Final Report on LOW Design Maximizing Science While Minimizing Single Point Failure.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Lunar Landing GN&C and Trajectory Design Go For Lunar Landing: From Terminal Descent to Touchdown Conference Panel 4: GN&C Ron Sostaric / NASA JSC March.
Advertisements

LETS Phase 3 Review 4/29/08. Agenda Team Introduction Daedalus Concept Concept of Operations Subsystem Overview Daedalus Performance Daedalus Vision Public.
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.
PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 1 1 March 4-5, 2008 Evolution of Lunar to Planetary Landing A.Miguel San Martin Mars Science.
Mars EDL CubeSat Mission Jekan Thanga 1, Jim Bell 1 Space and Terrestrial Robotic Exploration Laboratory School of Earth and Space Exploration (SESE) Arizona.
The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) is the first mission in NASA's Vision for Space Exploration, a plan to return to the moon and then to travel to.
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.
Project X pedition Spacecraft Senior Design – Spring 2009
Spacecraft Propulsion Dr Andrew Ketsdever Lesson 13 MAE 5595.
MAXIM Power Subsystem Diane Yun Vickie Moran NASA/GSFC Code (IMDC) 8/19/99.
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.
Navigation Systems for Lunar Landing Ian J. Gravseth Ball Aerospace and Technologies Corp. March 5 th, 2007 Ian J. Gravseth Ball Aerospace and Technologies.
Flying, Hopping and Perching Microbots for Extreme Environment Exploration Deployed Using CubeSats Jekan Thanga 1, Jim Bell 1 Space and Terrestrial Robotic.
Mysteries of Earth and Mars Mars Facts and Exploration.
Lunar Exploration Transportation System (LETS) MAE 491 / IPT Design Competition Instructors: Dr. P.J. Benfield and Dr. Matt Turner Team Frankenstein.
Today’s APODAPOD  Read NASA website:  solarsystem.nasa.gov solarsystem.nasa.gov  IN-CLASS QUIZ THIS FRIDAY!!  Solar Lab, Kirkwood, Rooftop this week.
Final Version Wes Ousley Dan Nguyen May 13-17, 2002 Micro-Arcsecond Imaging Mission, Pathfinder (MAXIM-PF) Thermal.
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.
NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center LRO Integration and Test Joanne Baker GSFC Code 568 August 16-17, 2005.
ReVeal Passive Illumination by Radar (PAIR). Overview Payload / Mission Communication Launch Orbit Power Thermal Attitude Propulsion Finance.
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.
20a - 1 NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center Attitude Control System (ACS) Eric Holmes, Code 591 Joe Garrick, Code 595 Jim Simpson, Code 596 NASA/GSFC August.
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)
Bits and Pieces. Spacecraft Systems Propulsion –Already discussed Communications Science instruments Power.
M E T ROVER MSCD Engineering Technology Critical Design Review Metropolitan State College of Denver April 2004.
Mars Exploration Rovers. SpiritOpportunity Mars Exploration Rovers  Launch: June 10, 2003  Landed on Mars: January 4  Location: Gusev Crater  Planned.
Mechanical SuperNova/Acceleration Probe SNAP Study Dave Peters George Roach June 28, a man who's willing to make a decision in the first place can.
1 Lunar Exploration Transportation System (LETS) Baseline Design Presentation 1/31/08.
Lunar Drilling and Driving Carnegie Mellon December 2007 Red Whittaker.
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.
LETS Phase 3 Review 4/29/08. Agenda Team Introduction Daedalus Concept Concept of Operations Subsystem Overview Daedalus Performance Daedalus Vision Questions.
Energy Notes.
Lunar Exploration Transportation System (LETS) Customer Briefing LETS go to the Moon!
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
Phoenix The Phoenix Mars Mission Doug Lombardi Education and Public Outreach Manager Lunar and Planetary Laboratory The University of Arizona
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.
LRO SRR LRO Mission Overview.
JWST Mission CDR Northrop Grumman Space Systems Redondo Beach (CA) April 10-16, 2010.
PTAR Presentation Jonathan DeLaRosa, Jessica Nelson, Ivan Morin, JJ Rodenburg, & Tim Stelly Team Cronus.
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.
Scarab Autonomous Traverse Carnegie Mellon December 2007 David Wettergreen.
Lunar Exploration Transportation System (LETS) MAE 491 / IPT Design Competition Instructors: Dr. P.J. Benfield and Dr. Matt Turner Team Frankenstein.
Planetary Lander PDR Team Name
Technical Resource Allocations
Rover Components.
LETS Phase 3 Review 4/29/08.
Lunar Exploration Transportation System (LETS)
Attitude, Lunar Transfer Phase
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.
Lunar Descent Trajectory
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
Presentation transcript:

Final Report on LOW Design Maximizing Science While Minimizing Single Point Failure

Project Management Team Eclipse Project OfficeEddie Kiessling Systems EngineerJay Gala StructuresNathan Coffee GN & CBrandon York GN & CJoseph Sandlin OperationsBrett Guin ThermalKathryn Kirsh Payload OperationsBrent Newson PowerChristopher Goes Sample Return VehicleJulien Gobeaut Sample Return VehicleGhislain Pelieu Technical EditorMichael Bryan

Team Objectives Develop Teamwork –Work as a team in an engineering environment Systems Integration Time management Develop communication skills

Final Concept Drawing

Video

Figures of Merit Table Figure of MeritGoalDesign Number of surface objectives accomplished 15 samples in permanent dark and 5 samples in lighted terrain Percentage of mass allocated to payload Higher is better33% Ratio of objectives (SMD to ESMD) validation 2 to 14:1 Efficiency of getting data in stakeholders hands vs. capability of mission Higher is better58% Percentage of mass allocated to power system Lower is better26% Ratio of off-the-shelf hardware to new development hardware Higher is better All subsystems have TRL 9 equipment

Critical Parameters of LOW ParameterUnitsNotes Overall Vehicle Mission DurationDays331 Total Masskg997.4 Number of Sites VisitedSites20 Total (5 Light / 15 Dark) Single Site Goal Masskg23 Payload Subsystem Total Masskg324 SMD Masskg260 ESMD Masskg64 Payload Percentage of Total Mass%32.48 Power Subsystem TypeN/ASolar Cells & Lithium Ion Batteries Total Power Masskg Total Power RequiredWe200 We Number of Solar ArraysN/A1 Solar Array Mass / Solar Arraykg Solar Array Area / Solar Arraym2m Number of BatteriesN/A24 Batter Mass / Batterykg9.824

Critical Parameters of LOW ParameterUnitsNotes Structure Subsystem Total Masskg140 Maximum G LoadG5 Thermal Subsystem Temperature of Rover (Cold Case)K160 – 250 Temperature of Rover (Hot Case)K226 – 277 Total MassKg40 Passive / Active SystemN/AActive GN&C Subsystem Total Masskg Accuracy%95 Power RequiredW Communication Subsystem Total Masskg5 TypeN/AS – Band Transmitter BandwithMHz1700 – 2300 Power RequiredW30 Data RateBits Per Minute (bpm)

Critical Parameters of LOW ParameterUnitsNotes Mobility System Range of Velocitym / hr5 – 6 Total Masskg100

Power Allocation Table Average LoadLandingInitializingDrivingScienceCommunicationsSleepEOM & SRV Thermal GN&C Power10 1 C&DH Communications Propulsion Mobility Mechanisms Payload SRV Total

CDD Requirements Atlas V-401 EPF with landed mass of kg Propulsion system dry mass is 64.6 kg First mission at polar location Capability to land at other lunar locations Minimize Cost Launch Date is Sept. 30, 2012 Capability to move on lunar surface Survive for 1 year on the lunar surface Survive the proposed concept of operations Must meet SMD and ESMD objectives Land within a precision of ± 100m 3σ Provide guidance, navigation, and control beginning at 5 km above lunar surface Capable of landing at a slope of 12 degrees Designed for G-loads during lunar landing Design to withstand g-loads with respect to stiffness only

Payload Subsystem Stereo Imaging Belly Cam GN&C Isometric View of LOW

Payload Subsystem Upon landing, the LOW prepares for single-site goals and multi-site goals. A drop-box is prepared for single-site goals utilizing various instruments measuring the following parameters: –Lighting conditions –Micrometeorite flux –Electrostatic dust levitation conditions Meets CDD Single Site Goals The LOW’s stereo imaging systems’ mast will permanently raise itself to its functional position.

Payload Subsystem At each site starting at site one, scientific equipment will perform multi-site goals utilizing various instruments performing the following operations: –Regolith sample collection –Geotechnical properties –Regolith composition –Geological characterization –Magnetic susceptibility –Surface temperatures –Alpha particle and gamma ray emissions –Image acquisition Meets and exceeds CDD Multi-site instrument package goals Maximized scientific equipment by allotting 325 kg to Payload 32 Individual pieces of equipment

Payload Subsystem Top View of Payload Layout

Payload Subsystem Sample Return Vehicle –Utilizes liquid propellant NTO / MMH –Separate GN&C system 2 Ring Laser Gyros Pressure Sensors Air Speed Sensors Angle of Attack Sensors –Launches directly from LOW Site of Launch: Shackleton Crater

Payload Subsystem At the final site (Shackleton Crater), the SRV will be ready to launch. An arm will load the SRV with regolith samples collected during the course of the mission.

Structures Subsystem 5 G’s Maximum Semi – Hard Landing Utilizing Crush Pads –Adapted from Mars Viking Lander Experiences impact velocity of 8 m / s Minimum Factor of Safety of 1.5 –Verified by Von Mises Stress Criterion Four Leg Configuration

Structures Subsystem Landing Phase –Four Unloading Ramps Primary System –Explosive Bolts Secondary System –Robotic Arm Assist

Guidance, Navigation, & Control Subsystem Descent (Terminal Descent Phase – TDP) –Attitude Controllers (ACS) IMU (Northrop Grumman LN-200 Fiber Optic) Star Tracker (Goodrich HD-1003) Sun Sensors (Optical Energy Technology Model 0.5) Radar Altimeter (Honeywell HG8500) Actuators –Thrusters/Main Engine (AeroJet MR-106 and MR-80B) –Reaction Wheels (Ithaco Type-A) –Optical (OSS) DSMAC (Digital Scene Matching Area Correlator) LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) (MDA-Optech) –Guidance Computer (BAE Systems RAD750)

Guidance, Navigation, & Control Subsystem Experimentation and Traveling (Lunar Excursion Phase – LEP) –2 Panoramic Cameras (PanCams) –4 Hazard Cameras (HazCams) –1 Navigational Camera (NavCam) –1 Belly Camera (BellyCam) –Also uses the IMU, Tilt Sensors, and the Guidance Computer

Thermal Subsystem To account for the diverse temperature range (50K – 400K) of the moon, the LOW utilizes a active thermal system with the following components: –Radiators –Heaters –Heat Pipes –Multi – Layer Insulation (MLI)

Power Subsystem Use of Nuclear Power was avoided –Nuclear power conflicts with the 2012 launch Requires a 5 year lead time –Pu-238 is scarce

Power Subsystem Power Source –Solar Arrays Area of 2.217m 2 Silicon Mass of kg Solar Power Required 455 W e Power Storage –Lithium Ion Batteries 24 Batteries Mass of kg per battery 45 kW e -hr Capacity During the Dark –8 days of power at 200 W e average –6 days of sleep phase at 20 W e

Communications Subsystem LOW uses S-band transmitters for communication –Relays data through LRO to Earth at DLS –Relays data to Earth at DLS Data transfer occurs after each site –Requires approximately 5.5 days to transfer 300 MB of experimental data for each site DLS of LRO for approximately 8.5 minutes per orbit Orbit Time of 113 minutes Data Rate of bits per second (bps)

Communications Subsystem Communication and Data –Gives and receives telemetry data when in LOS to LRO and Earth –Stores all data on 2 different 32 GB non- volatile memory Has no moving parts Redundancy

Sample Return Vehicle (SRV)

SRV Mass Balance

SRV GN&C Control of the rocket –Control in pitch & yaw –2 actuators –Sensor: 1 IMU Control of the re-entry capsule –Control on 3 axis –6 thrusters –Sensor: 1 IMU 3 pressure sensors on the heat shield Actuator Nozzle

SRV Trajectory

Conclusion Maximize Scientific Payload –LOW has the potential to visit extra sites –LOW can perform more in-depth experiments Minimize Single Point Failure –Comprised mostly of TRL 9 technology –Conservative ConOps Schedule –No lag time in data communication –Complete Redundancy in GN&C

Questions?

Landing Site Landing Landing Phase Battery Power GN&C Landing Legs Initializing Initializing Phase Com. Sys. “OK” Solar Power Science Box Cameras on 1 st Science Site Science Phase Experiments Com. Phase Data Transfer 1 day 1 st day

Light Sites Travel to Site Traveling Phase Mobility Solar Power Charge Batteries Com. Phase Data Transfer Repeat for Light Science Site Science Phase Experiments Com. Phase Data Transfer 4 days 1 day

Dark Sites Travel to Dark Traveling Phase Mobility Battery Power Science Site Science Phase Experiments Com. Phase Data Transfer Travel to Light Traveling Phase Mobility Battery Power Com. Phase Data Transfer Await Sunlight Sleep Phase Minimal Thermal And power Repeat for Dark 4 days 1 day 3 days

Shackleton Crater Travel to EoM Traveling Phase Mobility Battery Power Solar Power Shackleton Science Phase Experiments Com. Phase Data Transfer EoM & SRV Phase Launch SRV 3 Weeks

Radiator Temperature

Radiator Temperature vs. Area

Cold Case

Hot Case

Expected Temperature Ranges