Expected Results System Modifications Functional Block Diagrams 2.
Patch Testing. HYSWEEP ® Calibration of a Multibeam System Patch Testing Single and Dual Head Multibeam Systems. Patch Testing Single and Dual Head Multibeam.
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.
Full Mission Simulation Test Report RocketSat CU Boulder
How do you find the area of a rectangle using square units?
Tethered Aerostat Program Concept Design Review Team Name Conceptual Design Review University/College Team Members Date.
GLAST Science Support Center May 8, 2006 GUC Meeting AI#28. SAE Release Schedule David Band (GSSC/JCA-UMBC) Julie McEnery (GSFC)
RockOn! RockOn! Structure Build RockOn! 2009.
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.
Launch Readiness Review
Launch Readiness Review
Team Name Conceptual Design Review
Team Name Conceptual Design Review
Launch Readiness Report West Virginia University
Presentation transcript:

Launch Readiness Review MinnSpec University of Minnesota Bryce Schaefer, Chris Woerhle, Art Graf

User Guide ComplianceFinal PayloadIntegration Update/PlanTesting Results Level Of ReadinessRequired ToolsInspectionsQ/A

User Guide ComplianceFinal PayloadIntegration Update/PlanTesting Results Level Of ReadinessRequired ToolsInspectionsQ/A Type of RestrictionRestrictionStatus Mass allotment:<= 10 lbs Volume allotment:<= ½ can The payload’s center of gravity (CG):In 1”X1”X1” envelope of centroid? Activation met under requirement: (either 1.SYS.1 or 1.SYS.2) Yes? Structure mounts:Top and bottom bulkheads. No mounts to sides of cans. Sharing:Fully developed?

Where are you at on integration? Our plan for integration with Wyoming is fully complete, and we expect things to go smoothly at Wallops. We have integrated with Wyoming before, so this is nothing new to either team. Plan: –Wyoming has created correctly sized standoffs to create a rigid space within which we need to fit; we have been planning our payload to these specifications since the beginning of this project. –What areas worry you? Our main concern is height. There is always a possibility that things will not go smoothly during integration, or that there was perhaps a miscommunication during our planning process. We have done everything we can to keep this from happening, and hope still that all goes according to plan. Communication has occurred throughout. User Guide ComplianceFinal PayloadIntegration Update/PlanTesting Results Level Of ReadinessRequired ToolsInspectionsQ/A

Testing: Testing has gone smoothly, and data from most of those tests was presented earlier this spring. Data from the new AVR board will be presented on the next few slides. In place of the temperature sensor that is used on the RockOn! boards, we have place a light sensor. Though I know that the circuitry may not be correct to gather relevant data from the light sensor, a voltage change is still visible with the application of light. This is all we need to detect the spin rate of the rocket as it rotates past the Sun. User Guide ComplianceFinal PayloadIntegration Update/PlanTesting Results Level Of ReadinessRequired ToolsInspectionsQ/A

AVR board tests We can see that a lot of the background noise present in the other board’s data has been cleared up; this data is much more clean, and will allow for much easier calibration.

This data compares nicely with the low range x data. The voltage change across the graph is much smaller as it should be. Other accelerometers showed very similar data.

A laser was used to vary the voltage across the light sensor. We can see that as expected, with a laser it is difficult to point it consistently at a single point, causing many spikes in the data. We hope to be able to pick up the spin rate of the rocket, much like our experiment last year, with much less equipment.

The following plots are from a full system test preformed on a spin table. User Guide ComplianceFinal PayloadIntegration Update/PlanTesting Results Level Of ReadinessRequired ToolsInspectionsQ/A

IMU Data (Roll, Pitch, Yaw)

IMU Data (Accel, x,y,z)

Spectrometer Data The following data was collected on a spin table which had a red computer screen at the desired point. Since the spectrometer’s output is between 0 and 255, we know that the highest wavelength value (Red) is around

Most important slide! (or two or three) Are you ready? What is ready? What isn’t ready? Why aren’t certain areas ready (if applicable) User Guide ComplianceFinal PayloadIntegration Update/PlanTesting Results Level Of ReadinessRequired ToolsInspectionsQ/A

Level or Readiness Our payload is essentially complete, with minor goals to complete before we fly to VA. We will have no problem being fully ready and prepared for flight before we leave

What is Ready Both of our spectroscopy experiments are fully developed. All mechanical connections have been made and developed, and integrated into the canister to ensure that they fit. We are ready for integration with Wyoming, and expect that aspect to go smoothly.

What isn’t ready One data acquisition board is still being made, however an older board was used earlier this year to ensure its functionality. This data board will be completed and tested by June 12 th, and will be integrated into the canister shortly after. Our GPS system has not been functioning correctly, however we are still working on it, and in the case of failure, will still fly it as ballast weight.

Action Items: Development and testing of data acquisition board and GPS system. Payload tests and integration into canister to ensure payload completion User Guide ComplianceFinal PayloadIntegration Update/PlanTesting Results Level Of ReadinessRequired ToolsInspectionsQ/A

We are ready for Wallops, and have begun packing all necessary tools for the trip. We are packing all tools that we could possibly need during integration. We will assume nothing will be supplied for us, and will have everything we need to integrate, fix, and tweak the canister as necessary We will come prepared! User Guide ComplianceFinal PayloadIntegration Update/PlanTesting Results Level Of ReadinessRequired ToolsInspectionsQ/A

Inspections: We have been through the inspection process many times here with a mock up canister, and are prepared to do it successfully at the Refuge Inn. Our team has been through this procedure before, so we know what to expect. User Guide ComplianceFinal PayloadIntegration Update/PlanTesting Results Level Of ReadinessRequired ToolsInspectionsQ/A

This review has affirmed our readiness, and we have no further questions. User Guide ComplianceFinal PayloadIntegration Update/PlanTesting Results Level Of ReadinessRequired ToolsInspectionsQ/A