Full Mission Simulation Test Report SloshSAT University of Northern Colorado Team Members: Sage Andorka Dan Welsh Motoaki Honda Maurice Woods III Zach.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Testing Relational Database
Advertisements

1. warmed. 2. cooled. 3. neither warmed nor cooled.
Thermoforming Process
Gas Heating, Cutting, Brazing, and Welding
Building a Pressure/Temperature Weather Station (Sensor Pack) AEM 1905, Fall 2008.
RockSat-C 2012 CoDR Minnesota Sound Wreckers Conceptual Design Review University of Minnesota Alexander Richman Jacob Schultz Justine Topel Will Thorson.
NICK TSAMIS AERE 423 FALL 2009 Composite Rockoon Parts.
Solar Cell Efficiency Flight Readiness Review Teddy Bounds Angela Dunn Joel Sasser.
Chapter 2: Steady-State One-Dimensional Heat Conduction
AMS-02 Cryosystem Phase III Flight Safety Review January 12, 2010 Phil Mott.
Colorado Space Grant Consortium DemoSat-B Colorado State University Matthew Jui, Ian Patterson, Mark Spowart, Todd Wallis June Colorado Space Grant.
Full Mission Simulation Test Report UPR-R(river) P(rock) University of Puerto Rico Río Piedras Campus May 14, 2010.
Team 7, Final Presentation December 1, Mission Overview Send up petri dishes containing bacteria Analyze the effects of temperature, pressure, and.
RockSat-C 2012 SITR Full Mission Simulation Report University/Institution Team Members Date.
SloshSAT Preliminary Design Review Dr. Robert Walch Dan Welsh Maurice Woods III Motoaki Honda Zach Sears 6/11/2010.
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.
Full Mission Simulation Test Report Team Name University/Institution Team Members Date.
SloshSAT Conceptual Design Review Dr. Robert Walch Sage Andorka Dan Welsh Zach Sears Maurice Woods III Motoaki Honda Ryan Estrick 14 Oct
Sun Spectro Sat (SSS) Critical Design Review Dr. Matt Semak Motoaki Honda Maurice Woods III Sara Gray 25 June 2010.
RockSat-C 2011 CoDR CSU RocketSat-C Conceptual Design Review Colorado State University Isaiah Franka Jordan Rath Abby Wilbourn Mike Yeager 10/1/10 1.
Team Hubble Jr. Final Presentation Rachel Small, Holly Zaepfel, Ryan Del Gizzi, Kyle Norman, and Evan Levy December 5, 2006.
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
Launch Readiness Review MinnSpec University of Minnesota Bryce Schaefer, Chris Woerhle, Art Graf
Full Mission Simulation Report New Jersey Space Grant Consortium at Stevens Institute of Technology and Rutgers University Ethan Hayon, Mark Siembab, Mike.
SPIRIT of the Koala Project VOLT Critical Design Review Anthony Anglin, Colin Harkins, Dylan Cooper, Thomas Jefferies, Starteya Pais, Joao Mansur, Andrew.
(PDR ) University of Northern Colorado Nathan and Casey 11/14/08.
 Components have ratings  Ratings can be Voltage, Current or Power (Volts, Amps or Watts  If a Current of Power rating is exceeded the component overheats.
Cell Culture Stirrer for YSI Design overview: past and present New features Manufacturability improvements.
Malte HildebrandtDC Status Report, Dear MEG Committee,PSI, April 14 th 2009 this is the first report concerning the drift chamber status as.
MinnRock Design and Canister Layout Team members Bryce Schaefer (team coordinator)- AEM Cameron Japuntich- AEM Liz Sefkow- ME Mitch Andrus-
The Physics of Basketball
RockSat-C 2012 ISTR Individual Subsystem Testing Report Minnesota Sound Wreckers University of Minnesota 2/13/12 1 Alexander Richman Jacob Schultz Justine.
TRENTON Casing Filler Presentation
RockSat-C 2012 SITR Full Mission Simulation Report University of Minnesota Alexander Richman Jacob Schultz Justine Topel Will Thorson 4/23/2012.
Welding Inspection and Metallurgy
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.
AMS-02 Delta CDR Structural Analysis and Certification Process Carl Lauritzen Structural Analysis Lead Jacobs Engineering
HF Source Drivers Performance Observations and Recommendations Paul Debbins University of Iowa Nov. 10, 2004.
RockSat-C 2012 LRR Launch Readiness Review University of Minnesota Alex Richman, Jacob Schultz, Justine Topel, Will Thorson 5/27/2012.
S.H.I.E.L.D. CRITICAL DESIGN REVIEW Addison, Travis, Jared, Evan, Aaron, Matt 10/14/08.
Preliminary Design Review Metro State College of Denver Matthew Hanley, Daniel Bass 14 November 2008.
Factors Affecting Tool Life In Machining Processes
Manufacturing Processes & Techniques Designers need to understand a wide range of manufacturing processes and techniques to match their knowledge of materials.
13.2 The Nature of Liquids. Describe the particles in a liquid.
Welcome! Drafting 2323: Pipe Drafting Andrew Amini Full Time Instructor, HCC.
Air condition installation
SloshSAT Colorado Space Grant Consortium Space Symposium Sage Andorka Dan Welsh Zach Sears Maurice Woods III Motoaki Honda 17 April
Mr. Brooks Foundations of Technology.  Examine and analyze open and closed fluid systems in terms of common components and basic design.
RockSat-C 2013 SITR Payload Subsystem Integration and Testing Report University/Institution Team Members Date.
PACKING AND PACKED GLANDS
THE SCIENCE OF SOLVENT WELDING
A Simple Nutation Damper Design
Team S.H.I.E.L.D. Final Presentation
Thermoforming Process
Fuel Supply System Chapter 21 Lesson 1.
University of Northern Colorado
Prentice-Hall Chapter 13.2 Dr. Yager
Solids, Liquids, and Gases
TRENTON Casing Filler Presentation
Knowing When to Stop: An Examination of Methods to Minimize the False Negative Risk of Automated Abort Triggers RAM XI Training Summit October 2018 Patrick.
Solids, Liquids, and Gases
Launch Readiness Report West Virginia University
Measuring Temperature Part 2
with Solids, Liquids, & Gases
Ken Periman Problem solving, Large leak failure in vehicle.
Presentation transcript:

Full Mission Simulation Test Report SloshSAT University of Northern Colorado Team Members: Sage Andorka Dan Welsh Motoaki Honda Maurice Woods III Zach Sears

Due to acceleration of their containers, on board liquids manifest reactive forces on their containers that can have adverse effects on the performance of the vehicle. However, understanding these reactive forces is limited and modeling is computationally intense. Our goal is to create a simpler analytical model to describe liquid slosh. This simplified model, although not comprehensive, may yield practical results. Mission Overview

Changes Since Subsystem Integration The only changes since SITR pertain to payload mass (added to meet necessary minimum mass requirements)[1] and modification of the inner canister's end-cap design and adhesion method. The changes made only affect overall mission mass requirements, and alter the design and assembly method for the inner canister. This modification improves the canister's resistance to failure due to the forces exerted on the canister, and eliminates the unwanted 'piston' effect that occurred during earlier tests. Results are pending final subsystem tests.

Pictures [1] Mass was increased to meet Wallops' minimum payload mass requirements by adding aluminum rings around the cylinders

PICS!

Test Description Full Systems Testing has been delayed due to small leaks found in our inner cylinder. Further design review and testing is taking place to ensure proper function before full mission tests can be performed. However, through the development of more resilient and reliable cylinder designs, the following tests have been conducted: o Extensive pressure tests o Temperature and environmental testing o These tests have confirmed that the new canister/end-cap designs will endure the payloads flight, will be confidently self contained, and will not fail. Other (informal) tests include: o Center of mass test (not including testing with CSU)[2] o Spin testing: Successful

[2] Center of Mass test setup

Testing Description We determined that our canister manifested some small leaks by the observation of fluid within the exterior cylinder and outside the interior cylinder. The canister was dismantled and the inner cylinder was cooled in order to observe leaks (cooling the canister helped emphasize the escaping liquid Galden, which would normally evaporate in a warm, open environment) Three pinhole leaks were observed along the junction between the end-cap and the inner cylinder. We suspect that these leaks were caused by the heat generated by the heated needle tool that was used to cut notches in the canisters end caps[3] to allow proper air flow around the canister, preventing the problematic 'piston effect'.

[3] Notches cut in the end caps (abandoned method) to allow top-to- bottom air flow within the containment cylinder, preventing the unwanted piston effect

Testing Description A method of creating notches in the end caps which does not generate excessive heat (which may melt the glue holding the end-cap to the cylinder) was determined and employed. The canister was then put into a sealed jar and placed in a hot vehicle to increase the pressure inside the canister and force a failure if one were to occur. This second canister failed as well. We suspect that an air bubble in the adhesive prevented a full seal of the canister. Due to the color of JB Weld, such air bubbles are undetectable when applying to the canister.

Testing Description We have now re-examined the adhesion method and overall design of our inner canister. We have deemed that it may be necessary to change the material of the inner canister's end caps to one that will allow the use of chemical welding of the end caps, to ensure proper sealing and structural integrity (i.e. resistance to heat and pressure failure). This new angle on the design uses 'plugs' instead of end-caps to close the cylinder[4], thereby eliminating the need for modifications to compensate for the piston effect. This also improves the overall impact resistance of the inner canister, as the new plugs will be set snug into the ends of the cylinder and welded to the cylinder via chemical bond - essentially making it one piece of plastic instead of three components glued together. *Note: The exterior canister has not failed, and has, in all instances of inner canister failure, succeeded in acting as the redundant fluid containment system, as it was it's intended design.

[4] New, chemical welded fluid containment system (using plugs instead of end-caps)

New cylinder design with accelerometer

Testing Description The individual subsystems not affected by the canister issues are all functioning properly. Full systems testing and data analysis has not yet been completed due to the canister issues we have experienced, but are expected to be completed shortly. Again, some informal tests have been done throughout the building process, ensuring that few adjustments will need to be made upon payload completion (these tests include center of mass, spin, and AVR/accelerometer/electronics functionality)

Overall Analysis Are you ready ready for launch? o We are not yet ready to launch. o Come May 21st, we expect to be at launch readiness. Are you happy with the results? o Full testing success is expected and soon to come, provided that the new subsystems designs and tests have proven successful. o Great happiness is anticipated upon completion of full mission testing. What work still needs to be completed? o Full assembly of the cylinder and Galden containment system o Full system integration o "Life In The Day" / Full systems testing

Lessons Learned "Get it done sooner" mentality has greatly benefitted the team, and has proven necessary to this project. Considering the issues that are being encountered now, we are glad to find them sooner rather than later. Best practices? What has worked well? Next time, it would be helpful to have created multiple, usable versions of the payload design, so that when changes need to be made, the planning and assembly process has already been completed.

Conclusions Issues and concerns? New construction methods and step-by-step "build and test, build and test" method is proving to be very productive, has improved production time, and is reducing the chance of critical failure.