Lunar Exploration Transportation System (LETS) MAE 491 / 492 2008 IPT Design Competition Instructors: Dr. P.J. Benfield and Dr. Matt Turner Team Frankenstein.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
NASA-MSFC Lunar Exploration Ryan Baggett Nick Boyer Martha Hurley Hanum Jumastapha Michelle Pugh April 7, 2009.
Advertisements

LETS Phase 3 Review 4/29/08. Agenda Team Introduction Daedalus Concept Concept of Operations Subsystem Overview Daedalus Performance Daedalus Vision Public.
Mars Pathfinder Mission Breakthrough on the Surface of Mars.
1 Pacific International Science Center for Exploration Systems (PISCES) Conference – Nov 12, 2008 Commercial Lunar Business Perspectives John Kohut Chief.
E.T. ( E UROPA T RAVELERS ). GREEN TEAM Mission Principle Investigator : Min Ki Kim Co – Investigator : Young Been Choi : Jae Wook Choi : Yong Hyeon Jang.
VI. Descent and Terminal Guidance for Pinpoint Landing and Hazard Avoidance Session Chair: Dr. Sam W. Thurman.
Payload Site One Upon landing, the LOW prepares for single-site goals and multi-site goals. A drop-box is prepared for single-site goals utilizing various.
SATELLITES What They Do and How They Work Michael J. Mackowski Aerospace Engineer October 2013 With Updates from Shawn Shepherd.
MAE 491/492 Integrated Product Team Design Examples Bringing the Real World into the classroom.
Mars EDL CubeSat Mission Jekan Thanga 1, Jim Bell 1 Space and Terrestrial Robotic Exploration Laboratory School of Earth and Space Exploration (SESE) Arizona.
Lunar Advanced Science and Exploration Research: Partnership in Science and Exploration Michael J. Wargo, Sc.D. Chief Lunar Scientist for Exploration Systems.
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.
Temperature ( C) Pressure ( bars) Jupiter Probes Venus Surface Exploration CNSR Europa Surface and Subsurface Titan.
METEOR BACKGROUND This is a foundation project in an ambitious endeavor to provide the RIT research community with a means to conduct near space.
Autonomous Landing Hazard Avoidance Technology (ALHAT) Page 1 March 2008 Go for Lunar Landing Real-Time Imaging Technology for the Return to the Moon Dr.
Autonomous Robotics Team Autonomous Robotics Lab: Cooperative Control of a Three-Robot Formation Texas A&M University, College Station, TX Fall Presentations.
Lunar Exploration Transportation System (LETS) MAE 491 / IPT Design Competition Instructors: Dr. P.J. Benfield and Dr. Matt Turner Team Frankenstein.
ISRA Introductory - 1 In-Situ Resource Analyzer (ISRA) ISRA is a combined XRF/XRD/Imaging Instrument for Lunar Applications –XRF: X-ray Fluorescence –XRD:
Hang Seven Launch Readiness Review Lucas Migliorini, Becca Lidvall, Paul Smith Chase Goodman, Ethan Hollenbach, Nikhil Desai, Abby Caballero, Sierra Williams.
Dr. Jennifer Rochlis. Overview Build a technology testbed for future rover concepts Develop and demonstrate operations and mission concepts.
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.
Dhruv Patel 12th- Project manager Max Beasley 11th- Systems Engineer Trey Hargett 11th Jonathan Ford 11th Brent Higdon 11th Austin Lambert 11th Jay Chenault.
LETS Phase 3 Review 4/29/08. Agenda Team Introduction Daedalus Concept Concept of Operations Subsystem Overview Daedalus Performance Daedalus Vision Public.
Lunar Exploration Transportation System (LETS) MAE 491 / IPT Design Competition Instructors: Dr. P.J. Benfield and Dr. Matt Turner Team Frankenstein.
LUNAR ROVER Concept proposal meeting Dr. Ashish Dutta Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur Kanpur, INDIA ( *** for private circulation only)
M E T ROVER MSCD Engineering Technology Critical Design Review Metropolitan State College of Denver April 2004.
1 Lunar Exploration Transportation System (LETS) Baseline Design Presentation 1/31/08.
Lunar Exploration Transportation System (LETS) MAE 491 / IPT Design Competition Instructors: Dr. P.J. Benfield and Dr. Matt Turner Team Frankenstein.
Alternatives Concepts White Paper IPT 02E. Project Management The University of Alabama Huntsville Team LeaderEddie Kiessling StructuresNathan Coffee.
Lunar Exploration Transportation System (LETS) MAE 491 / IPT Design Competition Instructors: Dr. P.J. Benfield and Dr. Matt Turner Team Frankenstein.
Final Report on LOW Design Maximizing Science While Minimizing Single Point Failure.
LETS Phase 3 Review 4/29/08. Agenda Team Introduction Daedalus Concept Concept of Operations Subsystem Overview Daedalus Performance Daedalus Vision Questions.
Universal Chassis for Modular Ground Vehicles University of Michigan Mars Rover Team Presented by Eric Nytko August 6, 2005 The 2 nd Mars Expedition Planning.
DemoSat II Colorado Space Grant Consortium Design (EPICS) Division Colorado School of Mines Golden Colorado Critical.
SFINX Surveying Flying IN-situ eXplorer Old Dominion University
Lunar Exploration Transportation System (LETS) Customer Briefing LETS go to the Moon!
Team SSCSC Critical Design Review Nick Brennan, Kier Fortier, Tom Johnson, Shannon Martin, Dylan Stewart, and Adam Wright October 05, 2010 Fall 2010 Rev.
Hybrid Power Controller (HPC) Final Presentation Senior Design II.
Mars Exploration Rover Science Goals Determine whether Life ever arose on Mars Characterize the Climate of Mars Characterize the Geology of Mars Prepare.
Thermal Control Subsystem
LETS Phase 3 Review 4/29/08. Agenda Team Introduction Daedalus Concept Concept of Operations Subsystem Overview Daedalus Performance Daedalus Vision Questions.
Lunar Exploration Transportation System (LETS) MAE 491 / IPT Design Competition Instructors: Dr. P.J. Benfield and Dr. Matt Turner Team Frankenstein.
Crew Mobility for Lunar Surface Exploration Dr. Rob Ambrose NASA-JSC May 2008.
A&AE 450 – Senior Design Un-pressurized Surface Vehicles, Local Science Issues and Robotic Exploration February 13, 2000 Christopher Burnside.
AAE450 Spring 2009 Lunar Night and Lander Power System Adham Fakhry February 26th, 2009 Power Group Lunar Descent Phase Passive Thermal Control for Lunar.
PTAR Presentation Jonathan DeLaRosa, Jessica Nelson, Ivan Morin, JJ Rodenburg, & Tim Stelly Team Cronus.
Early Exploration Viking  “The scientific goal of the Viking missions is to ‘increase our knowledge of the planet Mars with an emphasis on the search.
LETS Phase 2 Review 3/6/08. Agenda Team Introduction Overview of Design Process Initial Mass and Power Budgets Trade Tree and Trade Study Concept Overviews.
Lunar Exploration Transportation System (LETS) Team Frankenstein Phase 2 Presentation 3/6/08.
Lunar Exploration Transportation System (LETS) MAE 491 / IPT Design Competition Instructors: Dr. P.J. Benfield and Dr. Matt Turner Team Frankenstein.
Session Chair: Dr. Sam W. Thurman
Planetary Lander PDR Team Name
Technical Resource Allocations
Rover Components.
LETS Phase 3 Review 4/29/08.
Lunar Exploration Transportation System (LETS)
Payload and Mobility Measure 15 samples in the dark and 5 samples in light. The Viking Lander did not move, but it used an SSRA with a boom, collector.
Daedalous Payload Basic Requirements for Single Site Science Box:
Lunar Exploration Transportation System (LETS)
LETS Phase 3 Review 4/29/08.
Mars Rover CDR Team Name
Measure 15 samples in the dark and 5 samples in light
Alternatives Concepts White Paper IPT 02E
Lunar Exploration Transportation System (LETS)
ISO View Stereo Imaging Belly Cam GN&C
Final Report on LOW Design
Communications Rover Penetrators Parabolic Dish Reflector
<Your Team # > Your Team Name Here
The Lunar Lion By: Hannah Flick.
Presentation transcript:

Lunar Exploration Transportation System (LETS) MAE 491 / IPT Design Competition Instructors: Dr. P.J. Benfield and Dr. Matt Turner Team Frankenstein Phase 2 Presentation 3/6/08

2 Team Disciplines The University of Alabama in Huntsville –Team Leader: Matt Isbell –Structures: Matthew Pinkston and Robert Baltz –Power: Tyler Smith –Systems Engineering: Kevin Dean –GN&C: Joseph Woodall –Thermal: Thomas Talty –Payload / Communications: Chris Brunton –Operations: Audra Ribordy Southern University –Mobility: Chase Nelson and Eddie Miller ESTACA –Sample Return: Kim Nguyen and Vincent Tolomio

3 Agenda Abstract Phase 2 Overview Design Process Outline Concepts Subsystems of Concepts Selection of Final Concept Phase 3 Planning Phase 3 Schedule Conclusions Questions

4 Abstract Multifaceted and reliable design System meets all CDD requirements Two concepts developed in Phase 2 using the Viking Lander as a baseline –Each design assessed based on the specifications of the CDD –Both were assessed and ranked –The best design, Cyclops, was chosen to be carried into Phase 3 Designs ranked by: ability to meet scientific objectives, weight, ease of design and mobility, etc.

5 Phase 2 Overview Deliverables –White paper Compare baseline, the Viking Lander, with two alternative concepts Strategy for selecting alternative systems Qualitative and quantitative information to evaluate each idea A logical rationale for selecting one concept from among the presented options –Oral presentation Specification Summary –Lander and rover is required to meet the CDD requirements for the mission –The CDD requirements are the foundation for the lander/rover design –Each subsystem is also directly affected by the requirements and lunar environment

6 Phase 2 Overview Cont. Approach to Phase 2 –Team Structure Team Frankenstein is born Team split up into separate disciplines –Concerns Harsh lunar environment – Electrically charged dust, temperature, radiation, micro meteoroids, etc. 15 Samples in permanent dark – Extreme temperature of -223 C Mobility - non-existent on the baseline lander and LETS CDD requires mobility –Concept Design Review baseline lander for detailed information about the customer’s specific requirement Investigated possible solutions to meet the given CDD requirements Each discipline presented design ideas to the team Team revised these possibilities and created two design concepts Evaluated the concepts based on the weighted values for desired criteria and chose the winning concept

7 Design Process Outline Results System Simulation CDD/Customer Project Office Systems Engineer Thermal Power GN&COperationsPayloads StructuresMobilitySample Return

8 Baseline Concept: Viking Lander First robotic lander to conduct scientific research on another planet Total Dry Mass: 576 kg Science: 91kg (16% of DM) Dimensions 3 x 2 x 2 m Power: –2 RTG –4 NiCd Survivability: -90 days expected -V1:6yrs 3mo -V2:3yrs 7mo

9 Alternative 1 Concept: Cyclops Single rover landing on wheels Total Dry Mass: kg Science: 320 kg (40% of DM) –Penetrators –SRV –Single site box Dimensions 2 x 1.5 x 1 m Power: –8 Lithium Ion Batteries –2 Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators (RTG) –Solar Cells Survivability: At least 1 yr

10 Alternative 2 Concept: Medusa Stationary lander with rover deployment Total Dry Mass: kg Science: 195 kg (21% of DM) –Penetrators Dimensions 2 x 1.5 x 1 m –Rover 1 x 0.5 x 0.5 m Power: –8 Lithium Ion Batteries –3 Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators (RTG) Survivability: At least 1 yr

11 Guidance & Navigation Viking –Guidance, Control, and Sequencing Computer utilized the flight software to perform guidance, steering, and control from separation to landing Cyclops –Decent/Landing An altitude control system will be used to control, navigate, and stabilize while in descent –Post Landing Operator at mission control navigating rover –Uses a camera system to obtain terrain features of its current environment Rover orientation will be accomplished by a technique known as Visual Localization –Uses a camera image to determine its change in position in the environment Medusa –Decent/Landing An altitude control system will be used to control, navigate, and stabilize while in descent –Post Landing Ground command inputs to the rover will be provided by onboard planning Autonomous Path Planning will be used to navigate the rover –Uses a camera system to obtain terrain features of its current environment Rover orientation will also be accomplished by Visual Localization

12 Communications Viking –Communications were accomplished through a two-axis steerable high- gain antenna –A low-gain S-band antenna also extended from the base –Both of these antennas allowed for communication directly with Earth Cyclops –Surface communications between penetrators and lander/rover will be done using a UHF antenna mounted on the lander/rover –Communications to mission control will be done by using a radio utilizing power amplifiers and medium gain antennas on the lander/rover, which will relay the data back to Earth via LRO Medusa –Surface communications between penetrators, rover, and Medusa will be done using a UHF antenna mounted on the rover –Communications to mission control will be done by using a radio utilizing power amplifiers and medium gain antennas on the lander, which will relay the data back to Earth via LRO

13 Structures Viking –Used a silicon paint to protect the surfaces from Martian dust –Structural frame used lightweight aluminum Cyclops –Six wheeled rover –Structural frame built from Aluminum 6061-T6 Lightweight properties Low cost –Composites (Various components) Carbon fiber, phenolic, etc. –Excellent thermal insulation –Excellent strength to weight ratio –Lower density Medusa –Four legged lander –Deployed six wheel rover –Structural frame built from Aluminum 6061-T6 –Composites

14 Power Viking –Bioshield Power Assembly (BPA), Power Control and Distribution Assembly (PCDA), Nickel Cadmium batteries, RTG, and Load Banks Cyclops –PCDA –Load Banks –8 Lithium Ion Batteries Best energy to weight ratio –2 RTG Constant power supply Thermal output can be utilized for thermal systems –Solar cells for single site box Medusa –PCDA –Load Banks –8 Lithium Ion Batteries –3 RTG One RTG is needed for Medusa’s rover

15 Thermal Viking –Thermal insulations and coatings, electrical heaters, thermal switches, and water cooling Cyclops –2 RTG Each RTG will deliver a maximum of 7.2 kW of heat –Multi-Layer Insulation Lightweight Multiple layers of thin sheets can be added to reduce radiation –Marshall Convergent Coating-1 (MCC-1) Forms a radiant heat barrier on surfaces that are painted Medusa –3 RTG Utilizes heat output –Multi-Layer Insulation –Marshall Convergent Coating-1 (MCC-1)

16 Payload Viking –Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS), camera system, meteorology equipment, seismometer, surface sampler assembly, fluorescent x-ray spectrometer, and magnets Cyclops –GC-MS –Multi-spectral Imager –Miniature Thermal Emission Spectrometer (Mini-TES) –Single site box Meteorology equipment Camera system –Penetrators Pressure sensors, atmospheric accelerometer, communication equipment, seismometer, meteorology equipment, and surface sampler assembly –SRV Solar System Research Analysis (SSRA) that includes a boom, collector head, and shroud unit, capable of collecting a variety of material elements Medusa –GC-MS –Multi-spectral Imager –Miniature Thermal Emission Spectrometer (Mini-TES) –Penetrators –Rover

17 Operations Upon reaching the Moon –Decent CONOPS takes over 5km from lunar surface –Upon decent, shoot 15 penetrators into permanently dark regions of the moon Dark regions in the Shackleton crater Landing –Drop off “sample box” for single site goals Micrometeorite flux Lighting conditions Assess electrostatic dust levitation and its correlation with lighting conditions –Have 14 days of guaranteed light conditions Lunar Surface Mobility –Have rover move to the rim of the Shackleton crater –Have the penetrators relay the data to the rover –The rover will send the data to LRO –Send data from LRO to mission control –Visit lit regions and collect samples –Relay data to mission control via LRO –The Cyclops SRV will take samples and send to Earth

18 Selection of Final Concept 560

19 Phase 3 Planning Key Issues to Address –TRL of 9 vs. New Technology –Penetrators Meets all challenges Design basis is new –Expectations Provide innovative ideas that meet or exceed the base requirements set out by the team Partner Tasks –ESTACA Sample Return Vehicle –Southern University Mobility

20 Phase 3 Schedule Subsystems –Each subsystem must develop a unique design that best fits the requirements for the chosen concept Design Critical systems –Con-ops Reliant on subsystems to provide direction for daily tasks –GN&C Reliant on subsystems to provide basis for equipment needed System Integration –Systems will be reviewed for feasibility –Compromises will be made on each design to create the most beneficial product

21 Conclusions The best design Cyclops –“There’s no place this thing can’t go!” Provide superior functionality and reliability Develop innovative and cutting edge ideas and designs to overcome the objectives Concerns of penetrator use and trajectory

22 Questions