Preliminary: Astronautics Group Design Project (Ae3017)

ASTRONAUTICS GROUP
DESIGN PROJECT (AE3017)
PRELIMINARY
REPORT
HYBRID SOUNDING ROCKET
DESIGN
NAME & KU ID No. : PRERNA SINGH (K0732468)

VENOD REDDY VELUSAMY (K0935738)
KAUSALYAH THEVENDRAM (K0938660)
CONOR O’DOWDA (K0718770)
ALEXANDRA CARPUS (K0823488)
ZAHID PASHA (K0629631)
DATE OF SUBMISSION : 12 NOVEMBER 2010
SUPERVISOR: DR. BARNABY OSBORNE

PRELIMINARY REPORT
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 3
2. PROJECT REQUIREMENTS …………………………………………………………………………………………………… 4
3. DESIGN CONFIGURATION …………………………………………………………………………………………………… 6
4. SOUNDING ROCKET DIMENSIONS ………………………………………………………………………………………. 7
5. ATTITUDE CONTROL & STABILISATION ……………………………………………………………………………….. 8
6. AVIONICS ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………11
7. SEPARATION MECHANISM …………………………………………………………………………………………………15
8. RECOVERY SYSTEM …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….17
9. HYBRID MOTOR PROPULSION SYSTEM ……………………………………………………………………………….21
10. CONCLUSION ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..25
11. REFERENCES………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..27
Figures and Tables

Figure 1: Hybrid rocket propulsion system............................................................................................3
Table 1: Weighted Decision Matrix (I)...................................................................................................6
Table 2: Dimensions Parameters of sounding rockets...........................................................................7
Table 3: Ratios of conceptual dimensions.............................................................................................7
Table 4: Preliminary Rocket Design Parameters....................................................................................8
Table 5: Weighted Decision Matrix [II]..................................................................................................9
Figure 2: A stretch Yo-Yo.....................................................................................................................10
Table 6: Preliminary calculations.........................................................................................................10
Figure 3: Avionics schematic diagram..................................................................................................13
Figure 4: Typical soundiong rocket flight.............................................................................................14
Table 7: Weighted Decision Matrix [III]...............................................................................................15
Figure 5: Ball and lock system..............................................................................................................17
Figure 6: Parachute Deployment Bag..................................................................................................18
Figure 7: Typical ejection charge & flashbulb......................................................................................20
Figure 8: Typical closure ejection well.................................................................................................20
Table 8: Weighted Decision Matrix [IV]...............................................................................................20
Table 9: Weighted Decision Matrix [V]...............................................................................................21
Figure 9: Hybrid Rocket Motor Design.................................................................................................21
Table 10: Oxidizer Characteristics........................................................................................................23
Table 11: Fuel Characteristics..............................................................................................................24
Figure 10:[ Hybrid Motor Design Process] Available at Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology
22 (2008).............................................................................................................................................24
ASTRONAUTICS GROUP PROJECT Page 2

PRELIMINARY REPORT
I. INTRODUCTION
The idea of designing a hybrid sounding rocket to carry a small component of
payload into microgravity is indeed a luminous resolution. The design would
inherently show the concept of real world situation thus representing the
requirements. Here, in this project, we design a hybrid sounding rocket that will
dependably meet the requirements to perform its mission. This involves
traditional aerospace engineering field such as structures, propulsion, flight
mechanics, orbital mechanics, avionics, attitude control, sensors and system
design optimization. Besides, economics and plan will also play a key role in
determining design feasibility.
Sounding rockets which are also known as research rocket is designed to carry a
payload, take measurements and carry out scientific experiments. The rockets
are designed to carry instruments to typical operational altitudes which are in
between 50 to 1500km above the surface of Earth. The advantages of sounding
rockets in some research area are their low cost, short lead time as well as the
ability to conduct study in areas inaccessible to either satellites or balloons. A
hybrid rocket has a rocket engine which uses two different matter of propellant
to perform. One is solid and the other is either gas or liquid. The concept of a
hybrid rocket consists of a pressure tank containing the liquid propellant, a
combustion chamber containing the solid propellant and a valve separating the
both. Commonly, the liquid propellant is oxidizer and solid propellant is the fuel
as solid oxidizers are low in performance compare to liquid oxidizers. There are
more advantages in the use of hybrid rocket compare to liquid and solid rockets.
Technically, hybrid rockets are mechanically simpler, have denser fuels and are
metal additives which are beneficial in increasing the specific impulse. Moreover,
hybrid rockets are more controllable, safe as in using non-toxic oxidizer and
contribute less in explosion hazard.
Figure 1: [Hybrid rocket propulsion system]. Available at http://www.spg-

corp.com/images/News_1_clip_image002.jpg

PRELIMINARY REPORT
II. PROJECT REQUIREMENTS

The aim of this project is to design a hybrid sounding rocket which would meet
the following requirements:-
1. Mission Requirements
1.1 Rocket must be capable of carrying a 20kg payload to an altitude of
150km.
1.2 The payload should be in a useable microgravity environment for as
long as possible.
1.3 Gravity levels reduced to 10-2 or less are desirable.
1.4 Absence of angular body rate is mandatory for generation of
microgravity environment.
1.5 Provide a layout for the payload module that is convenient for
assembly and disassembly, servicing, calibration and testing.
1.6 Retrieval of results and data collected by the microgravity
experiment equipment.
1.7 Safe recovery of the payload, i.e. the microgravity experiment
equipment.
2. Product Assurance Requirements

2.1 Reliability of the proposed designs or chosen techniques.
2.2 Consider availability of products proposed to be brought into use.
2.3 Maintainability, calibration and testing of subsystem components.
3. Performance Requirements
3.1 Ranging, pointing and measurement accuracy.
3.2 Stability
3.3 Data Storage and transmission capacity and on-board processes.
3.4 Effective and timely functioning of the separation mechanism, de-
spin mechanism and parachute deployment.
3.5 Reliable tracking and recovery system.
3.6 Safe and efficient hybrid rocket propellants and a dependable motor
design.
3.7 Structural strength and stiffness.
4. Physical Requirements
4.1 Payload, launch vehicle and propellant masses.
4.2 Launch Vehicle Dimensions
4.3 Power/ thrust required to meet the 150km range requirement.
4.4 Internal torques and disturbances.
5. Cost Effective Services for the customer.

PRELIMINARY REPORT
6. Subsystems Requirements
6.1 Hybrid Rocket Propulsion System
6.1.1.1 Dimension of combustion chamber and nozzle
6.1.1.2 Performance – in this case it is related to the Isp and
density of propellant
6.1.1.3 Assuming 300 kg of total mass (rocket) at 10g
acceleration results into a Thrust Required of 30 kN
( force = mass x acceleration)
6.2 Recovery & Parachute Deployment System
6.2.1.1 It must endure natural flight conditions without
rupturing.
6.2.1.2 It must spread reliably.
6.2.1.3 It must slow the deliverables enough to avoid
ruinous damage to equipments.
6.2.1.4 The Deployment system must have different
deployment triggers altitude triggers, or timed
triggers and an emergency back-up trigger.
6.2.1.5 Lightest and smallest possible equipment.
6.2.1.6 Safety measures for low temperature and highly
windy conditions since it might affect the internal
instruments
6.3 Avionics
6.3.1.1 Sustainable power supply
6.3.1.2 Structural strength for protection of sensors and electrical
equipment.
6.3.1.3 Protection from rigorous environment conditions during
the flight and launch.
6.3.1.4 Timely activation of events.
6.4 Attitude Control and Stabilisation
6.4.1.1 Structural strength of fins and body.
6.4.1.2 Mass and material properties of de-spin equipment.
6.5 Separation System
6.5.1.1 There should sufficient clearance between the separating
bodies
6.5.1.2 Ensure no damaging shock loads provoked in the
structure and payload.
6.5.1.3 Ensure no contamination such as extreme or destructive
debris from the operation.
III. DESIGN CONFIGURATION

Rockets are made up of stages which are multistage and single stage. Staging is
being a major contribution to the rocket design to enhance the overall
performance whilst still consuming smaller motors. This is performed by emitting

PRELIMINARY REPORT
unused mass along the escape as the propellant is spent. The design for the
hybrid sounding rocket in this project is a single stage rocket. In order to carry a
small payload according to the requirement, a single stage rocket is an
appropriate shoot up compared to a multistage. However, there are pros and
cons comparing to a multistage design. A single stage would have a lower
operating cost, better reliability, straightforward separation and enhanced
safety. In addition, as this stage is would be recoverable thus all the factors of
having this stage would be favourable. Besides that, by having this single stage
system, many complications to the design could be avoided such as separating
costly engines and structure, complexity of reinstating a large stage and higher
improvement cost of two separate vehicles.
A weight decision matrix is done in Table 1 below to decide between a single
stage design and multistage design.
Specification Points Single stage Multistage

rocket rocket
Cost 9 7 63 3 27
Structure 7 8 56 6 42
Weight 6 4 24 7 42
Construction 3 6 18 4 12
Sub element 1 6 6 3 3
Efficiency 5 4 20 6 30
Total 187 156
Table 1: Weighted Decision Matrix
Cost and time constraints are the most essential part of the project which has to
be given top priority. This constraint play major role in a decision as the other
listed specification directly related to cost. Structural complexity and sub
element contribute to the total weight and construction difficulties. Even though
efficiency of the rocket is vital, trade off with cost and time has rated efficiency
constraint low.
Single stage rocket mostly suite low altitude research as it provides cost and
time efficiency in term of construction as well as weight constraint. Meanwhile,
multistage rocket for this project would not be suitable as it add more
complexity and time consuming in term of construction.

PRELIMINARY REPORT
IV. SOUNDING ROCKET DIMENSIONS
The importance of gaining sustainable method to determine the dimension is

important as it plays major role of the entire project requirement and directly
related to cost constraint. In order to obtain reliable source to determine the
dimension of the sounding rocket, a systematic table been created by
determining successful rocket of same kind. Table 2 shows the dimension
parameter ratio of existing rocket meanwhile Table 3 shows the criteria range of
the projects sounding rocket.
Dimension Parameter
Rocket Name (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)
MT - 135 0.294 0.41 0.139 0.699 0.722 0.039
Maser 0.201 0.35 0.184 0.787 0.189 0.045
Black Brant (1-5) 0.221 0.43 0.243 0.978 0.226 0.035
MR - 12 0.222 0.31 0.231 0.919 0.474 0.040
Table 2: Dimensions Parameters of sounding rockets

Parameter (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)
Ratio 0.2-0.3 0.3-0.4 0.14-0.24 0.77-0.99 0.20-0.60 0.035-0.045
Table 3: Ratios of conceptual dimensions
(A) - Payload Height Fin Height
(B) - Diameter Height
(C) – Diameter Payload Height
(D) – Diameter Span
(E) – Fin Span Fin Height
(F) – Fin Height Apogee
With the help of this table, the initial design of the rocket was able to sketch and
an allowable change in the dimension of ¿10% obtained. Even thought constrain
such as technology and design implementation factors could change this ratio, at
this stage of research this table can be applied to design the initial dimension.
Based on Table 3, the maximum allowable conceptual dimension of the sounding

rocket is calculated and tabled on Table 4.
Dimension Parameters (cm)

Full Height 1667
Diameter 500

PRELIMINARY REPORT
Full Span 518
Payload Height 12
Fin Span 9
Fin Height 3.6
Table 4: Preliminary Rocket Design Parameters
V. ATTITUDE CONTROL & STABILISATION

The attitude of a body can be stabilised by simple passive methods such as
imparting spin to it. A rigid body with its angular velocity parallel to its major
axis (the principal axis passing through the centre of mass, having max.
moment of inertia) will maintain this axis in a fixed direction with respect to
inertial space in the absence of external torques. Hence Spin Stabilisation is
considered a useable attitude control technique for our rocket, which would
correct instabilities by creating angular momentum.
Various means of imparting spin could be:-
 Canting the fins, i.e. giving the fins a slanting edge.

 Air-foiling all the fins, i.e. all the fins facing the same direction.
 Releasing the exhaust gases at an angle (this technique was used in
earlier times).
However, the payload requires a microgravity environment for the research

experiments, which implies the following two conditions must be met:-
 Absence of net acceleration force (force gradient) acting on the body.

 Absence of angular body rate (spin).
The net acceleration force acting on the body is significantly reduced in the free-
fall state above Earth’s sensible atmosphere. And to efficiently utilise the time
above the Earth’s atmosphere, a positive means of controlling angular body
rates must be provided for the payload. Hence the payload must be de-spun to
sustain the microgravity requirements. Various active (with sensors) and
passive (without any sensors) Attitude Control Systems (ACS, were considered
to support this requirement, such as:
 Three Axis Rate Control System and Guidance Control System

PRELIMINARY REPORT
 Yo-Yo De-Spin Mechanism

 De-spun Platform
The passive or semi-passive attitude control systems (particularly the Yo-Yo De-
spin Mechanism) were found to be lighter, simpler and more cost-effective
solutions to meet the customer requirements. Since the de-spun platforms
require servo motors for stabilisation, the yo-yo mechanism is considered a
convenient option for this project. The Weighted Decision Matrix depicted below,
was created for selection of the de-spin mechanism.
Features Total Points

Mechanism Weight Complexity Cost Effectivenes
s
Rate 4 4 3 8 18
Control
System
De-spun 7 8 6 7 27
Platforms
Yo-Yo De- 8 9 8 7 31
spin
Mechanism
Table 5: Weighted Decision Matrix [II]
Yo-Yo- De-Spin Mechanism
The technique of yoyo de-spinning is by attaching 2 equal masses

connected by wires of equal length to the exterior of the rocket by a
pyrotechnic release mechanism. The wire is then wrapped around in the
opposite direction to that of the rocket’s spin.

PRELIMINARY REPORT
Figure 2: [A stretch yo-yo consisting of weight, spring, wire and end fittings (the scale is in
inches)]. Joseph V. Fedor, “Analytical Theory of Stretch Yo-Yo for De-Spin of Satellites”,
NASA
The principle behind this technique is that when the release mechanism
has reached its predetermined time for release, the 2 masses are
jettisoned tangentially from the rocket thereby increasing its moment of
inertia and decreasing its angular velocity to desirable rates (refer to
Appendix 1). Finally, once the distance of the masses from the rocket are
equal to the length of the tether, they are then detached from the rocket
and propelled off carrying a substantial fraction of the system’s angular
momentum.
However, due to the nature of the technique the wires and masses will
need to be replaced after each use which would contribute to an increased
cost.
For the proposed concept with an estimated mass of 300Kg, preliminary

calculations put the masses to weigh a combined total of 3kg and a tether
length of 10.05m when G=10-3.
Diameter ω (initial) ω (final) I L (tether)

0.3m 8.087Hz 0.2557Hz 6.75kg/m2 10.05m
0.8m 4.952Hz 0.387Hz 48kg/m2 10.05m
Table 6: Preliminary calculations
Using I =mR 2
m R 2+ I
c= 2
m R2

PRELIMINARY REPORT
a
ω=
√ r
L=R √ c - Where ω (final) = 0
Assuming that ω (final) equates to 0 despite early calculations should

improve the final spin rate theoretically to 0. However as it will never be 0
exactly this improves the conditions for microgravity experiments by
optimising the environment.
VI. AVIONICS
1. Ground Control Computer/ Launch Station
 Control the avionics system of the rocket and give direction and guidance
command.
2. Packet Radio
 Form of packet switching technology used to transmit digital data via
radio/wireless communication links.
3. Flight Computer
 Positioned in the rocket below nose cone. Acceleration, direction and the
atmospheric pressure of the rocket is analysed. The data logged to the
EEPROM (Electrically Erasable Programmable Read-Only Memory)
for post launch and after launch analysis.
 Control the parachute, rocket axis direction and GPS system.
4. GPS System
 Interface with 3 Global Positioning System Satellite and constantly sent
data to Flight Computer with is then analysed and send back to the launch
station.
5. Accelerometer
 Device used to determine the proper acceleration relative to the free fall
by interface with the altimeter with used the ambient pressure and the
pressure at that altitude to compute the temperature and pressure drop.
 Sense the orientation, shock vibration, falling (Altimeter) and direction

(axis). Axis models used to defect magnitude and direction as a vector
quantity.

PRELIMINARY REPORT
 Constantly interface with the Flight Computer to interpret the data.
6. Altimeter
 Pressure drop (barometer) and temperature drops logged in and interface
with accelerometer.
7. Attitude Gyroscope
 A gyroscope based inertially-referenced attitude sensor can be used to
determine coarse 3-axis payload attitude information (1-3 degrees in all
axes). An available option is the MIDAS which is manufactured by Space
Vector Corporation. The MIDAS unit comprises of a pair of 2-degree of
freedom displacement gyros, sensing the vehicle roll-yaw and pitch
displacement respectively.
8. INSTRUMENTATION POWER SUPPLY
The instruments on sounding rockets are driven by electrical power from

batteries. Several types of battery system are available such as Silver Zinc
cells and Nickel Cadmium cells which have a 3-4 times lower energy density
than the former. There are two different types of the Silver Zinc cells, ‘High
Rate Discharge Series’ designed for energy to be expended in an hour or
less; and ‘Manually Activated Primary Series’ designed for quick activation.
9. EVENT TIMING SYSTEM
Often time delays are desirable between various in-flight events, such as the
motor separation and parachute deployment; or de-spin mechanism
activation and research experiment activation. In-flight event timing is
normally controlled by the following types of timers:-
 Mechanical Timers:
These comprise of three basic components: “G” weight actuator, a spring wound
timing mechanism, and an electrical switch system controlling external circuits,
that are put into operation at the pre-set time. Three to eight switch units are
available. Maximum time capacity ranges from 90 to 600 seconds.
 Electromechanical Timers :
These are made up of a DC chronometrically governed timing motor and an

electrical switch assembly controlling external circuits. Nine or thirteen switch

PRELIMINARY REPORT
units are available. And the maximum time capacity for electromechanical timers
is 720 seconds.
 Electronic Timers :
These are more complex timers with logic circuitry for low power consumption, a
battery backup and time-event decoding programmes. Electronic timers can
space events as close as 100 milliseconds apart. And can also provide a limited
amount of random event programming.
Figure 4 shows the schematic Avionics System block diagram of the sounding
rocket which will be implemented at this initial stage of the project.
Figure 3: [Avionics schematic diagram]. Available at

http://soundingrocket.org/Documents/ARES%20Rocket%20PPT-%202.pdf

PRELIMINARY REPORT
Staging Process
1st Stage – launch station initiate launch sequence to flight computer and the
ignition start off and open the valve. GPS and accelerometer activated on the
valve is open.
2nd Stage – Pressure/Temperature difference is logged into the black box

throughout the journey. Wireless link enable data transmission from the flight
rocket to the launch station to prevent any loss of data.
3rd Stage – The separation mechanism is activated by accelerometer as the

altitude and free falling condition is detected.
4th – The spinning motion of the payload module will initiate the ‘YOYO’ de-spin
as the Angular-Rate-Gyroscope detects change in angular speed due to loss in
weight.
Figure 5 shows the planned trajectory and staging of the sounding rocket.

PRELIMINARY REPORT
4th
Stag
3rd
Stag
2nd
Stag
5th
Stag
1st
Stag
Wireless
Link
Transmitte
Figure 4: [Typical soundiong rocket flight]. Available at
http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/S/sounding_rocket.html
VII. SEPARATION MECHANISM

A weight decision matrix is shown to decide on the type of mechanism:
Specification Points Mechanical Pyro-

system technique
devices
Joint rotation 7 7 49 5 35
Simultaneity 8 3 24 6 42
Reliability 8 7 56 6 42
Low shock 10 8 80 4 40
levels
Weight 10 7 70 7 70
Cost 9 6 59 5 45
Total 338 274
Table 7: Weighted Decision Matrix [III]
As the separation mechanism act as a medium that deliver the payload to its
final altitude, it’s important to make sure no damage is caused to payload during

PRELIMINARY REPORT
the separation process. Therefore, low shock level and extra weight the
mechanism adding to the rocket is essential trade off. Timing and accuracy of
the separation mechanism is essential to deliver successful project. Besides that,
non spinning payload study is the requirement of the projects; joint rotation of
the mechanism has to be given more priority.
Mechanical system has less commitment toward adding complexity in term of

construction and avionics requirement. Even though its reliability and joint
rotation criteria are close to the pyro-technique, the amount of time and cost
that will be spend on a low altitude research rocket will be less as the
mechanical system is applied to the sounding rocket.
Separation mechanism is an instrument which involves in releasing stages in a

rocket. In designing the separation mechanism, some significant factors need to
be measured: Sufficient clearance between the separating bodies; No damaging
shock loads provoked in the structure and payload; No contamination such as
extreme or destructive debris from the operation. There are three basic
elements to be considered for the operation of the separation. An actuator which
is either electric or pyro based is the first element to trigger the event. The
second element is release mechanism for physical separation. Jettisoning system
is part of the separation element used to provide the essential relative
separation velocity. There are two commonly used rocket separation mechanism
which are the mechanical system and pyro-technique devices. The mechanical
separation mechanism works internally without internal radiated energy.
Meanwhile, the pyro system works in the collaboration of firing electrical
charges. In the case of this project requirement, ball and lock system which is
the mechanical separation mechanism is the most suitable implement to be
used.
Ball and lock system consist of three main components: The upper and lower
rings which are adoptable and attached together by steel; A retainer ring which
has escape holes for balls; Balls which are hold by a retainer ring. The holes in
the retainer ring are set to a balance angular in the locked condition. The pyro-
thruster swivel the retainer ring which causes it to be imbalance during release.
The system has a stopper to limit the rotation of the retainer ring. An electric

PRELIMINARY REPORT
command from the central sequencer of the rocket instigates the pyro thrusters.
Jettisoning system used is a helical compression spring in between the flanges to
report the vital differential separation velocity. A clean separation is achievable
in this system as the lower stage outer ring is endowed with holes all the way
through for the balls in the locked condition. Meanwhile, the upper stages
adapter ring comes with a conical ball seat. The radial element of the spring
forces eventually pushes the balls away from the ring and discharges the inner
ring which performs a clean separation.
The advantages of this mechanism comparing to many others are the good joint
stiffness, lightweight construction, tunable jettisoning velocity, debris free
actuation and redundancy in launch to increase the reliability of the system.
Moreover, ball and lock system generates low release shock. However, a good
understanding of system dynamics would be essential in order to identify the
contribution of shock from different sources.
Figure 5: [Ball and lock system]. Available at http://www.raes.org.uk/pdfs/3007.pdf
VIII. RECOVERY SYSTEM

PRELIMINARY REPORT
The main job of the recovery system is to bring the deliverable safely to the
surface without damage. The primary objective is to design such a recovery
system which would recover the payload and deliverables along with the motor.
The system will have to maintain structural and aerodynamic stability once it
reaches the atmosphere to the surface, and survive impact.
The most common Recovery system is the Parachute Recovery System.
1. Single Stage Recovery System
In this system a single parachute is used, which is put out at apogee. An

altimeter, a timer or the motor sends an ejection charge for deployment.
2. Two Stage Recovery System
In this system a drogue parachute is put out at apogee and the main parachute
is put out at a lower altitude like 600 feet. This is to minimize the drift in the
rocket. An altimeter, a timer or the motor sends an ejection charge for
deployment for both drogue followed by the main parachute.
3. Parachute Deployment Bag
It is a bag into which a parachute is put into. It might have more than one
purpose, depending upon how the recovery system works. The two most
common uses are to protect the parachute from hot ejection charge gases and
particles, and for organised deployment. Nomex cloth is commonly used for
making deployment bags because it is fire resistant.
Figure 6: [Parachute Deployment Bag] Available at http://www.info-

central.org/images/263-002.jpg
4. Other recovery techniques

PRELIMINARY REPORT
 Gliding Recovery: Using Aerodynamic surfaces which can produce lift

to control the terminal velocity. The aerodynamic requirements of
gliding flight needs to have a mass shift to allow transition between
vertical flight and gliding flight.
 Featherweight recovery: If the rocket is very light (less than an

ounce typically), or the rocket have enough drag that its terminal
velocity is very low.
 Parachute Recovery: Using a parachute or parasheet for drag.

Because of the efficiency of parachutes, this is the most popular way.
You get more drag with less cloth than in any other way. Because of
this efficiency they are used for virtually all high power projects.
 Break-Apart recovery: In this way one could simply break the rocket
in the middle and attach the 2 sections by a shock cord. Works for
small rockets. It would be possible to make large rockets, with very
large surface area and relatively low weight that would be safe to
recover this way.
 Helicopter Recovery: Rigid blades could be used to slow terminal

velocity. For this system the whole rocket must be designed around
this m the whole rocket is designed around it. The stresses of a rapidly
spinning rocket touching down are enormous.
 Streamer Recovery: The streamer adds drag and slows the rocket.
Bigger streamer would be providing better recovery.
Hence considering all the alternatives, anything over a few ounces, parachute
recovery is the most important, tried and tested, and very simple. They are the
most efficient for their weight and bulk.
PARACHUTE DEPLOYMENT SYSTEM
The successful operation of any parachute depends on satisfactory performance

of the deployment system. Deployment of a parachute is defined herein as the
process of extending the parachute canopy and suspension lines to a position at
which satisfactory inflation can occur.
Forced Ejection System is frequently used and a very common technique. This
technique is very simple. The mortar, catapult, and pressure bellows are some of
the techniques designed to provide a forced ejection of parachute.

PRELIMINARY REPORT
Drogue Parachute System is parachute deployment using a drogue parachute

and has numerous advantages. The system is quite flexible since the parachute
extraction force is applied continuously over the entire deployment sequence.
Compared with a forced ejection system, the drogue system is usually lighter in
weight and produces smaller reaction loads. These reductions are due primarily
to the reduced energy requirements of the drogue parachute mortar. A drogue
system is more complex than a forced ejection system because the drogue
parachute itself must be deployed.
DEPLOYMENT MECHANISMS
Following are comparative types of deployment system.
Spring Loaded: In this method a spring is used to deploy the parachute at the
desired time.
Mortar
Figure 7: Typical ejection charge & flashbulb
In this method an electric signal is used to trigger the explosive charge in order
the parachute could be blown out.
Drogue/Mortar
Figure 8: Typical closure ejection well
Once the drogue is released, it pulls the parachute out. The mortar is fired at the
same moment to inflate the parachute following the drogue.
Parachute Weig a b C d

PRELIMINARY REPORT
Deployment ht
Sprin Mort Drogu Mortar+Drog
g ar e ue
Reliability 10 2 6 4 8
Size 6 2 3 4 1
Stability (Drift) 8 2 2 6 6
Trigger
Integration 6 1 4 2 3
Cost 4 4 1 3 2
Simplicity 6 2 4 3 1

Total Score 82 146 154 166
Table 8: Weighted Decision Matrix [IV]
Reliability is the most important aspect hence it gets a weightage of 10.

Stability is the next important thing to look into. The cost is not so important
since the material used to manufacture the parachute deployment system is
comparatively light and less expensive. But the size, trigger integration and
simplicity are fairly important hence getting a higher weightage.
PARACHUTE DESIGN
Following designs have been looked into:
A. Parachute with hole

B. Parachute with no hole
C. Parachute with a drogue and a hole
D. Parachute with a drogue but no hole
Parachute Weigh
Design t A b C d
with
with no hole+drogu no hole with
hole hole e drogue
Stability 10 3 1 4 2
Force of
Deployment 5 2 1 4 3
Simplicity 10 3 4 1 2

Total Score 70 55 70 55
Table 9: Weighted Decision Matrix [V]
The design needs to be stable and simple hence getting a higher weightage,
followed by the force of deployment.
IX. HYBRID MOTOR PROPULSION SYSTEM

PRELIMINARY REPORT
Hybrid motor is a combination of solid and liquid motors as they use a

combination of solid fuel grain with an oxidizer.
Figure 9: [Hybrid Rocket Motor Design] Available at http://www.hastic.jp/camui/img/img1.gif
The combustion chamber provides the location of the rocket fuel and also
contains the whole fuel grain. Separating the fuel from the oxidizer is preventing
them from mixing quickly and combusting. Another aspect to be known is that
the hybrid motors have the ability to be reusable and throttled. Also the
regression rate and therefore thrust of hybrid motors depend of the oxidizer flow
rate.
Hybrid Propellants
When selecting a propellant, one of the most important features to be

taken into account is performance, which in this case is measured by Isp
(specific impulse). Another aspect is density of propellants. A given weight of
dense propellant can be carried in a smaller, lighter tank than the same weight
of a low-density propellant this will result in small combustion chamber, which is
one of the heaviest parts of rocket as it will have to withstand high temperatures
and pressures. Also the molecular mass of the fuels should be kept small.
 Hybrid rocket fuels:

1. Polyethylene (PE) - density of 960 km/m3, thermal conductivity .
023 Wm-1K-1
2. Poly-Methyl Methacrylate(PMMA) – density of 1683kg/m3, molecular
weight 114
3. Hydroxyl Terminated Poly-Butadiene(HTPB) –density 930kg/m 3,
thermal conductivity .217 Wm-1K-1
4. Poly-Vinyl Chloride (PVC) – density 1380kg/m3, thermal

conductivity 0.16 Wm-1K

PRELIMINARY REPORT
5. Paraffin - density 0.8 g/cm3; Pros: Extremely easy to acquire

(used in, e.g., candles); Safe to work with ; Has high regression
rate due to liquid boundary layer effects
Cons: Expands during solidification process,
complicating fuel grain casting; Is structurally weak at high
temperatures, possibly causing grain to "slump" during high
acceleration
 Hybrid rocket oxidizers:

1. Hydrogen Peroxide(H2O2)- Pros : Non-cryogenic; non-toxic ; self-
pressurization
- Cons: Decompose at slow rate of 1%
per year. If it gets in contact with
human, the concentrate peroxide
causes severe burns and may ignite,
also when it is in contact with oils,
wood etc causes fire.
2. Nitrogen Tetroxide(N2O4) – Pros: Offers moderate impulse when
burned with most fuels (relative to other oxidizers);
- Storable
- Cons: Not very safe: EU Dangerous
Substances Directive ratings
"Corrosive" and "Very toxic"; Requires
use of pressuring gas (Helium etc.)
3. Nitric Acid(HN3) - Pros: Storable

- Cons: Offers low specific impulse
when burned with most fuels (relative
to other oxidisers); Not very safe: US
National Fire Protection Association
health code 4 (Very short exposure
could cause death or major residual
injury); requires use of pressuring gas
(Helium etc.)
4. Nitrous Oxide (N2O) - Pros: Storable; is quite safe: non-

flammable, non-toxic, etc.; is self-pressurizing, so does not require
pressuring gas (so less tanks, valves, etc.) Cons: Offers low
specific impulse when burned with most fuels (relative to other
oxidizers); cryogenic
5. Liquid Oxygen (O2) - Pros: Offers high specific impulse when

burned with most fuels (relative to other oxidizers)

PRELIMINARY REPORT
Cons: Is cryogenic (raises safety and simplicity

issues); Not storable (due to boil-off); requires use of
pressuring gas (Helium etc.
Oxidizer Type Boiling Density Freezing Molecular

Point (g/cm3) Point Weight
(°C)
Nitrous Cryogenic -89.5 1.222 -219 44
Oxide g/cc
(N2O)
Nitrogen Storable 21.2 1.443 46.01

Tetroxide g/cc
N2O4
H2O2 Storable 150 1.463 -1
g/cc
O2 Cryogenic -183 1.265
g/cc
HN3 83 1.522 63
g/cc
Table 10: Oxidizer Characteristics
HTPB is the fuel of choice due to its relatively high density and regression rate,
material proprieties and ease of manufacturing.
Oxidizer/FuelDensity (g / o/f Isp (sea Isp (vacuum)

cc) level)
98%H2O2/HTPB 1.35996754 6.1 228.4 331.0
90%H2O2/HTPB 1.32793061 6.7 219.5 323.5
N2O/HTPB 0.804126861 7.6 219.5 323.7
LOX/HTPB 1.08444997 2.1 244.1 366.1
Table 11: Fuel Characteristics
The table above give information regarding the performance of different

oxidizer/fuel propellant combinations. (I220 psic Pc, optimally extended for
Ispsl, or expansion ratio of 80 for Ispvac)
For the oxidizer, hydrogen peroxide was chosen due to its high Isp and density
and it is non-toxic. Another benefit is that is non-cryogenic. Comparing to other
oxidizers such as liquid oxygen it is safer to be handled and reduces the
operational costs. Also it is safer and more self-pressurized than the nitrous
oxide.
Hybrid motor design
The chart below represents the design process that will be taken in consideration
for building the hybrid rocket motor.

PRELIMINARY REPORT
Figure 10: [Hybrid Motor Design Process] Available at Journal of Mechanical Science and
Technology 22 (2008)
X. CONCLUSION
The hybrid sounding rocket design consists of fuel and oxidizers which are
hydroxyl-terminated- polybutadiene (HTPB) and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2). The
conceptual design would be a single stage hybrid propulsion rocket. The initial
dimension are subjected to changes during the next stage of project but
following the allowable constraint of ¿10% to avoid complex as well as drastic
changes on the aerodynamic properties of the rocket. The constraint allowable
limits also smoothes the designing process as the further trade of and other
changes are limited to avoid more structural and cost spending.
Subsystems which are the main body of the rocket includes avionics, separation
mechanism, parachute deployment, recovery system, de-spin mechanism and
hybrid motor. Avionics plays two major roles in which it controls the activation of
other subsystem and navigation and control. Each stage of flight triggers unique
subsystem with interaction from accelerometer and flight environment. The
separation mechanism is in control of delivering the final stage of the entire
mission and vital asset of the flight. Ball and lock system are compatible and
suitable separation mechanism as its subsystem requirement are adequate with
the mission requirement. The parachute has high reliability and cost efficient.

PRELIMINARY REPORT
Parachute deployment system is simple and suitable to be used for low altitude
as well as light weight research rockets. Doing further research and using the
outcome of the weighted decision matrix it could be safely concluded that a Dual
Deployment system using a drogue and a mortar for deployment and a
parachute with a hole is a feasible option. Beacon and GPS navigation system
are used to recover and during flight. Meanwhile, a simple and reliable de-spin
mechanism is required to satisfy non-spinning research environment. In this
case, a yoyo de-spin is simple and cost efficient mechanism.
XI. REFERENCES
Sounding Rocket Program Handbook – NASA,

http://www.fas.org/spp/guide/usa/launch/sr_handbook.pdf (Accessed 3rd
November)
NASA Technical Note: Techniques for Selection and Analysis of Parachute

Deployment Systems,
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19700005898_197000589
8.pdf (Accessed 5th November)
Recovery Systems: Rocketry Online, http://www.info-central.org/?article=263

(Accessed 5th November)
Recovery Systems for Model Rockets: Apogee Components,

http://www.apogeerockets.com/education/recovery.asp (Accessed 6th
November)
United States Air Force Parachute Handbook, http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-

bin/GetTRDoc?AD=AD118036&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf (Accessed 6 th
November)
[1]: J. Stark, P. Fortescue, G. Swinerd, “Spacecraft Systems Engineering”, 3 rd

edition.
[2]: http://books.google.co.uk/books?
id=7uxrFTgCOfsC&pg=PA60&lpg=PA60&dq=De-
spun+platform&source=bl&ots=lu59Tz1tBB&sig=-

PRELIMINARY REPORT
2KpUQjwKEtJt7fOk3oM9cKdqh4&hl=en&ei=93vYTI22A5WTjAfEvdTpCQ&sa=X&oi
=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CDYQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=De-
spun%20platform&f=false
[3], [6],[7] & [8]: Sounding Rocket Program Handbook – NASA
[4]: Theory and Design Curves for Yo-Yo Mechanism – NASA
[5]: Joseph V. Fedor, “Analytical Theory of Stretch Yo-Yo for De-Spin of

Satellites”, NASA
Spacecraft Attitude determination and Control; James R. Wertz
Space System Design; Robert Stengel
Manoeuvre of spinning rocket in flight; Hayakawa, Ito, Matsui, Noguchi, Uesugi,

Yamashita
Theory and design curves for a yoyo de-spin mechanism for satellite; J.V. Fedor
Byu Ares Rocket (2008) ESRA [Internet], Available at: www.soundingrocket.org

(Accessed 6 October 2010).
CU/ULA Hybrid Sounding Rocket Project. University of Colorado [Internet],

Available at: www.colorado.edu/aerospace (Accessed 6 October 2010)
NASA. (1999) Sounding Rocket Program Handbook [Internet], Virgina, Goddard

Space Flight Centre. Available at:
http://www.fas.org/spp/guide/usa/launch/sr_handbook.pdf (Accessed 11
October 2010).
Virginia Tech Sounding Rocket Project. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State
University [Internet], Available at:
http://www.aoe.vt.edu/~cdhall/courses/aoe4065/OldReports/vtsrpf02.pdf
(Accessed 15 October 2010)
Glenn, E. Preliminary Design of a Hybrid Rocket Liquid Injection Thrust Vector

Control System [Internet], West Lafayette, Purdue University. Available at:
http://www.aiaa.org/pdf/student/E_Case_Astro.pdf (Accessed 20 October 2010)
Tsohas, J., Droppers, L.J., and Heister, S.D. (2006) Sounding Rocket Technology
Demonstration for Small Satellite Launch Vehicle Project[Internet], Los Angeles,
4th Responsive Space Conference. Available at:
http://www.responsivespace.com/Papers/RS4/Papers/RS4_4004P_Tsohas.pdf
ESA, Sounding Rockets [Internet], Available at:

http://www.spaceflight.esa.int/users/downloads/userguides/chapter_5_sounding
_rockets.pdf (Accessed 15 October 2010).

PRELIMINARY REPORT
NASA. (2005) Sounding Rocket Program Handbook [Internet], Virgina, Goddard

Space Flight Centre. Available at:
http://snebulos.mit.edu/projects/reference/NASA-Generic/810-HB-SRP.pdf
Development of a Staging Sounding Rocket and Experimental Solid Rocket

Motor. Arizona State University [Internet], Available at:
http://soundingrocket.org/Documents/Arizona (Accessed 23 October 2010).
Rscience, NASA Sounding Rocket Science [Internet], Available at:

http://rscience.gsfc.nasa.gov/srrov.html (Accessed 27 October 2010).
Sounding Rockets, Space Rocketry [Internet], Available at:

http://www.rocketryonline.com/jimball/alway/sounding_rocket.htm (Accessed
22 October 2010).
Sounding Rockets, The Internet Encyclopedia of Science [Internet], Available at:

http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/S/sounding_rocket.html (Accessed 1
November 2010).
Somanath, S., Krishnan Kutty, V. K., Francis, E. J.(2001) Dynamics Simulation

of Pyro Actuated “Ball Lock” Separation System for Micro-Satellites to Evaluate
Release Shock pp. 199-206 ESA Publication Division [Internet], Available at:
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001ESASP.480..199S (Accessed 1 November
2010)
Mechanicalseminar (2009) Stage Separation System Design of Space Launch
Vehicles [Internet] Available
at:http://mechanicalseminarz.blogspot.com/2009/10/stage-separation-system-
design-of-space.html (Accessed 2 November 2010).
Konno,V.K., Catalano,D.A., Krivanek, T.M., Evaluation of Separation Mechanism

Design for the
Orion/Ares Launch Vehicle [Internet] NASA. Available at:
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20080012476_200801098
9.pdf (Accessed 29 October 2010)
Rao,B.N., Jeyakumar, D., Biswas,K.K., Swaminathan, S. and Janardhana.E.

(2006) ‘Rigid Body Separation Dynamics for Space Launch Vehicles’ The
Aeronautical Journal, Paper No: 3007 pp. 289-302 [Internet] Available at:
http://www.raes.org.uk/pdfs/3007.pdf (Accessed 4 November 2010).
Brown,C.D.,Elements of Spacecraft Design

Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 22 (2008) 1576~1585
Zilliac, Greg, Hybrid Rocket Fuel Regression Rate Data and Modeling, NASA
Ames Research Center, Moffet Field, Mountain View, CA July 2006
Sutton, G.P., Rocket Propulsion Elements Seventh Edition

PRELIMINARY REPORT

Preliminary: Astronautics Group Design Project (Ae3017)

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Preliminary: Astronautics Group Design Project (Ae3017)

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

ASTRONAUTICS GROUP

DESIGN PROJECT (AE3017)

NAME & KU ID No. : PRERNA SINGH (K0732468)

DATE OF SUBMISSION : 12 NOVEMBER 2010

SUPERVISOR: DR. BARNABY OSBORNE

Figures and Tables

ASTRONAUTICS GROUP PROJECT Page 2

Figure 1: [Hybrid rocket propulsion system]. Available at http://www.spg-

ASTRONAUTICS GROUP PROJECT Page 3

II. PROJECT REQUIREMENTS

2. Product Assurance Requirements

5. Cost Effective Services for the customer.

ASTRONAUTICS GROUP PROJECT Page 4

III. DESIGN CONFIGURATION

ASTRONAUTICS GROUP PROJECT Page 5

Specification Points Single stage Multistage

ASTRONAUTICS GROUP PROJECT Page 6

IV. SOUNDING ROCKET DIMENSIONS

The importance of gaining sustainable method to determine the dimension is

MT - 135 0.294 0.41 0.139 0.699 0.722 0.039

Maser 0.201 0.35 0.184 0.787 0.189 0.045

Black Brant (1-5) 0.221 0.43 0.243 0.978 0.226 0.035

MR - 12 0.222 0.31 0.231 0.919 0.474 0.040

Table 2: Dimensions Parameters of sounding rockets

Based on Table 3, the maximum allowable conceptual dimension of the sounding

Dimension Parameters (cm)

ASTRONAUTICS GROUP PROJECT Page 7

Full Span 518

Fin Height 3.6

Table 4: Preliminary Rocket Design Parameters

V. ATTITUDE CONTROL & STABILISATION

Various means of imparting spin could be:-

 Canting the fins, i.e. giving the fins a slanting edge.

However, the payload requires a microgravity environment for the research

 Absence of net acceleration force (force gradient) acting on the body.

 Three Axis Rate Control System and Guidance Control System

ASTRONAUTICS GROUP PROJECT Page 8

 Yo-Yo De-Spin Mechanism

Features Total Points

Yo-Yo- De-Spin Mechanism

The technique of yoyo de-spinning is by attaching 2 equal masses

ASTRONAUTICS GROUP PROJECT Page 9

For the proposed concept with an estimated mass of 300Kg, preliminary

Diameter ω (initial) ω (final) I L (tether)

ASTRONAUTICS GROUP PROJECT Page 10

L=R √ c - Where ω (final) = 0

Assuming that ω (final) equates to 0 despite early calculations should

 Control the parachute, rocket axis direction and GPS system.

 Sense the orientation, shock vibration, falling (Altimeter) and direction

ASTRONAUTICS GROUP PROJECT Page 11

 Constantly interface with the Flight Computer to interpret the data.

8. INSTRUMENTATION POWER SUPPLY

The instruments on sounding rockets are driven by electrical power from

9. EVENT TIMING SYSTEM

These are made up of a DC chronometrically governed timing motor and an

ASTRONAUTICS GROUP PROJECT Page 12

Figure 3: [Avionics schematic diagram]. Available at

ASTRONAUTICS GROUP PROJECT Page 13

2nd Stage – Pressure/Temperature difference is logged into the black box

3rd Stage – The separation mechanism is activated by accelerometer as the

ASTRONAUTICS GROUP PROJECT Page 14

VII. SEPARATION MECHANISM