UNIVERSIT DEGLI STUDI DI PADOVA

Centro Interdipartimentale di ricerca di Studi e attivit spaziali G. Colombo (CISAS)

PRELIMINARY DESIGN OF A THRUST BALANCE FOR ELECTRIC SPACE PROPULSION SYSTEMS

THESIS

Autor: D. Pablo Prez Rueda Ingeniero Tcnico Aeronutico (EUITA, U.P. MADRID)

Supervision: D. Daniele Pavarin D. Fabio Trezzolani D. Andrea Lucca Fabris

PRELIMINARY DESIGN OF A THRUST BALANCE FOR ELECTRIC SPACE PROPULSION SYSTEMS

By

Pablo Prez Rueda

Abstract:
This paper describes the research carried out at CISAS (Center of Studies and Activities for Space) laboratory, in the frame of the development of a high power helicon thruster for space applications. The activity is mainly focused on the design of a mechanical system supporting the thruster inside the vacuum chamber used to reproduce a space-like environment during the thruster testing. This system has two different missions: to support the thruster inside the vacuum chamber; 2) to determine the thrust. Particularly, the second one is based on the fact that the system consists of an arm fixed by a flexural pivot, which allows a little rotation when the thruster is operating. The dynamic of the system has been study, in order to determine the horizontal displacement in function of the expected thrust. The oscillation makes our arm a pendulum, because of this, the initial study is about the dynamics of three different kinds of pendulum, and this will lead to the election of one of them. Finally a detailed study and design is provided for the selected configuration.

Thesis supervisor: Daniele Pavarin Title: Professor of Mechanical Engineering

TABLE OF CONTENTS:

1. Introduction.7
1.1. 1.2. 1.3. Purpose..7 Project Overview.7 Acknowledgments.....8

2. Pendulum Modeling and Dynamics.9

Theorical Introduction.9 2.1.1. Simple Pendulum.9 2.1.2. Inverted Pendulum.10 2.1.3. Stabilized Inverted Pendulum.11 2.2. Flexural Pivots..13 2.3. Solutions of the Equations of Motion.14 2.1.

3. Application.17
3.1. 3.2. Introduction.17 Stage 1: Pendulum Selection18 3.2.1. Fixed Data18 3.2.2. Study Results.19 A. Displacement of the Thruster, Time who need to reach a stable point and Velocity of the Displacement.20 B. Rotational Speed..23 C. Response Time Analysis. Instability....25 D. Matlab Plots.26

4. Conclusions of Phase 1.33 5. Stage 2: Study of the selection34

5.1. Materials comparison.34 A. Outgassing Properties.34 B. Non Magnetic Properties..35 C. Stiffness and Density35 D. Cost Range..35 Model of deformation of a slender rod.38 Analysis of the forces acting on the thrust balance..41 Pendulum rod deformation42 Conclusions stage 2..44

5.2. 5.3. 5.4. 5.5.

6. STAGE 3: DETAILLED STUDY45

Final rod measures...45 6.1.1. Deformations..45 6.1.2. Deformations vs. Displacement Generated by Thrust47 6.2. Variations in the flexural pivots..47 6.3. Rod design optimization51 6.3.1. Deformation of the New Rod51 6.3.2. Displacement of the New Rod.52 6.4. Rod parameters optimization....... 53 6.5. Damping Coefficient.. 54 6.6. Pendulum rod conclusions... 56 6.7. Considerations about simple pendulum. Natural frequency..57 6.8. Magnetic field interactions.58 6.9. Vibrations59 6.10. Thermal effects59 6.11. Conclusions60 6.1.

7. MEASURES61 8. THRUST STAND CALIBRATION.61 9. PHASE 4; DESIGN....63

9.1. 9.2. 9.3. 9.4. 9.5. Design justification63 Tolerances in binding to flexural pivot63 Initial choose design 65 Final structure design. First approximation dimensions.66 Final design.68

APPENDIX A. Matlab Scripts and Function Files..70 APPENDIX B. Data Sheets78

1. RiverHawk. Flexural pivots.78 2. Laser distance sensor. Mel M7LL80

APPENDIX C. Material Choice Data.....82

BIBLIOGRAPHY...84

1. INTRODUCTION: 1.1 PURPOSE

The objective of the work in this thesis is to devise a means of support and measure of the thrust for Helicon Plasma Thruster, hereafter HPT, developed at CISAS. The pendulum will be the way to quantify the performance of the HPT; in terms of the useful force it can produce to move a spacecraft in a vacuum environment. The design employs a vertical arm joined with a flexural pivot, which let it rotate around itself. A horizontal thrust force generated by the HPT causes the pendulum to rotate. This motion is measured and studied to determine the thrust of the HPT.

1.2

PROJECT OVERVIEW

This thesis covers several topics. Primarily, there are three kinds of pendulum, which can be chosen: the determination of their dynamic response to the thrust will be the main objective of the first part. The numeric implementation of the different kinds of pendulum in matlab will be important, along with the decision of the parameters necessary for this implementation. We will take the decision about the kind of pendulum after studying these data. The second part relies on the accurate study of the pendulum selected and all of the components. The forces and deformations in the pendulum rod are studied here and the conclusions about how they could affect our system. In the third stage the responses of the different final configurations for our pendulum are investigated. Particularly, the displacement caused by the thruster and all the interactions that affect this displacement are considered. The measure methods will be described in this document. About this, there are two main sources of uncertainty in the thrust measurements: those due to changes in the sensitivity of the pendulum and those due to the Radio Frequency interferences. At the end, the 3D design of the structure will be presented, with a detailed list of all of the components necessary to construct the structure.

1.3

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to voice my appreciation to everyone who helped me on this project. Special thanks to Professor Pavarin for let me work with his team and for his support, to Fabio Trezzolani for suggesting this thesis, for his guidance along the way and for his assistance and permanent support, and to Andrea Lucca Fabris for his corrections and ideas. Finally, many thanks to those who made contributions on this project before me. Outside of CISAS, I would also to acknowledge my parents and my brother for his moral support and guidance throughout my academic career.

2. PENDULUM MODELING AND DYNAMICS: 2.1. TEORICAL INTRODUCTION:

The hypothesized mechanism of the thrust balance for electric thruster testing at CISAS can be modeled as a pendulum, is it simple, inverted or stabilized inverted. One of the preliminary steps to perform is to develop a numerical model of the balance, in order to simulate its dynamical behavior and thus predict its response to an applied force for a given thruster mass. In order to understand how this can be accomplished, the dynamics of the different pendulums must be known.
2.1.1. SIMPLE PENDULUM:

Lets consider first a simple pendulum, as the one illustrated in the following picture: Here lp is the length of the pendulum [m] , mt and mp are the mass of the thruster and of pendulums rod respectively [kg], T is the thrust [N], is the deflection angle [rad], x is the horizontal displacement of the thruster from its equilibrium position [m], kt is the torsional spring constant of pendulums pivot [N m /rad ],ct is its damping coefficient [N m s/rad] and g is earths standard gravity acceleration (9.81 m/s2). In this lumped-parameters model the mass of the rod can be modeled as a point mass applied in rods center of mass (lp/2). The response of the pendulum can be defined as the angle or the displacement x produced by the force T. The motion of the pendulum can be expressed through a single equation, describing its rotational motion around its pivot point:
+ k + c = Tl cos gm l sin 1 gm l sin I t t p t p p p 2
eq.1)

Here I is the moment of inertia of the system [kg m2], which, for a system of point masses as the one here considered, can be calculated as:

l I = mt l p 2 + m p ( p )2 2

eq.2)

2.1.2. INVERTED PENDULUM

Mechanics of the inverted pendulum is not different from that of the ordinary pendulum. In the inverted position, the pendulum is unstable without control. The inverted pendulum is a common, interesting control problem that involves many basic elements of control theory. Stabilization at the inverted position is usually accomplished through linear state feedback. This report explores the theoretical analysis of the system dynamics of the inverted pendulum, but in this first stage, doesnt contains any documentation or study about control methods. We avoid the stability problem for the theoretical dynamics analysis of the pendulum, but we will consider it at the time of the conclusions. When the thruster is switched off, the gravity causes pendulum rotational acceleration at a magnitude increasing with swing angle. When the thruster is switched on, it causes a pendulum rotation, in addition to the effects of gravity. The motion of the inverted pendulum also, can be expressed as a simple equation who describes its rotational motion around its pivot point:
k = Tl cos + gm l sin + 1 gm l sin I t p t p p p 2

eq.3)

Here I is again the moment of inertia of the system, and is calculated exactly like in the previous case, because both structures are equal. There is an additional problem to use this kind of pendulum. The inverted pendulum, because of its unstable equilibrium needs a control system for this. There are two options to make this control; the first one is to increase the Kt of the cantilever, significantly reducing the range of motion but this solution makes that the sensibility will lose. The other solution is to implement an electronical feedback to be used. However, the electromagnetic fields that are used to produce the plasma induce interference that potentially can generate several fails in the feedback system, causing errors and problems.

10

2.1.3. STABILIZED INVERTED PENDULUM

Like its name says, is an inverted pendulum. The difference between this case and the previous one is that, here exist an auxiliary mass that reduces the time that the pendulum needs to stabilize itself. The equations of the movement are similar but, it is necessary to include the equality between the moments caused by the mass of the thruster and the stabilizing mass. Torque is equal in both masses because they are fixed by the same rod, but the distance between the masses and the fixed point must be different. Making the distance l1>l2, it forces M2 to be bigger than M1, and this is the way in which is eliminated the unstable equilibrium who appears in the inverted simple pendulum. This is a simple equality:
T = ma M 1 = mt at l1 M1 = M 2 2 = m2 a2 l2

M = 0 M
Where:

eq.4)

T = torque. a = acceleration of the pendulum in motion. m,l = are the mass and length of any arm.

Because of the masses are fixed by the same rod,

at = a 2 mt l1 = m2 l2
eq.5)

This will make that the time that the pendulum needs to be stabile, after the switch on of the thruster, will be decreased.

11

Lets consider the case in which l1 is bigger than l2 because of geometric constraints in the vacuum chamber; equation 5), shows that the mass M2 can increase a lot depending on the thruster mass and the ratio l1/l2. Because of this the next study is necessary. Is necessary calculating some parameters, related to the mechanical characteristics of the steel used in the rod and the characteristics of the flexural pivots, i.e. the maximum weight they can support. Weight approximations: L1[m] 0,6

All dimensions of the rod are fixed and for instance its mass (Mr). Mt references the total mass of the complete system, thruster and balanced mass included.
L2 [m] 0,2 M1=Mt [Kg] 2 10 20 2 10 20 M2 [Kg] 6 30 60 3,33 16,667 33,33 Mr(MAX)* [Kg] 3,24293 Mt [Kg] 11,24293 43,24293 80,24293 8,57626 29,90960 56,57626

0,5

0,3

3,24293

*with a rod diameter of 0,0254m.

In some cases, is visible that the overall weight of the elements is really heavy, because of this is recommendable to analyze how will response the rod to this axial force, and how do the same the flexural pivot. This will be treated in the phase 2 of the study, which contains the study of materials deformation. The singularity of the inverted stabilized pendulum requires to dedicate time to reflect about installation conditions: because the available space under vacuum chamber is not big, a stabilized inverted pendulum that have to support a heavy thruster, must have another mass heavier. After all of these considerations, which are necessary because of the numerous particularities of this possible solution,, is necessary define the motion of the pendulum similarly to the other pendulums, this will be defined as a simple equation:
k = Tl cos + m l g sin m l g sin + 1 m l g sin 1 m l g sin I t 1 t 1 2 2 p1 1 p2 2 2 2

eq.7)

Here, the moment of inertia of the system I is calculated in a different way, because this structure is different than the other ones:
l l I = mt (l1 ) 2 + m2 (l2 ) 2 + m p1 ( 1 ) 2 + m p 2 ( 2 ) 2 2 2
eq.8)

12

2.2.

FLEXURAL PIVOT:

In this study, it is assumed that the pendulum is rigid and deforms only the joint that keeps it anchored to the rest of the structure. This joint is a Flexural pivot whose characteristics are described in this section. Flexural pivots are devices that permit mechanical components to pivot on a common axis relative to each other through a limited angle. Inasmuch as this angular motion is affected by the flexing of elastic flexural elements rather than contact surface displacement, the flexural pivot operates without friction. Because they are generally too expensive to be considered for mass-market products the use of such pivots is confined to specialized high-technology products such as control linkages for aircraft and gimbals for scientific instruments, as in our case. This is unfortunate because alternative pivots such as rolling-element or knife-edge bearings used in massmarket products constitute over-design or involve inherent bearing instabilities arising from oscillating motion. In the fig. 1, are shown the primary force vectors which must be considered in order to make the design of this component. After this is possible to have an idea of why its fabrication is so expensive. For our study, is not necessary to consider all of these forces, since will be only used the Torsional Spring Rate, that it will be called as Kt. This data is reported among the specifications of different constructors.
FIGURE. 1

We introduce another term in the study, called Torsional Pivot Damping Coefficient, in the following referred to as csit; this coefficient will be calculated in the hypothesis of critical damping.

13

The pendulum swings slightly at the beginning, and stabilizes at the steady condition In the case of a torsional harmonic oscillator, the critical damping condition corresponds to:

1 ; where csit 2I. Kt

eq. 17)

The flexural pivot parameters used in this study was taken of data provided by Riverhawk Flexural pivots (appendix B1). All the study is realized with the parameters of the model CANTILEVER Type 400, before of study shown down, it has been found that using the parameters of the other cantilever types, all the principal parameters increase considerably.

2.3.

SOLUTION OF THE EQUATIONS OF MOTION:

The main parameters calculated by this analysis are: X (horizontal displacement of the pendulum), d/dt (rotational velocity) and the time that needs the pendulum to stabilize. DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS: The differential equations describing the dynamics our system cannot be solved analytically; however, for this study of engineering, a numeric approximation to the solution is good enough to solve the problem. An alternative method is to use techniques from calculus to obtain a series expansion of the solution or to linearize the equations for small angles MATLAB SOLVER: The program has five main kinds of solutions for these equations. The designations are: ODE45, ODE23, ODE113, ODE15s and ODE23s. The first three methods only must be used with non stiff problems, i.e. systems of equations describing the motion of a rigid body without external forces, this is not the studied case. Thus, there are only two options to choose, ODE15s and ODE23s. For stiff systems, the order of accuracy is higher if is used the system ODE15s (who is a variable order solver based on the numerical differentiation formulas, NDFs) and because of this is the election that we will use.

14

To solve the stiff problems, also exist ODE23t and ODE23tb, but their accuracy is even lower than ODE23s. The equations of motion are a non-linear second-order differential equation, which can be numerically integrated two times in order to reconstruct the temporal evolution of and its derivative respectively. Second-order differential equations can be easily integrated as a system of first-order equations:
tf = dt to

= f ( , )

tf

to

dt = tf f ( , )dt
to

eq.9)

For each of pendulum cases obtains, respectively: SIMPLE PENDULUM:

= dt
to

tf

tf

to

1 1 ( kt ct + Tlp cos g 0 mt l p sin g 0 m p l p sin )dt l 2

eq.10)

INVERTED PENDULUM:
tf dt = to

tf

to

1 + Tl cos + gm l sin + 1 gm l sin )dt (kt + p t p p p l 2

eq.11)

15

STABILIZED INVERTED PENDULUM:

tf = dt to

1 + Tl cos + m l g sin m l g sin + 1 m l g sin 1 m l g sin )dt ( kt + p t 1 p1 1 p2 2 2 2 to l 2 2

tf

eq.12)

The numerical integration takes place between the initial time t0 and the final time tf, between which the response of the system is simulated, through a certain number of time steps; for each step the second of equation for every type of pendulum is integrated first, giving d/dt, which is then used as an input for the first equation giving . The integration is performed starting from a set of initial , . conditions, which are:
0 0

16

3. APLICATION:
3.1. INTRODUCTION:

To fix the thruster inside of the vacuum chamber, is necessary to use a pendulum system, there are three options that is necessary to compare to make an election, and these three options are: 1) Simple Pendulum 2) Inverted Pendulum 3) Stabilized inverted Pendulum

We make this study to know how we can make a measure of the oscillations of the supporter designed for the thruster.
Abbreviations of the variables of the study: Simple Pendulum mt= thruster mass [Kg] l= pendulum simple rod length [m] Tt= thruster force [N] Inverted Pendulum mt= thruster mass [Kg] l= pendulum simple rod length [m] Tt= thruster force [N] Stabilized Pendulum Inverted

m1= Thruster mass [Kg] m2= balance mass [Kg] l1= distance of m1 to pivot l2= distance of m2 to pivot l= total rod length [m] Tt= thruster force [N]

Fixed data: 2 Rod material: steel (with density= 8000Kg/m ) 0(theta0)= [0,0] (initial position and velocity) T0=0 s ; Tf=100 s

System limits: Tt= 0,001 0,2 N mt= 1 20 Kg L=800 1000 mm

17

3.2.

STAGE 1: PENDULUM SELECTION

3.2.1. FIXED DATA:

In this stage it is necessary to determine which is the better pendulum to support our thruster. According with the flexural pivots, the dimensions and specially the diameter of the pendulum rod must be consistent. Because of this, for this study it will be used, four different diameters, everyone consistent with one of the valid flexural pivots for our purpose. These diameters will be:
DIAMETER D [in] 0,5000 [m] 0,0127 5016-400 5016-600 5016-800 5020-400 5020-600 5020-800 5024-400 5024-600 5024-800 5032-400 5032-600 5032-800 CANTILEVERED (SIZE-TYPE) GOODRICH ROME / RIVERHAWK Kt (in . Lb)/ degree 0,9080 0,1134 0,0142 1,8500 0,2321 0,0295 3,1800 0,3980 0,0500 7,5200 0,9390 0,1175 (N.m)/rad 5,8780 0,7341 0,0919 11,9761 1,5025 0,1910 20,5859 2,5765 0,3237 48,6812 6,0787 0,7606

0,6250

0,0159

0,7500

0,0191

1,0000

0,0254

DATA TABLE. 1)

Also, is necessary to count that every flexural pivot has three different cantilevers, denominated as different types: 400, 600 and 800. And also, the type contributes to have different Kt. After the comparative study of the maximum axial rate allowed by the flexural pivot and the force caused by the effect of our set (rod + thruster), with the diameters selected, the smaller of them resist a weight of 45, 29 and 15 kg in its respectively configurations of the type 400, 600 and 800. Is clearly that the type 800 in the smaller diameters can generate structural problems with the bigger thrusters; this is because the maximum axial force the pivot can support is smaller than the loading force. Because of this, these pivots will not be taken into account.

18

The different results are taken with the variable data shown in the next table:
THRUSTER MASS [Kg] THRUST [N] ROD DIAMETER [m] Kt [(N*m)/rad] 2 0,001 0,0127 5,878 10 0,1 0,0159 11,9761 20 0,2 0,0191 20,5859 0,0254 48,6812 STABILIZED INVERTED PENDULUM WILL USE THE SAME DATA, BUT ALSO INCLUDES THE STABILIZED MASS DATA TABLE.2) SIMPLE AND INVERTED PENDULUM

The data table 1, shows that there are more Kt values; as we mentioned before, the values of the type 800 will not be taken into account because of the limits in the maximum mass that they can hold on, the values of the type 600 and type 400 responds in the same way, but with the pivots of the type 600 our pendulum will lost stability and the times to stabilize the pendulum during the thrust probes will be increased considerably.

3.2.2. STUDY RESULTS:

All the data described earlier, are implemented using two Matlab scripts (appendix A). After its introduction in matlab programs, we obtain a prediction of the behavior of our three different pendulums. In these scripts we will make the assumption that the csit, damping coefficient is a first approximation to the critical damping coefficient. The first approximation to the critical damping is calculated as, csit = 2 kt I , the use of this method will give us a pendulum that needs less time to stabilize itself after the thrust than the real and in our graphics we will obtain just a few seconds of oscillation before reach the stabile measure. All the obtained data are classified in three different studies, each of them show the more interesting parameters that are necessary have into account.

19

A. DISPLACEMENT OF THE THRUSTER, TIME WHO NEED TO REACH A STABLE POINT AND VELOCITY OF THE DISPLACEMENT:

The principal parameter is the displacement of the thruster, because this is the parameter we will use to determine the thrust. Also is very important to know, how much time our set needs to reach a stable point, because the time that the thruster can be on is limited. The velocities of displacement dont give us more information, but are taken into account in the pendulum selection.
A1. X [m] AND TIME TO STABILIZE [s]:
cantilever 400 THRUSTER M ASS 20Kg ; THRUST 0,2N THRUSTER M ASS 10Kg ; THRUST 0,1N THRUSTER M ASS 2Kg ; THRUST 0,001 N r_d=0,0127m MATLAB RESULTS: SIMPLE INVERTED STABILIZED SIMPLE INVERTED STABILIZED SIMPLE INVERTED STABILIZED SIMPLE INVERTED STABILIZED SIMPLE INVERTED STABILIZED SIMPLE INVERTED STABILIZED SIMPLE INVERTED STABILIZED SIMPLE INVERTED STABILIZED SIMPLE INVERTED STABILIZED SIMPLE INVERTED STABILIZED SIMPLE INVERTED STABILIZED SIMPLE INVERTED STABILIZED GRAPHIC 1: X vs. TIME XMAX [m] XSTABILIZED[m] XMEAN [m] TIME TO STABILIZED 30,65 25,86 25,79 7,1 7,99E+05 5,80E+05 5,50E+05 9,2 68,05 68,05 42,06 4,3 21,61 19,6 19,54 1,9 8,00E+05 7,92E+05 7,16E+05 12,7 33,43 33,43 21,2 3 15,46 14,72 14,68 1,5 5,67E+05 5,67E+05 3,67E+05 55 19,45 19,45 12,85 2,4 8,383 8,302 8,277 0,6 31,57 21,55 31,27 3,1 8,227 8,227 5,594 1,3 1046 732 730 3,8 7,96E+05 7,33E+05 1,68E+05 7,6 9826 6805 5297 15 875 670,7 669,2 3,8 8,00E+05 6,70E+05 3,09E+05 5,7 4845 3340 2785 12 731,7 602,5 600,9 2,7 7,98E+05 4,81E+05 4,68E+05 5,7 2824 1943 1657 9,5 502,9 457,6 456,2 1,6 8,00E+05 7,76E+05 7,32E+05 8,1 1197 821,7 720 6,8 1193 772,1 770,1 8,3 7,97E+05 9,31E+04 9,01E+04 8,3 2,28E+04 1,36E+04 1,24E+04 46 1049 736,2 734,8 5,7 7,91E+05 1,73E+05 1,72E+05 7,9 1,12E+04 6,68E+03 6220 35 921,8 693,2 691,5 3,9 7,99E+05 2,79E+05 2,76E+05 6,5 6517 3886 3634 26 695,4 586,5 584,7 2,3 7,98E+05 5,48E+05 5,31E+05 7,3 2760 1643 1543 30

r_d=0,0159m

r_d=0,0191m

r_d=0,0254m

r_d=0,0127m

r_d=0,0159m

r_d=0,0191m

r_d=0,0254m

r_d=0,0127m

r_d=0,0159m

r_d=0,0191m

r_d=0,0254m

DATA TABLE. 3)

From the data shown in the table above, and selecting those that are most significant, comparison charts are obtained from our three different types of pendulums. These parameters are summarized in the graphs shown below:

20

X vs. THRUST [1/2]

1000000 100000 10000 X [m] 1000 100 10 1 0,001 0,1 THRUST [N] SIMPLE PENDULUM (0,0127m) STABILIZED INVERTED (0,0127m) INVERTED PENDULUM (0,0159m) INVERTED PENDULUM (0,0127m) SIMPLE PENDULUM (0,0159m) STABILIZED INVERTED (0,0159m) 0,2

X vs. THRUST [2/2]

1000000 100000 10000 X [m] 1000 100 10 1 0,001 0,1 THRUST [N] SIMPLE PENDULUM (0,0191m) STABILIZED INVERTED (0,0191m) INVERTED PENDULUM (0,0254m) INVERTED PENDULUM (0,0191m) SIMPLE PENDULUM (0,0254m) STABILIZED INVERTED (0,0254m) 0,2

FIGURE. 1)

21

Time to Stabilize vs. Thrust

120 100 80 Time [s] 60 40 20 0 0,001 0,1 Thrust [N] SIMPLE PENDULUM (0,0127m) STABILIZED INVERTED (0,0127m) INVERTED PENDULUM (0,0159m) INVERTED PENDULUM (0,0127m) SIMPLE PENDULUM (0,0159m) STABILIZED INVERTED (0,0159m) 0,2

Time to Stabilize vs. Thrust

80 70 60 Time [s] 50 40 30 20 10 0 0,001 0,1 Thrust [N] SIMPLE PENDULUM (0,0191m) STABILIZED INVERTED (0,0191m) INVERTED PENDULUM (0,0254m) INVERTED PENDULUM (0,0191m) SIMPLE PENDULUM (0,0254m) STABILIZED INVERTED (0,0254m) 0,2

FIGURE. 2)

The first and second tables show the X when the pendulum is stable; these graphs collect the data relative to the three models of pendulum for the configurations individuated in Phase 1 of the thesis. The third and fourth tables show the time needed by each system to achieve the aforementioned steady condition.
22

B. ROTATIONAL SPEED:

As in the first case, the data shown below were taken from the same simulation performed with Matlab, in this case shown for d/dt data with respect to time.

DATA TABLE. 4)

23

The following pictures show a comparative study of the behavior of the three types of pendulums based on the average angular speed [d/dt].

d/dt [MEAN] (1/2)

1,00E+01 1,00E+00 d/dt [/s] 1,00E-01 1,00E-02 1,00E-03 1,00E-04 1,00E-05 0,001 0,1 Thrust [N] SIMPLE PENDULUM (0,0127m) STABILIZED INVERTED (0,0127m) INVERTED PENDULUM (0,0159m) INVERTED PENDULUM (0,0127m) SIMPLE PENDULUM (0,0159m) STABILIZED INVERTED (0,0159m) FIGURE. 3) 0,2

d/dt [MEAN] (2/2)

1,00E+01 1,00E+00 1,00E-01 d/dt [/s] 1,00E-02 1,00E-03 1,00E-04 1,00E-05 0,001 1,00E-06 0,1 Thrust [N] SIMPLE PENDULUM (0,0191m) STABILIZED INVERTED (0,0191m) INVERTED PENDULUM (0,0254m) INVERTED PENDULUM (0,0191m) SIMPLE PENDULUM (0,0254m) STABILIZED INVERTED (0,0254m) 0,2

FIGURE. 4)

24

C. RESPONSE TIME ANALYSIS. INSTABILITY: Since two of the three basic thrust stand mechanisms under examination are intrinsically unstable (the inverted and stabilized inverted pendulum), it is necessary to investigate, among the considered test cases, the eventual presence of instable configurations, that is, of conditions in which the pendulum angle, , tends to diverge. Table 5 reports the maximum values of obtained during the simulations: the simple pendulum is always stable and produces very small values of , well within the limit of the small angle approximation, while the inverted pendulum and the inverted stabilized pendulum, although resulting stable for each tested case, both present configurations in which becomes too large for the approximation to hold; in that case the relation between thrust and displacement will not be linear.

DATA TABLE. 5)

25

D. MATLAB PLOTS:

This section contains Matlab plots reporting the main results of the simulations.
1. THRUSTER MASS=2Kg ; THRUST=0,001N TESTED PENDULUM ROD DIAMETERS: 0,0127m, 0,0159m, 0,0191m and 0,0254m, respectively. a. THUSTER HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT [X-t]

FIGURE. 5)

The results shown in figure 5 correspond to a pendulum rod diameter of 0.0159 m, which is associated with a particular value of Kt, as reported in table 3. The measures of the simple and stabilized pendulums are in m, but in the case of the inverted pendulum is shown in dm. It will be the same in the rest of the plots. Note the very high deflection sustained by the inverted pendulum. The other test cases gave an analogous response, of course with different values of x.

26

b. ROTATION SPEED [d/dt-t]

FIGURE. 6)

As happened for the displacement, the values of the angular speed are very different between the two pendulums. All these data can be reviewed in the DATA TABLE. 4).

27

c. XSIMPLE VS. XINVERTED time:

FIGURE. 7)

28

2. THRUSTER MASS=10Kg ; THRUST=0,1N

As expected the behavior obtained in this case was quantitatively, but not qualitatively, different from the one seen with the previous data; the corresponding output data are reported in tables. 3 & 4), while pictures 8-9-10 report some examples
PENDULUM ORDERS: SIMPLE, INVERTED AND STABILIZED INVERTED PENDULUM DIAMETER: 0,0191m a. THUSTER HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT [X-t]

FIGURE. 8)

29

b. ROTATION SPEED [d/dt-t]

c. XSIMPLE VS. XINVERTED time:

FIGURE. 9)

FIGURE. 10)

30

3. THRUSTER MASS=20Kg ; THRUST=0,2N

The considerations stated for test case 2 still hold for case 3. Pictures 11-12-13 report some examples of the results, while the complete output is listed in tables 3 and 4.
PENDULUM DIAMETERS: 0,0254m. a. THUSTER HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT [X-t]

FIGURE. 11)

31

b. ROTATION SPEED [d/dt-t]

FIGURE. 12) c. XSIMPLE VS. XINVERTED time:

FIGURE. 13)

32

4. CONCLUSIONS OF PHASE 1:
The results obtained in this first phase of the study can thus be summarized: The inverted pendulum potentially gives the highest sensibility, but suffers from an unstable equilibrium. In order to make it operate within the linear regime (small angles) it will be necessary to employ an active stabilization system, likely based on a feedback mechanism, which would increase the cost and complexity of the system and may be prone to RF interference Another option may be to employ a very high kt pivot, which would reduce the sensibility of the pendulum; The stabilized inverted pendulum, although more stable, may result very heavy with respect to the other two possible structures, due to the stabilization mass, while achieving values of x which are comparable to those given by the simple pendulum. In addition to this, it would also show a very high response time if compared with the other two kinds of pendulum; ; The simple pendulum is intrinsically stable without the need of a balancing mass or of an active stabilization system, while giving values of x which, although very small if compared to those obtainable with the inverted pendulum, are still well within the measuring range of commercially available displacement sensors;

From these considerations, the simple pendulum has been chosen as the basic structure for the thrust stand.

33

5. STAGE 2: DETAILED ANALYSIS:

Following the preliminary selection phase a simple pendulum mechanism was chosen for the thrust stand; in this section the structure of the thrust balance is studied in more detail, in particular with respect to pendulum rod materials and deformation.
5.1. MATERIALS COMPARISON:

In the design of the thrust balance it is mandatory to select a suitable material for the pendulum rod; the possible candidates must be selected according to a series of fundamental requirements, which are expressed below.
A. Outgassing Properties:

The materials used to work in vacuum conditions shall be selected based upon low outgassing criteria. The selection criteria are based on many years of experience and represent a degree of confidence based on experience. The tests to determine the low outgassing was developed by NASA, these tests determine the volatile content of material samples placed in a heated vacuum chamber. The outgassing criteria are based upon the micro-VCM test (ECSS-Q-70-02), and shall take into account the location of the outgassing source and its mass. The general requirement for materials outgassing is TML (Total Mass Loss) <1.0% and CVCM (Collected Volatile Condensable Materials) < 0.1 % as per ECSS-Q-70. %TML (Total Mass Loss) is the total amount of material that outgases from a conditioned sample expressed as a percent of the initial sample mass. In many instances the total mass lost will consist of absorbed water, which in moderate quantities will dissipate in the vacuum of space and not be problematic. %CVMC (Collected Volatile Condensable Materials) represents the percentage of the weight of the sample that will outgas from the sample then condense on a collector plate. For a specific application, the definition of the outgassing requirements shall take into account quantity of material concerned and specific environmental conditions. The reference document to take the data is outgassing data for spacecraft materials by NASA and Materials data as given in ECSS-Q-70-71 by European Space Agency (ESA).

34

B. Non Magnetic Properties:

. The plasma thrusters, like those under development at CISAS, need strong magnetic fields, generated either by electromagnets or permanent magnets, whose function is to contain the plasma inside the thruster and to shape a proper magnetic nozzle. These fields may interact with the material of the pendulum arm, distorting the force lines and thus potentially altering the functioning of the thruster; in order to avoid this, it would be preferable to select a non-magnetic material.
C. Stiffness and Density:

Stiffness is an important property of materials, relating their deformations to the forces they are subject to. Density determines the mass and thus the rotational inertia of the pendulum, affecting its sensitivity; With respect to this, a low-density material would be preferable, since the lighter the pendulum arm, the higher the deflection produced and thus the sensitivity of the thrust stand, keeping all the other parameters constant.
D. Cost Range:

In this study cost is considered as a secondary factor, which will be taken into account only for a final level selection between materials possessing equivalent properties. The prices show in the data table. 6, was provided by Metalmen Sales Inc. in New York for one rod of this materials with one meter length and 0,0254 meters of diameter. Among the possible candidate materials the investigation was focused on materials which are widely used within the aerospace industry for space applications, due to their low outgassing and very good mechanical problems, selecting among them those having the best non-magnetic properties; the chosen materials families are: aluminum alloys; stainless steel alloys; titanium alloys.

35

The amount of stainless steel alloys, aluminum alloys and titanium alloys commercially available form a huge initial list of candidates. The materials tested and accepted for use in vacuum ostensibly reduces the list, leaving the list options shown:
MATERIALS \ ALUMINIUM 2219 (Aluminium/Copper/Manganese Alloy) 7075 (Aluminium/ Zinc Alloy) Aluminium ISO Al99,5 Aluminium/Magnesium Alloy (ISO AlMg2) Aluminium/Magnesium/Silicon Alloy (ISO AlMgSi) STAINLESS STEEL Stainless Steel A286 Stainless Steel AISI 304L Stainless Steel AISI 316L TITANIUM Timetal 6-4 Timetal 35A Timetal 550 Extensive Good Good Good Good Good 200,0 193-200 193,0 105-120 105-120 110-120 690 210 290 847 246 970 7920 8000 8000 4420 4510 4600 <150 135 150 350 250 250-400 Good Good Good Good Good 73,8 71,7 68,0 70,3 69,0 70 340 55 87 90 2840 2800 2710 2690 2700 <150 100 100-150 100-150 100-150 PROPERTIES OUTGASSING MODULUS OF YIELD STRESS DENSITY COST RANGE ELASTICITY [E=Gpa] [Mpa] [Kg/m^3] [$]

DATA TABLE. 6)

Aluminum, thanks to its non-magnetic properties, low density and low cost appears to be the favorite candidate, as long as its mechanical properties are good enough to stand the stresses acting on the pendulum rod without significant deformations. Between the different alloys of the aluminum Al 7075(Aluminum/Zinc Alloy) exhibits the better mechanical properties, while being substantially equivalent to the other Al alloys with respect to outgassing, magnetic properties, density and cost, and has therefore been chosen. (Properties in appendix B). The Aluminum alloy 7075 has zinc as the primary alloying element. It is strong, with strength comparable to many steels, and has good fatigue strength and average machinability. This alloy is produced in many temperatures, and depending of this, its properties are different. Initially any one of them could be good for our purpose, but is necessary calculate the mechanical requirements that we will have. The options are 7075-O, 7075-T651, 7075-T7351 and 7075-T7651, but the properties of 7075-T651 changes a lot with temperature and it could be a problem, because of this our options are just three.

36

Data table 8 reports the values of mass and total rotational inertia (calculated taking into account also the mass of the thruster) for various thruster masses and pendulum arm diameters.
SIMPLE PENDULUM STEEL ALUMINIUM Mt [Kg] L [m] Mr [Kg] I [Kg*m^2] Mr [Kg] I [Kg*m^2] 2 0,8 0,81073 1,40972 0,28376 1,32540 1,26677 1,48268 0,44337 1,35094 1,82415 1,57186 0,63845 1,38215 3,24293 1,79887 1,13502 1,46160 10 0,8 0,81073 6,52972 0,28376 6,44540 1,26677 6,60268 0,44337 6,47094 1,82415 6,69186 0,63845 6,50215 3,24293 6,91887 1,13502 6,58160 20 0,8 0,81073 12,92972 0,28376 12,84540 1,26677 13,00268 0,44337 12,87094 1,82415 13,09186 0,63845 12,90215 3,24293 13,31887 1,13502 12,98160 DATA TABLE. 7)

To calculate the mass of the rod (Mr), the diameters of the rods are decided by the available flexural pivots. The differences in the mass of the rod are notable but not so much in the inertial moment, this is because the mass of the rod doesnt represents a big perceptual of the total mass, the heavier mass being the thruster. But in any case, this decrease in the mass will increase the accuracy of the measures, since, for a given thruster mass and thrust level, the smaller is the total mass, the bigger is the deflection and, with the same displacement sensor, a bigger deflection means bigger accuracy. The movement of the pendulum is a simple harmonic motion where:

dx d 2x ; a = 2 = w2 x dt dt F F = ma = m( w2 x) ==> x = m ( w2 ) x = A cos( wt + ); v =

eq. 13)

We can see in the equation above, when the mass is reduced the "x" increase. Because the other parameters will be the same every time we realized the experiment.

37

5.2.

MODEL OF DEFORMATION OF A SLENDER ROD:

Every material has its own stiffness indicating, , the extent to which it resists deformation in response to an applied force. . This characteristic depends of the geometry of our object, the nature natur of the material and of the kind of force who is applied. Responding to this, there here are three types of deformations who can affect to our pendulum rod, firstly is shown, a definition of anyone of these types and its possible effects. 1. TORSIONAL ORSIONAL FORCE: FORCE is the twisting or wrenching of a body by the exertion of forces tending to turn one end or part about a longitudinal axis while the other is held fast or turned in the opposite direction. The hypothesis for the calculus to our case, torsional for a constant cons section, was provided by Coulomb-Saint Saint Venant. The torsion is generated by a shear stress at the outer surface that creates a torsional moment(T). The way to determine this shear force is: Tr eq. 14) (r ) = J Where J is the torsional constant for the section. It is identical to the second moment of area for concentric circular tube.

2. AXIAL FORCE (TENSION): is the capacity of a material or structure to withstand axially directed pushing forces. When a specimen of material is loaded in such a way that it extends it is said to be in tension. According with the Hookes law, the maximum linear deformation in the conditions of axial charge is calculated as:

F
F Kg / mm 2 eq.15) A Where, , the Force F is calculated as: F = mg , and the area of the pendulum

Y =

rod, as: A =

d2

38

3. TRANSVERSE FORCE (FLEXURE/BENDING OF ROD): characterizes the behavior of a slender structural element subjected to an external load applied perpendicularly to a longitudinal axis of the element. The structural element is assumed to be such that at least one of its dimensions is a small fraction, typically 1/10 or less, of the other two. When the length is considerably longer than the width and the thickness, the element is called a beam, but this is not our case. The figure represents the deformation, in the left can see the original rod, then, there is a force in the edge of the rod, from left to right. The image on the right simulates the rod with the deformation. The Thrust applied generates a shear force and a bending moment. The shear is constant in all of the rod sections: T = F for 0 x l The bending moment: M = Fx for 0 x l , and present a maximum in the side of the embedment: M MAX = Fl . The diagrams of this are:

The effective deflection distance, , can be estimated by assuming a long, slender beam and employing the Euler Bernoulli beam equation. Considering the long slender cantilever beam, with a length L. A force T is applied at the tip of the beam such that the deflection at that location is . From Hookes Law we have, T eq.16) = k The deflection distance depends on the material properties and dimensions of the beam according to the Euler-Bernoulli beam equation:

d 2 y M ( x) = , where _ M ( x) = T ( L x) dx 2 EI

eq. 17)

39

Is the sum of the moments about x, E is the Youngs Modulus of the beam 4 material, and I is the area moment of inertia of the beam ( I = D ). 64 Differentiating twice: FLx 2 Fx3 y ( x) = + C1 x + C2 eq. 18) 2EI 6EI y (0) = 0 And applying the initial conditions: dy (0) = 0, dx We find: TL y ( x) = (3Lx 2 x3 ) eq.19) 6 EI To find the deflection at the tip we solve for y(l): Fl 3 = y (l ) = eq.20) 3EI According with the structural studies about bending deformation and displacement and according with Timoshenko beam theory, is possible calculate the same effect as an angle: FL2 r ( x = L) = eq. 21) 2EI

40

5.3.

ANALYSIS OF THE FORCES ACTING ON THE THRUST BALANCE:

In the following analysis, we assume that the only externally applied force is thrust. Figure 14 shows a scheme of the pendulum without external loads: The pendulum is placed in a vertical position, the masses of the rod (grey arrow) and thruster (black arrow) generate a vertical force (weight). The reaction force is produced by the flexural pivot (blue arrow). The weight (W = (mass of the rod + mass of thruster)*g) depends of the gravity force and generates an axial force (tension) to our rod and flexural pivot that have to be measured.

FIGURE. 14)

Figure 15 reports the case in which thrust (orange arrow) is applied, the weight forces are still there (black and grey arrows). The blue and red arrows correspond to the response that flexural pivot makes when the thrust force is acting on the system. The red horizontal vector in the figure represents the horizontal component of the constraint reaction force, opposing thrust (and thus having the same magnitude).

FIGURE. 15)

41

As we can see, all the forces are applied in the vertical plane; because of this there are not torsional stresses acting on the pendulum, which will thus experience only elongation and flexural deformations
5.4. PENDULUM ROD DEFORMATION:

In order to achieve a more realistic simulation of the real behavior of the pendulum, a model predicting its deformations under the expected loads has to be added to the Matlab model. The final objective is to minimize these deformations, which produce deviations from the ideal model of a rigid pendulum characterized, in the operating range, by a linear relationship between displacement and thrust. The first step in this analysis has been the estimation of pendulum elongation in the worst expected case, that is, with a 20 kg thruster sustained by a 0,8 m long, 0,0254m wide bar, with a total weight of 21,14 kg. With these data and eq. 13) we can estimate that the maximum elongation stress experienced by the pendulum rod, which is around, =0,41MPa, long away from the yield limit of our aluminum with a value between 96,5 and 390MPa. According with the value of , we can conclude that the deformation of our pendulum rod is in the elastic zone. Now we are going to calculate the maximum deformation that our masses could generate:

; =

F = A

4, 575 m

Eqs.22)

This deformation doesnt affect to the measure of the deflection of the pendulum rod, being in the vertical direction. After the previous step, the flexural bending of the pendulum rod was modeled. In order to realistically model this effect it is first of all necessary to choose a model. The classic model of a deformable rod perfectly embedded within a rigid wall was chosen, although being only partly valid, since, while a perfectly rigid embedment would have an infinite Kt, the real embedment may be: 1. a flexural pivot, having a potentially high but finite Kt; 2. A mobile coupling, whose Kt will be even smaller than the previous. When the value of Kt of the flexural pivot decrease the time necessary to stabilize the system increases, and when reaches certainly small point converts the system into instability. It will show in the point 6.5 of this study.

42

In any case the value of the deformation calculated with the chosen model is over estimated with respect to the real case, thus providing a safety margin, since the objective of the design is to minimize the deformations produced on the pendulum. According with the theory exposed in the point 5.3.3, the deflection produced in the rod is reported in table 8 for three different variants of the Al 7075 alloy, all three having the same density and Youngs modulus.

ALUMINUM 7075-0 7075-T7651 7075-T7351

DEFLECTION AT THE TIP [m]

ANGLE OF DEFLECTION [rad]

23,5297

4,41E-05 DATA TABLE.8)

This data must be compared with the deflection induced by the thrust for have a real idea of the effects of the deformation that the pendulum rod suffers. The data to compare was exposed in the point 3.2.2.A. For this specific case, the thruster mass is 20Kg and the pendulum rod has a diameter of 0,0254m. These are the chosen data because with these system specifications we will have the possible worst conditions. The data obtained with these specifications are:
X [m] DEFORMATION OF THE ROD pendulum rotation 23,53 695,40 [degrees] 0,00253 0,0498 DATA TABLE.9)

It can be seen that the deflection produced by the thruster is more than one order of magnitude bigger than the deflection produced by the flexural deformation of the rod, thus showing that the rigid pendulum model still holds.

43

5.5.

CONCLUSIONS STAGE 2:

In this section it was shown that, employing Al 7075 for the pendulum arm: weight forces produce a negligible elongation along the arm of the pendulum, which does not affect the thrust measurements; thrust generates a deflection which, in the worst case of a perfectly rigid embedment, is at most one order of magnitude smaller than the deflection generated by the rotation of the arm under the effect of thrust. The rigid pendulum model retains thus its validity;

These results confirm that Al 7075 is a viable choice for the pendulum arm.

44

6. STAGE 3: DETAILED STUDY:

In this stage will be evaluating the advantages from the use of the new material, i.e. the aluminum in the place of the stainless steel, to construct our pendulum rod, as well as different possibilities to minimize the deflection produced by the deformation of the rod applying the thrust. There are other important aspects that will be taken into account in this section. The plasma thruster requires, as we mentioned before, a strong magnetic field whose topology may be altered by the interaction with magnetic materials.. Another important aspect is that it is necessary to evaluate the vibrations produced during the operation of the thruster, since they may hamper thrust measurements by inducing oscillations in the pendulum. Possible thermal effects on the measurements will also be analyzed.
6.1. FINAL ROD MEASURES

The first two stages of this thesis showed that for any of the studied configurations of the system it is possible to obtain a good pendulum sensibility. The thruster that is currently being developed at CISAS has a mass near a 2 Kg And a thrust level around 1 mN; since the balance will be primarily used to test thrusters belonging to this cathegory, these data will be employed in the final optimization of the thrust stand design.
6.1.1. Deformations:

According to the study made in section 5.5, the pendulum rod will undergo two kinds of deformations, induced by axial and transverse force respectively. The method to calculate the deformations induced by these forces was explained in the point of the study 5.3, equations 15 and 20 respectively. Further optimization will be carried out considering a rod length of 1 m, which is actually the maximum length allowable in CISAS vacuum chamber, in order to further increase sensibility. The optimization parameter is the arm diameter, which has to be chosen in order to achieve the best compromise between rigidity and lightness.

45

The following subsections report the results of the analysis. A. AXIAL FORCE: Table 10 reports the axial elongation experienced by the pendulum for different arm diameters.
ROD LENGTH [m] DIAMETER [m] 0,8 0,0127 0,8 0,0159 0,8 0,0191 0,8 0,0254 1 0,0127 1 0,0159 1 0,0191 1 0,0254 AREA [m^2] TOTAL MASS[Kg] AXIAL FORCE [N] 1,01341E-04 2,28376 22,40365 1,58845E-04 2,44477 23,98316 2,29217E-04 2,64181 25,91613 4,05366E-04 3,13502 30,75459 1,26677E-04 2,35470 23,09956 1,98557E-04 2,55596 25,07395 2,86521E-04 2,80226 27,49016 5,06707E-04 3,41878 33,53824 [Mpa] 0,22107 0,15098 0,11306 0,07587 0,18235 0,12628 0,09594 0,06619 3,08328E-06 2,10578E-06 1,5769E-06 1,05814E-06 2,54324E-06 1,76124E-06 1,33814E-06 9,23132E-07 [m] 2,46662E-06 1,68462E-06 1,26152E-06 8,46513E-07 2,54324E-06 1,76124E-06 1,33814E-06 9,23132E-07

DATA TABLE. 10)

In the worst cases, the axial elongation reaches 2,5m, and, taking place along the axis of the pendulum, this deformation doesnt affect the results of the thrust measure. B. TRANSVERSE FORCE: The deformations caused by thrust in the pendulum rod are reported in table 11 for various rod diameters.

DATA TABLE. 11)

The flexural deformations are similar in magnitude to the axial ones, but, since they act in the horizontal direction, they may hamper thrust measurements introducing a non-linear contribution and thus have to be minimized.

46

6.1.2. Deformations vs. Displacement Generated by Thrust.

Once all the deformation data obtained, it is necessary compare it with the displacement that the same transverse force causes in the pendulum system. The next table shows the comparison between the displacement produced by pendulum rotation and the one generated by pendulum deformation:
ROD LENGTH [m] DIAMETER [m] 0,8 0,0127 0,8 0,0159 0,8 0,0191 0,8 0,0254 1 0,0127 1 0,0159 1 0,0191 1 0,0254 [m] 1,8797E-06 7,6510E-07 3,6743E-07 1,1748E-07 3,6713E-06 1,4943E-06 7,1764E-07 2,2946E-07 x [m] TOTAL DISPLACEMENT [m] 3,0650E-05 3,2530E-05 2,1610E-05 2,2375E-05 1,5460E-05 1,5827E-05 8,3830E-06 8,5005E-06 4,0290E-05 4,3961E-05 2,9030E-05 3,0524E-05 2,1100E-05 2,1818E-05 1,1630E-05 1,1859E-05 [%] 5,778 3,419 2,321 1,382 8,351 4,896 3,289 1,935

DATA TABLE. 12)

The reported values confirm that the deflection due to pendulum arm deformation is almost negligible if compared with the total displacement.
6.2. VARIATIONS IN THE FLEXURAL PIVOTS

The results of the previous point show that the pendulum rod has larger displacement with the smaller flexural pivots. In all of the previous points of this study, the model of the flexural pivot was determined by the pendulum rod diameter. The union zone between the flexural pivot and the pendulum rod is around 0,9 - 1,9 cm. This is a really small zone comparing with the total length of the rod. Because of this, we can modify the diameter of the rod in its union zone in order to be able to use other combinations between rod and flexural pivot and in this way obtain bigger displacements that can produce more accurate measurements. According with the previous results, the better options may be the combination between relatively big rods, capable of sustaining even heavy loads, and relatively small flexural pivots, whose low Kt maximizes the displacement. Is important know that this combinations could experience problems with the time necessary to reach a stable equilibrium during thruster operation. The combinations are made between the four diameters of the rod and two smaller flexural pivots. The length of the pendulum rod, as in the previous point will be 0,8 and 1 meter. The results will be showed as a data table and with the comparative graphics.

47

RESULTS:
cantilever 400 XMAX [m] Kt = 5,8780 Nm/rad Kt = 11,9761 Nm/rad Kt = 5,8780 Nm/rad ROD LENGTH = 0,8m ROD LENGTH = 0,8m r_d=0,0127m r_d=0,0159m r_d=0,0191m r_d=0,0254m r_d=0,0127m r_d=0,0159m r_d=0,0191m r_d=0,0254m r_d=0,0127m r_d=0,0159m r_d=0,0191m r_d=0,0254m r_d=0,0127m r_d=0,0159m r_d=0,0191m r_d=0,0254m 32,38 31,59 30,66 28,57 23,45 23,00 22,47 21,24 44,25 42,95 41,47 38,15 33,05 32,28 31,39 29,35

PARAMETRIC STUDY FOR SIMPLE PENDULUM: X vs. TIME

XSTABILIZED[m] 28,22 27,46 26,58 24,59 22,24 21,76 21,20 19,93 36,72 35,44 33,98 30,82 30,00 29,15 28,16 25,90 XTOTALMAX [m] XTOTALSTB [m] TIME TO STABILIZED WITH DEFORMATIONS WITH DEFORMATIONS 34,2597 32,3551 31,0274 28,6875 25,3297 23,7651 22,8374 21,3575 47,9213 44,4443 42,1876 38,3795 36,7213 33,7743 32,1076 29,5795 30,0997 28,2251 26,9474 24,7075 24,1197 22,5251 21,5674 20,0475 40,3913 36,9343 34,6976 31,0495 33,6713 30,6443 28,8776 26,1295 6,5 6,5 7 7,5 6 6,2 6,5 7 6,5 6,5 8,3 8,8 6,3 6,5 7,3 8,5

Kt = 11,9761 Nm/rad

ROD LENGTH = 1m

ROD LENGTH = 1m

DATA TABLE. 13)

The time that the pendulum will need to reach a stabile state when the thruster is running is longer than in the case of bigger flexural pivot. This increase, however, is around a few seconds and shouldnt generate problems in the measurements. As expected the smaller pivots in general provide a bigger pendulum displacement, thus enhancing sensibility and accuracy of thrust measurements. Figures 15-16-17-18 report the time response of the pendulum for the tested configurations.

48

A. FLEXURAL PIVOT 5016-400 & ROD LENGTH OF 0,8m:

FIGURE. 15) B. FLEXURAL PIVOT 5020-400 & ROD LENGTH OF 0,8m:

FIGURE. 16)

49

C. FLEXURAL PIVOT 5016-400 & ROD LENGTH OF 1m:

FIGURE. 17) D. FLEXURAL PIVOT 5020-400 & ROD LENGTH OF 1m:

FIGURE. 18)

50

6.3.

ROD DESIGN OPTIMIZATION:

It has been seen in the previous section that the flexural deformation of the rod generates very small displacements, whose value is within 5% of the displacement produced by the rotation of the pendulum. This small ratio can be further reduced by a proper design of the rod section, aiming at increasing its inertia while reducing its overall area, in order to reduce the weight of the rod as well; in this way the deformation will be reduced, while the rotation of the pendulum will be increased. The new geometry studied is formed by two cylindrical rods, with the length of the previous study i.e. 1m, joined together by another three cylindrical rods of 5cm length. The diameter for the smaller rods, those used to join are fixed at 0,0127m, while the different diameters used in the study will be taken into account for the external structural rods. The planes of the design described are in the next stage of the study. There are many changes between this new geometry and the previous one studied, to show referential data to these differences we will take the diameter of 0,0127m to. The main differences to our study are:
CYLINDRICAL ROD 0,3547 1,277E-09 2,0887 PHASE 3 ROD 0,7768 1,609E-07 2,1942 DATA TABLE. 14)

ROD MASS [Kg] AREA MOMENT OF INERTIA [m4] MOMENT OF INERTIA [Kg/m2]

Because of these changes, we will obtain different values in our main parameters to make the measures of the thrust.
6.3.1. Deformation of the New Rod

The method to calculate the deformation was defined in the point 5.3.3. of this study, deformation produced by transverse force. Our new geometry is different and will make us use the Steiner theorem to calculate the area moment of inertia and moment of inertia:

ICG = I + Ad 2

eq. 23)

The deformations caused by this force in the pendulum rod are shows as a displacement in meters and as the angle that caused. The rest of the data shows are these necessary to make the calculus with the different possible configurations of the system.

51

ROD LENGTH [m] DIAMETER [m] TRANSVERSE FORCE [N] AREA MOMENT OF INERTIA [m^4] 1 0,0127 0,001 1,609E-07 1 0,0159 0,001 2,5447E-07 1 0,0191 0,001 3,71217E-07 1 0,0254 0,001 6,74248E-07

[m] ? [GRADES] 2,8894E-08 7,56E-10 1,8269E-08 4,78E-10 1,2524E-08 3,28E-10 6,8951E-09 1,81E-10

DATA TABLE. 15) 6.3.2. Displacement of the New Rod:

The new parametric study was carried out employing a thruster with a mass of 2 kg and a thrust of 1 mN, with an arm length of 1 m.
RESULTS: PARAMETRIC STUDY FOR NEW ROD DESIGN: X vs. TIME
cantilever 400 XMAX [m] XSTABILIZED[m] XTOTALMAX [m] XTOTALSTB [m] TIME TO STABILIZED WITH DEFORMATIONS WITH DEFORMATIONS 41,6389 39,3983 36,9525 31,8769 34,1589 31,9983 29,7025 25,1769 8 8 8 8

Kt = 5,8780 Nm/rad

ROD LENGTH = 1m

r_d=0,0127m r_d=0,0159m r_d=0,0191m r_d=0,0254m

41,61 39,38 36,94 31,87

34,13 31,98 29,69 25,17

DATA TABLE. 16)

Figure 19 reports a plot of the time response of the pendulum in the studied case.. The Matlab code of this study is included in the Appendix A.

FIGURE. 19 )

52

6.4.

ROD PARAMETERS OPTIMIZATION:

In this point, we are going to compare the data obtained with the cylindrical pendulum rod, used in the stages 1 and 2 with the data obtained for our new design. The data of the new deformation and its comparison with the deformation of the previous design are the next:
[m] DIAMETER 0,0127m DIAMETER 0,0159m DIAMETER 0,0191m DIAMETER 0,0254m *Fixed data: 1m length DEFORMATION OLD DESIGN* DEFORMATION NEW DESIGN* 3,67134E-06 2,88937E-08 1,49434E-06 1,82693E-08 7,17639E-07 1,25237E-08 2,29459E-07 6,89509E-09 DATA TABLE. 17)

As we can see there is a strong reduction of the deformation. Now we report the comparison between in the displacements (X). [m] DISPLACEMENT OLD DESIGN*
36,72 35,44 33,98 30,82

DISPLACEMENT NEW DESIGN*

34,13 31,98 29,69 25,17 DATA TABLE. 18)

DIAMETER 0,0127m DIAMETER 0,0154m DIAMETER 0,0191m DIAMETER 0,0254m *Fixed data: 1m length and Kt=5,8780 Nm/rad

As we can see, we obtain a strong reduction of the deformation without any remarkable reduction of the displacement. Moreover with the new pendulum rod the times to stabilize the oscillation dont have an important increase.
ROD LENGTH [m] DIAMETER [m] 1 0,0127 1 0,0159 1 0,0191 1 0,0254 [m] 2,8894E-08 1,8269E-08 1,2524E-08 6,8951E-09 x [m] TOTAL DISPLACEMENT [m] 3,4130E-05 3,4159E-05 3,1980E-05 3,1998E-05 2,9690E-05 2,9703E-05 2,5170E-05 2,5177E-05 [%] 0,085 0,057 0,042 0,027

DATA TABLE. 19)

Even if these data are an improvement respect the previous design, is not enough because the potential of the new design is bigger than this. Now we are going to try to adjust the mass of the new design to something similar to the mass that we had with the simple rod design and with a change in the distance between the two vertical rods we can also obtain similar values of the inertial moment; thanks to these two modifications we will obtain a pendulum with the advantages of the simple rod in terms of displacement and with the advantages of the new design in terms of deformation.

53

With the previous data reported in this section and in the last one, we know how the new the design responds to the different dimensional changes on it. The final objective was defined just before, watching the data of the simple rod pendulum a really good reference can be the rod with a diameter of 0,0159m since the displacement was really good. Because of this, we will adjust the new design in the way to obtain the same inertial moment that this rod has and to obtain even better results with less deformation we will try to reduce the mass of the pendulum around 60-70%. With these premises we will make a new study. New dimensional data of the design: CYLINDRICAL ROD MAIN DIAMETER (L=1m)[m] TOTAL MASS [Kg] INERTIAL MOMENT [Kg/m^2] AREA INERTIAL MOMENT 0,0159 0,5542 2,1386 3,1373E-09 FINAL DESIGN 0,009 0,4292 2,1073 2,5829E-07
DATA TABLE. 20)

In the next graphic is shown the reaction of the system with the new configuration;, the graphic compares the displacements obtained for different values of radius of the vertical rods. The differences between them are not substantial.
6.5. DAMPING COEFFICIENT:

Another important effect is illustrated in the plots reported in figure 20, namely the influence of the damping coefficient on the motion of the pendulum. In the previous modeling, the used damping coefficient was an approximation of the critical value, as explained at point 3.2.2 of this study. To make the study of the final rod is considered the exact critical damping coefficient, calculated as:

ccrit = 2

[ ( kt + g ) (mt l p +

1 m p l p ) ]I 2

eq .23)

To calculate the values of the under critical damping and over critical damping the previous equation was multiplied per 0,5 and 1,5 respectively.

54

In this graphic the result is shown taking the critically damped (green line), under-damped (marine line), over-damped (red line) and undamped (cyan line).

FIGURE. 20)

55

6.6.

PENDULUM ROD CONCLUSIONS

In order to evaluate the improvement due to the final design the comparison will be made with our reference simple rod and with the first approximation of this design. All parameters that are not shown are fixed and the same in the three configurations. The deformation data is calculated using the matlab code New_design_pendulum_phase3.m included in the appendix A with the modification of the dimensional parameters. SIMPLE ROD 0,0159 0 0,5542
1,49434E-06 35,44E-06

DIAMETER VERTICAL RODS [m] DISTANCE BETWEEN RODS [m] TOTAL MASS ROD [Kg] DEFORMATION [m] DISPLACEMENT [m] TOTAL DISPLACEMENT [m] PERCENTUAL DEFORMATION

1ST APPROX. 0,0127 0,04 0,7768

1,82693E-08

3,6934E-05 4,046%

31,98E-06 3,1998E-05 0,057%

FINAL DESIGN 0,009 0,09 0,4292 1,7999E-08 36,24E-06 3,6258E-05 0,050%

DATA TABLE. 21)

This final table shows us that with this configuration the deformation of the rod is quite small as in the first approximation and our main parameter, i.e. the displacement, obtains an increase. Regarding the vertical deformation, the reduction in the total weight reduces the effort that our system suffers; this kind of deformation is still not a problem to our measures. The only potential problem that our new design could have is that the construction of the system must be really accurate and it could suppose an important increase in the cost of fabrication.

56

6.7.

CONSIDERATIONS ABOUT SIMPLE PENDULUM. NATURAL FREQUENCY.

Ideal simple pendulum is a model in which all the mass of the system is located in a point mass suspend by a wire without mass. If the point mass is displaced from the equilibrium position, this will start to oscillate with a natural frequency of:

w0 =

g l

eq. 24)

For a real pendulum, is important to determinate the gravity center, for our calculus will be the point where all the mass will be concentrated and where the gravity force acts. The gravity force will be the restoring force of the system. For this case the natural frequency is calculated as:

w0 =
Where

mgd I
m = total mass of the system. g = gravity force. d = distance from mass center to axis of rotation. I = inertial moment of the system.

eq. 25)

Our system is more complicated, because our axis of rotation is a flexural pivot. The flexural pivot generates a torque which opposes to this movement (Kt). For this reason its effect helps the gravity force and must be taken into account. The thruster mass will be considered independent to mass of the pendulum rod and will be added to our calculus. The differential equation of the movement of our pendulum is the same defined previously in this study. To use this in the calculus of the natural frequency we need to add the hypothesis of little angles, where sin and cos 1 . Therefore:

+ k + gm l + I t t p

1 gm p l p = 0 2
eq. 26)

1 ( gmt l p gm p l p kt ) 2 = I

57

The motion of our pendulum corresponds to a simple harmonic motion and this movement has its angular frequency calculated as: gmt l p + 1 gm p l p + kt 2 I

wo =

eq. 27)

And the natural frequency will be obtained as:

f =

1 wo 2

eq. 28)

Substituting our obtained data of the system, we will have a natural frequency of 6,103 Hz. The natural frequency of the vacuum chamber produced by the pumps of the vacuum system was obtained before in the CISAS laboratory and is around 300Hz. The difference between these two measures will ensure that our system will not go into resonance.

6.8.

MAGNETIC FIELD INTERACTIONS

When the thruster and its associated subsystems are powered, the interaction between the current-carrying elements produces forces which cannot be easily discriminated from thrust. It is to be noted that this effect is quite complex because the total force exerted on the pendulum rod depends not only on the current through one system but on the interaction of all subsystems (electrical system, measure system, etc The electromagnetic forces cause a change in the stand position at the time that the thrust measurement is made. Necessarily, these forces act on the stand in combination with the thrust. Calibrations, where no thrust is produced, must be performed to determine the magnitude of stand tares. If they cannot be reduced to acceptable levels, they must be characterized and subtracted from the measured thrust to obtain the true thrust.

58

6.9.

VIBRATIONS

To keep the precision in the measures is necessary to estimate the mechanical vibrations that we will have. The vibrations are produced mainly by the pumping system of the vacuum chamber. The study of the effects of this font of error was made at CISAS, and its results will not include in this study.
6.10. THERMAL EFFECTS:

Perhaps the most troublesome for the pendulum rod sensitivity is the behavior of the thermal loads. The thermal effects will produce spurious displacements during the thruster operation. The effect of thermal loading is minimized when we have a constant temperature during thrust measurement. The evolution of the temperature has two main sources: Radiation from the feed system, thruster, and plasma. This effect can be minimized by installing radiation shields around our system. Joule heating in the cables due to the current conducted along their length.

In this study is not included a cooling system, if this system will be finally designed is necessary to take into account that the change in the thermal conditions can produce thermal deflections in the joints of elements. The measures during the switching off of the thruster are also affected by the thermal deflections, because of a rapid change in the temperature that this action produces. Another possible problem due to the thermal effects is the change of the rigidity of the coaxial cables that transmit the power to the thruster. Coaxial cables have an inner conductor surrounded by a tubular insulating layer, surrounded by a tubular conducting shield. Many coaxial cables also have an insulating outer sheath or jacket. The insulating tube of these cables is normally made in Teflon (PTFE) and the temperatures that we will have inside of the vacuum chamber will make that the rigidity of our coaxial will change. The main problem of this change is that the variation of rigidity of this material is not a linear function with the temperature and could be an important font of error in the measures of the deflection of the pendulum system. In the calibration phase (point 8 of this study) is described as measure the change in the rigidity.

59

6.11.

CONCLUSIONS:

In this paper we have described the behavior of the simple pendulum method of thrust measurement for high and low power plasma thrusters using an ideal analytical model and adding the different sources of interference. The sensitivity of the pendulum measures can be increased only at the expense of more stringent requirements on the vibrations level and thermal control. The final results of this study shows that the system can have the accuracy required but it will need a really hard work to calibrate the system in order to obtain the accuracy required in the measures.

60

7. MEASURES:
The low continuous thrust levels characteristic of these thrusters and the electrical requirements for steady-state, high-power operation, and the intense thermal and electromagnetic environments in which they operate put many constraints on thrust measurements. A laser-based optical measurement system would be chosen to measure pendulum deflection when a force is applied. The laser-based thrust measurement system has been proven to be immune to many of the problems, i.e. it is not adversely affected by radiofrequency noise generated by the thruster, and most of its components can be placed away from the thruster. It can also be configured to measure different magnitudes of pendulum deflection simply by changing the path length of the laser beam. According with the specifications of our study, appropriate laser distance sensors could be the Mel M7LL (appendix B.2). Watching the laser specifications, the most appropriate are those that have a laser range of 0,5 or 2 mm with the measuring rate of 20Hz. These lasers will give us a resolution of 0,02 and 0,1 m respectively, that is a really good accuracy for our study.

8. THRUST STAND CALIBRATION:

Calibration is required to determine pendulum sensitivity and the magnitude of any tare forces. Tare forces are defined as forces other than the desired thrust that cause a change in the stand position at the time that the thrust measurement is made. The calibration procedure aimed at the determination of the tare forces produced by the interactions defined in the previous pages, will be realized including a mechanic actuator. The force in the tip of our pendulum, produced by the thruster, will have a value around 0,001N, the actuators of this resolution are really expensive, and because of this we will apply the equality of moments to determine the kind of actuator that we will use.

61

Our system will be something like this:

DISTANCE FOR ACTUATOR FORCE (D1)

FORCE PROVIDED BY THE ACTUATOR (F1)

DISTANCE FOR THRUSTER FORCE (D2)

1 = 2 F1d1 = F2 d 2

THRUST FORCE (F2)

With such a configuration it is possible to achieve the same torque generated by thrust with a more intense force; more specifically the ratio between the two forces will be equal to the reciprocal of the respective arms (as the formula of the image above shows). This implies that an actuator with coarser resolution (and thus minor cost) will be sufficient. The thrust and the distance where is applied are fixed parameters, and even known. The distance is 1m and thrust is 0,001N. Fixing the distance of the actuator in the range of 5-10cm we will obtain that the needed force of our actuator will be around 0,02-0,01N. In this work range there are many more actuator suppliers in the market, making its acquisition cheaper and reliable. There is another parameter that will have to be measured. The thermal effects were described before and in the calibration time must be estimated. The calibration tests to estimate this parameter will consist in obtaining the typical working temperature and in these conditions evaluating how it affects the components of the pendulum, i.e. the power coaxial cable, metal structure and joins between elements.

62

9. PHASE 4; DESIGNS:
In this final phase of the study the designs of the final pendulum rod are shown. These designs were made with the use of the program Catia V.5 to realize the planes. All dimensions are chosen according to the previous study and in order to obtain the better displacement when the thrust is applied. As we justified previously the bigger displacement increases the sensitivity of our measure system and this is the main objective of the study.
9.1. DESIGN JUSTIFICATION

The justification is explained step by step in this document, all the requirements were studied in the different stages of this thesis. Both designs presented here are capable to make the function of be an instrument to measure the thrust of our radio frequency plasma thruster. The first design has an advantage in its simplicity but suffers more deformation that the design 2. In the other way, the second design is more complicate to construct and its accuracy could be dependent on the precision in its construction. The precision required could make our pendulum more expensive and its advantages compared with the design one could not be enough to justify it. Another advantage of the first design is that could be a good reference in the calibration stage. For these reasons the two designs are showed here.
9.2. TOLERANCES IN BINDING TO FLEXURAL PIVOT

The tolerances of the flexural pivot are defined by the constructor (Riverhawk) and the data of these tolerances are in the appendix B. The data given by Riverhawk was being converted to the standard notation with the use of the normative UNE-EN ISO 286_2011. According with this document and the specifications of the constructor, the flexural pivot tolerances are:

12, 7

+0.00 0.0127

mm = 12, 7 H 7

63

The union between the flexural pivot and the pendulum rod, because of the force of weight, must be in tightening. The union surface is around 2cm therefore the tolerances that are defined now to the pendulum rod only need to be applied in a 2cm length of the rod. The better option to have a tightening union is the same:
12, 7k 8

The data obtained with these tolerances are the next:

12,7mm TOLERANCE LOWER DISTANCE HIGHER DISTANCE MAX. DIAMETER MIN. DIAMETER KIND OF ADJUST T.A. A.MAX A.min PENDULUM ROD [k8] 0,027 +0 +0,027 12,727 12,700 FLEXURAL PIVOT [H7] 0,018 -0,018 +0 12,700 12,682 TIGHTENING 0,027 + 0,018 = 0,045 12,727 - 12,682 = 0,045 12,700 12,700 = 0

This election is the same for our two designs, the initial design studied in stages 1 and 2 of this document and the final design studied in the stage 3, because the kind of join is the same for the two designs.

64

9.3.

INITIAL CHOOSE DESIGN

65

9.4.

FINAL STRUCTURE DESIGN. FIRST APPROXIMATION DIMENSIONS.

66

67

9.5.

FINAL DESIGN.

68

69

APPENDIX A: Matlab Scripts and Function Files

File: Simple_vs_Inverted.m

Description: This script compares the dynamic response of a simple and an equivalent inverted pendulum. Setting Single_Case_Study, the program will perform an analysis of the pendulum with fixed parameters setting Parametric_Study, the program will perform an analysis of the pendulum with varying parameters (mass of the thruster and thrust are the default varying parameters, but this can be edited). The configuration the rotational damping coefficient of the pendulum is adjusted in order to maintain an ideally critical damping (c=sqrt(kt*I)). %Workspace and screen cleaning close all; clc; clear all; %General constants g=9.806;% [m/s^2] gravity acceleration %Single case study %Definition of the pendulum parameters mt=input (THRUSTER MASS > );% [kg] thruster mass (thruster) l=0.8;% [m] pendulum rod length ro_r=8000;% [kg/m^3], rod density (steel) d_r=input (ROD DIAMETER > );% [m] rod diameter a_r=(pi/4)*d_r^2;% [m] rod area mr=ro_r*a_r*l;% [kg] mass of the rod I=mt*l^2+mr*(l/2)^2;% [kg*m^2], moment of inertia of the pendulum kt=input (TORSION PIVOT SPRING CONSTANT > );% [Nm/rad] torsion pivot spring constant csit=2*sqrt(kt*I);% [Nm/rad*s]torsion pivot damping coefficient required for critical damping fr=1/(2*pi)*sqrt(kt/I);% [Hz] Pendulum frequency %Forced motion Tt=input (THRUSTER FORCE VALUE > );% [N] thruster force (applied in m1) %Initial conditions t0=0;% [s] start time tf=100;% [s] end time time=linspace(t0,tf,1000); theta0=[0;0];% Initial pendulum position and velocity %Equation of rotational motion eqmots= @(t,theta) kt*theta(1)-csit*theta(2))]; eqmoti= @(t,theta) kt*theta(1)-csit*theta(2))]; [theta(2);1/I*(Tt*l*cos(theta(1))-g*(mt+mr/2)*l*sin(theta(1))-

[theta(2);1/I*(Tt*l*cos(theta(1))+g*(mt+mr/2)*l*sin(theta(1))-

70

[times,thetafs]=ode15s(eqmots,time,theta0); [timei,thetafi]=ode15s(eqmoti,time,theta0); %Plots % Rotation angle and speed set(gca,FontSize,12); ang=sprintf(\\Deltax [\\mum]); subplot(3,1,1);plot(times, 1e6*l*sin(thetafs(:,1)),b,timei, 1e6*l*sin(thetafi(:,1)),r); grid on; title(Thruster horizontal displacement);xlabel (Time [s]); ylabel(ang);legend(Simple pendulum,Inverted pendulum,Location,Best); angv=sprintf(^{d\\theta}_{dt} 1.5*max(1e6*l*sin(thetafs(:,1)))]); [/s]);ylim([1.5*min(1e6*l*sin(thetafs(:,1)))

subplot(3,1,2);plot(times, thetafs(:,2)*180/pi,b,timei, thetafi(:,2)*(180/pi),r); grid on; title(Rotation speed);xlabel (Time [s]); ylabel(angv);legend(Simple pendulum,Inverted pendulum,Location,Best); tit3=sprintf(\\Deltax_{inv} 1.5*max(thetafs(:,2)*180/pi)]); / \\Deltax_{simple}');ylim([1.5*min(thetafs(:,2)*180/pi)

subplot(3,1,3);plot(times,thetafi(:,1)./thetafs(:,1),g);grid on;title(tit3);xlabel(Time [s]); end

71

File: Stabilized_inverted_pendulum.m Description: This script calculates the dynamic and cinematic response of a thrust balance based on an inverted pendulum design. The thruster is placed on the upper end of the balance, while a balancing mass is set on the lower end. The two masses are connected by a single rod rotating around a fixed pivot point (see figure 2). The balance is at rest in a vertical position. %Workspace and screen cleaning close all; clc; clear all; %General constants g=9.806;% [m/s^2] gravity acceleration %Definition of the pendulum parameters m1=input (THRUSTER MASS > );% [kg] upper mass (thruster) m2=input (BALANCED MASS > );% [kg] lower mass (balance) l1=0.5;% [m] distance of m1 from pivot point (upper) l2=0.3;% [m] distance of m2 from pivot point (lower) l=l1+l2;% [m] total pendulum rod length ro_r=8000;% [kg/m^3], rod density (steel) d_r=input (ROD DIAMETER > );% [m] rod diameter a_r=(pi/4)*d_r^2;% [m] rod area mr=ro_r*a_r*l;% [kg] mass of the rod (0.6m*0.1m*0.01m, steel) mr1=mr*l1/(l1+l2);% [kg] mass of upper part of the rod mr2=mr*l2/(l1+l2);% [kg] mass of lower part of the rod I=m1*l1^2+m2*l2^2+mr1*(l1/2)^2+mr2*(l2/2)^2;% [kg*m^2], moment of inertia of the pendulum kt=input (TORSION PIVOT SPRING CONSTANT > );% [Nm/rad] torsion pivot spring constant csit=2*sqrt(kt/I);% [Nm/rad*s]torsion pivot damping coefficient required for critical damping fr=1/(2*pi)*sqrt(kt/I);% [Hz] Pendulum frequency %Initial conditions t0=0;% [s] start time tf=10;% [s] end time % time=linspace(t0,tf,1000); theta0=[0;0];% Initial pendulum position and velocity %Forced motion Tt=input (THRUSTER FORCE VALUE > );% [N] thruster force (applied in m1)
%Equation of rotational motion

eqmot= @(t,theta) [theta(2);1/I*(Tt*l1*cos(theta(1))-kt*theta(1)csit*theta(2)+m1*g*l1*sin(theta(1))-m2*g*l2*sin(theta(1)))]; [time,thetaf]=ode15s(eqmot,[t0 tf],theta0); %Plots %Rotation angle and speed figure(1) set(gca,FontSize,12); ang=sprintf(\\Deltax [\\num]);

72

subplot(2,1,1);plot(time, 1e6*l*sin(thetaf(:,1))); displacement);xlabel (Time [s]); ylabel(ang) angv=sprintf(^{d\\theta}_{dt} [/s]);

grid

on;

title(Thruster

horizontal

subplot(2,1,2);plot(time, thetaf(:,2)*180/pi); grid on; title(Rotation speed);xlabel (Time [s]); ylabel(angv) %Pendulum position apf=1000000/Tt*1e-3;% Rotation magnification factor bar_up=[sin(apf*thetaf(length(thetaf),1))*linspace(0,l1,100) cos(apf*thetaf(length(thetaf),1))*linspace(0,l1,100)]; %Upper part of the balance bar_dwn=[sin(pi+apf*thetaf(length(thetaf),1))*linspace(0,l2,100) cos(pi+apf*thetaf(length(thetaf),1))*linspace(0,l2,100)];% Lower part of the balance bar=[bar_dwn bar_up]; figure(2) plot([0 0],[-l2 l1],-.b,[-0.5 0.5],[0 0],.b,bar(1,:),bar(2,:),r,0,0,ok,bar_up(1,100),bar_up(2,100),ob,bar_dwn(1,100),bar_dwn(2,10 0),ob); grid on; axis equal hold; plot([bar_up(1,100) bar_up(1,100)*1.2],[bar_up(2,100) bar_up(2,100)],->k) tit=sprintf(Inverted pendulum thrust balance equilibrium (red) position (thurst is indicated by the black arrow) \n Rotation angle: %.2e \n Rotation amplification factor: %.0e \n Thrust=%.2e N,thetaf(length(thetaf))*180/pi,apf,Tt); title(tit); xlabel(x [m]) ylabel(y [m]) ; ;

73

File: Simple_pendulum_phase3.m Description: This script makes a parametric study of the dynamic response of a simple pendulum made in Aluminum with the specifications of phase 3 with varying parameters (Kt and rod diameter). In this parametric study section thruster displacement is plotted against time in order to perform a sensitivity analysis. For each configuration the rotational damping coefficient of the pendulum is adjusted in order to mantain an ideally critical damping (c=sqrt(kt*I)). %Workspace and screen cleaning close all; clc; clear all; %General constants g=9.806;% [m/s^2] gravity acceleration %Parametric study %Definition of the pendulum parameters mt=2;% [kg] thruster mass (thruster) l=input (LENGTH OF THE ROD (0.8-1m) > );% [m] pendulum rod length ro_r=2800;% [kg/m^3], rod density (steel) d_r=[0.0127 0.0159 0.0191 0.0254];% [m] rod width a_r=(pi/4)*d_r.^2;% [m] rod area mr=ro_r*a_r*l;% [kg] mass of the rod I=mt*l^2+mr*(l/2)^2;% [kg*m^2], moment of inertia of the pendulum kt=input('Insert the value of kt [Nm/rad] ');% [Nm/rad] torsion pivot spring constant %Forced motion Tt=0.001;% [N] thruster force (applied in m1) for ii=1:length(d_r) %Initial conditions t0=0;% [s] start time tf=100;% [s] end time time=linspace(t0,tf,200); theta0=[0;0];% Initial pendulum position and velocity csitcr(ii)=2*sqrt(kt*I(ii)); %Equation of rotational motion eqmots= @(t,theta) [theta(2);1/I(ii)*(Tt*l*cos(theta(1))-g*(mt+mr(ii)/2)*l*sin(theta(1))kt*theta(1)-csitcr(ii)*theta(2))]; [times,thetafs]=ode15s(eqmots,time,theta0);thetafins=thetafs(length(thetafs),1); dxs(ii,:)=1e6*l*sin(thetafs(:,1)); end %Plots figure(2) set(gca,'FontSize',12,'FontWeight','bold'); % subplot(2,1,1) tit3=sprintf('\\Deltax for simple pendulum \n kt=%.02f Nm/rad', kt); plot(times,dxs);grid on;title(tit3);xlabel('Time [s]');ylab=sprintf('\\Deltax [\\mum]');ylabel(ylab);%ylim([0 10]) 74

for i=1:ii leg{i}=sprintf('d_r= %.02f mm, c_{crit}= %.02f Nm*s/rad',1000*d_r(i),csitcr(i)); end legend(leg) figure(3) set(gca,'FontSize',12,'FontWeight','bold'); tit3=sprintf('Theoretical critical (\\varsigma=1) torsion pivot damping coefficient \n \n k_{t}=%.2f Nm/rad, l_{rod}=%.2f m, m_{rod}=%.2f kg',kt,l,mr); plot(mt,csitcr);grid on;title(tit3);xlabel('mt [kg]');ylab=sprintf('c_{crit} [Nms/rad]');ylabel(ylab);%ylim([0 10]) %end

75

File: New_design_pendulum_phase3.m Description: This script makes a parametric study of the dynamic response of a complex pendulum rod to our simple pendulum made in Aluminum with the specifications of phase 3 with varying parameters (Kt and diameter of the vertical rods). In this parametric study section thruster displacement is plotted against time in order to perform a sensitivity analysis. For each configuration the rotational damping coefficient of the pendulum is adjusted in order to mantain an ideally critical damping (c=sqrt(kt*I)). %Workspace and screen cleaning close all; clc; clear all; %General constants g=9.806;% [m/s^2] gravity acceleration %Parametric study %Definition of the pendulum parameters mt=2;% [kg] thruster mass (thruster) %Vertical rods l=input ('LENGTH OF THE ROD (0.8-1m) > ');% [m] vertical pendulum rod length ro_r=2800;% [kg/m^3], rod density (steel) d_r=[0.0127 0.0159 0.0191 0.0254];% [m] rod width a_r=(pi/4)*d_r.^2;% [m^2] rod area mr1=ro_r*a_r*l;% [kg] mass of the vertical rod %horizontal rods l2=0.05;% [m] horizontal rod lenght d_r2=0.0127;%[m] h. rod width a_r2=(pi/4)*d_r2^2;% [m^2] rod area mr2=ro_r*a_r2*l2;% [kg] mass of the horizontal rod %join to flexural pivot l3=0.02;% [m] join lenght d_r3=0.0127;% [m] join width a_r3=(pi/4)*d_r3^2;% join area mr3=ro_r*a_r3*l3;% [m^2] mass of the join %Total mass mr=2*mr1+3*mr2+2*mr3;% [Kg] I=mt*l^2+mr*(l/2)^2;% [kg*m^2], moment of inertia of the pendulum kt=input('Insert the value of kt [Nm/rad] ');% [Nm/rad] torsion pivot spring constant %Forced motion Tt=0.001;% [N] thruster force (applied in m1) for ii=1:length(d_r) %Initial conditions t0=0;% [s] start time tf=100;% [s] end time time=linspace(t0,tf,200); 76

theta0=[0;0];% Initial pendulum position and velocity csitcr(ii)=2*sqrt(kt*I(ii)); %Equation of rotational motion eqmots= @(t,theta) [theta(2);1/I(ii)*(Tt*l*cos(theta(1))-g*(mt+mr(ii)/2)*l*sin(theta(1))kt*theta(1)-csitcr(ii)*theta(2))]; % eqmoti= @(t,theta) [theta(2);1/I(ii)*(Tt*l*cos(theta(1))+g*(mt+mr(ii)/2)*l*sin(theta(1))-kt(jj)*theta(1)csitcr(ii)*theta(2))]; [times,thetafs]=ode15s(eqmots,time,theta0);thetafins=thetafs(length(thetafs),1); % [timei,thetafi]=ode15s(eqmoti,time,theta0);thetafini=thetafi(length(thetafi),1); dxs(ii,:)=1e6*l*sin(thetafs(:,1)); % dxi(jj,ii)=1e6*l*sin(thetafini); end %Plots figure(2) set(gca,'FontSize',12,'FontWeight','bold'); % subplot(2,1,1) tit3=sprintf('\\Deltax for simple pendulum \n kt=%.02f Nm/rad', kt); plot(times,dxs);grid on;title(tit3);xlabel('Time [s]');ylab=sprintf('\\Deltax [\\mum]');ylabel(ylab);%ylim([0 10]) for i=1:ii leg{i}=sprintf('d_r= %.02f mm, c_{crit}= %.02f Nm*s/rad',1000*d_r(i),csitcr(i)); end legend(leg) %end

77

APPENDIX B: Data Sheets

1. RIVERHAWK FLEXURAL PIVOTS:

78

79

2. LASER DISTANCE SENSOR: MEL M7LL

80

81

APPENDIX C: Material Choice

From:www. esmat.esa.int

82

83

BIBLIOGRAPHY:
[1] RiverHawk company flexural pivots. http://www.flexpivots.com/index.asp [2] William A. Campbell, Jr. and John J. Scialdone, Outgassing Data for Selecting Spacecraft Materials, National. Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D.C. 20546-0001. NASA RP-1124, Revision 3. [3] Data for section of space materials and processes. ECSS-Q-70-71A rev. 1, 2004 by the European Space Agency for the members of ECSS. [4] Materials for high vacuum technology: an overview, S. Sgobba, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland. [5] Scienza delle costruzioni. Luigi Gambarotta, Luciano Nunziante e Antonio Tralli, 2003, McGraw-Hill, ISBN 88-386-6100-6. [6] A Thrust Stand for High-power Steady-state Plasma Thrusters, L.D. Cassady,A.D. Kodys and E.Y. Choueiriz, Electric Propulsion and Plasma Dynamics Laboratory (EPPDyL)Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey. [7] An Inverted Pendulum Thrust Stand for High-Power Electric Thrusters. L.D. Cassady,A.D. Kodys and E.Y. Choueiriz, Electric Propulsion and Plasma Dynamics Laboratory (EPPDyL)Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey. AIAA-2006-4821. [8] Peter M. Moretti, Modern Vibrations Primer, 2000, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, ISBN [978] 0-8493-2038-0. [9] Dewitt, D.P. Bergman, T.L. Lavine, A.S. Incropera, F.P. Fundamentals of Heat and Mass Transfer. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey, sixth edition 2007. [10] European Aviation Safety Agency. EASA. http://www. esmat.esa.int [11] NASA. Flexural pivots for space applications. Seeling, F.A. The Bendix corporation, Fluid power division. Utica. New York.

84