...
Goal | Reason |
|---|---|
Contain and Support a Soda Can During Flight | Learn how a carbonated beverage will behave after experience launch conditions. |
Use a Party Payload Including Lights and a Speaker | Expose delicate electronics to launch conditions. |
Utilize a Reefed Parachute In Recovery | Test a single-bay deployment system for future use. |
Deploy a Smoke Flare at Apogee | Develop a method of mixing and deploying a smoke flare for aid in locating rockets on the ground. |
Open Recovery Bay at Apogee and Disreef Parachute | Recovery of the rocket. |
Track Rocket Position | Aid in locating the rocket after flight. |
Reach 6,000 ft. | Apogee goal. |
Gather Telemetry Data During Flight | Verify success of reefed parachute and collect information about the rocket’s performance. |
Post-mortem
...
The Good
All systems of the rocket were finished in time for the launch day, without the need to pull multiple all nighters to get it there.
All portions of the rocket were recovered and fairly well documented.
Division of labor between the various sub teams was fairly even, given the context of what each sub team was working on.
Team leadership felt cohesive and communication between leads was mostly clear and consistent.
The Bad
Following an accidental launch of the rocket by URRG officials, the rocket experienced a RUD, with the rocket separating into 3 sections: nosecone and parachute, upper half of the rocket, and lower half / booster section of the rocket. The parachute and nosecone drifted into the field, the upper half of the rocket fell and landed next to the rail, and the booster section went ballistic, impacting a field ~0.5km away. All sections of the rocket still in existence were recovered. Launch Initiative Members responded quickly to the situation and successfully disarmed the black powder charges in the upper half of the rocket as per SOP. One recovery team collected the parachute and nosecone from where they had drifted in the field, while the other recovery team located and dug out the booster section.
The RUD of the rocket was likely caused by an uneven connection between the booster and polycarb sections of the rocket, and possibly asymmetrical motor burn. The joint between the two aforementioned sections was uneven, and likely caused there to be uneven trust transfer up the rocket, causing the wobble exhibited by the rocket. In the case of asymmetrical motor burn, not much could have been done except perhaps closer inspection of the motor prior to integration with the rocket. There was a series of other structural failures that occurred after the rocket broke into 3 pieces, and while some improvements could have been made during manufacturing it is unclear weather they could have been mitigated (such as snatch cord tearing) given the failure mode of the rocket. More detailed documentation of the various failures of the rocket is available in the team drive.
Overall the main lesson learned is that space race should have more active oversight from more senior members of the club in order to identify and correct potential mistakes during the manufacturing of the rocket. Furthermore, a much more intensive pre-flight check is needed in order to ensure the rocket is flight ready and identify any critical errors the space race team might not notice or otherwise minimize due to an (understandable) desire to get the rocket in the air.
Furthermore, Launch Initiative members need to feel more empowered to push back on directives from URRG officials they find to be unsafe, and it should be stressed that when the igniter is in the rocket engine, it is armed, and should be treated as such due to all the implications of that fact.
Design overview
Payloads
Payload Requirements
...
In the future, when evaluating whether or not to turn off avionics systemsystems:
It must not be done while the igniter is still in the motor.
The decision should be made in the context of the battery life of the avionics systems contrasted with the expected delay.
...
Requirement | Reason | Verification |
|---|---|---|
Contain and Support a Soda Can During Flight | Learn how a carbonated beverage will behave after experience launch conditions. | Design and Analysis |
Stability between 1.5 and 2.5 | Safe Upwards Flight | Analysis |
Tube Components Connect Firmly | Rocket Integrity | Test |
Structure Fits Other Subsystems | Enable Critical Rocket Functions and Controls | Test |
Reach Apogee above 6,000 ft. | An apogee goal | Analysis |
URRG Requirements
Describe what an external organization (probably ESRA, URRG, or EH&S) requires of this one.
Requirement | Reason | Verification |
|---|---|---|
Apogee must be under 18,000 ft | Safety and FAA regulations | OpenRocket |
Thrust to weight ratio must be 5:1 or better | Safety | OpenRocket |
All components of the rocket must be recovered, and no part of the rocket can be intentionally ballistic | Safety and Laws | Analysis |
Interface Requirements
Describe what other subsystems require of this one.
Source(s) | Requirement | Reason | Verification |
|---|---|---|---|
Payload | Polycarb Tube | A spot designated for Payload to hold the Party Module | Design |
Avionics | Avionics Bay Section | An area designated for Avionics | Design |
Avionics | Vent Holes | Avionics needs vent holes to equalize pressure | Design |
Avionics | Screw Switches | To turn on Avionics | Test |
Recovery | Recovery Bay | A spot designated for refeed parachute and smoke flare | Design |
Design
This should describe high-level distinguishing features of this subsystem. If this project is recurring (Space Race or IREC), focus on the items you judge would be important to tell the next year's team, especially specific improvements over previous years.
The Structure of FLDSMDFR has various key features. Past years contain a payload section, avionics bay, and recovery section. This year was different from previous years .
Post-mortem
In Progressby including a poly carb tube, soda can, and a smoke flare.
The polycarb tube had allowed Payload’s camera get a clear view of flight. It was critical to get a good mount for the polycarb tube to the Blue Tube. We believe that this is where some issues may have arose. There had not been a clean cut on the Blue Tube, leaving a gap between the two sections. Another mistake was with the way we connected the two sections, the Bee Keeper’s had connected the two sections and then drilled the holes, we had drilled the holes then tried to connect them. It would be much easier to do it the same way the Bee Keeper’s had done.
The soda section had been secured using a 3D printed container. On the top it was sealed using a wooden bulkhead and was made sure to be water-tight. This was to prevent any liquid possibly ruining the structure of the Blue Tube.
In our design we needed to be aware of the mass and space that smoke flare would take up. This is important as the extra weight affects the center of gravity along with the fin flutter. Further details of the smoke flare can be found under recovery.
Post-mortem
Looking back, one of our biggest issues was most likely the connection between the polycarb tube and the Blue Tube. Upon analysis after the launch, it was concluded that this maybe the biggest place where we went wrong. This connection maybe what lead to the failure of the rocket. We have discussed that in future years we need to ensure our builds need to be further inspected. Producing a rocket that has parts that are just “okay” is not enough. We need to ensure that our rocket is to the highest factor of safety as we can, to ensure the best results.
Almost all of the rocket was recovered, which in some ways, made it easy to try and analyze what went wrong. Having both the rocket pieces and videos helped this process immensely. We have an intact Payload, had been able to see where/when the parachute had deployed, along with the structural elements of the rocket. As mentioned, we had not been fortunate to get any real data from the avionics bay, as the avionics only had the tracking system working and it landed right next to the pad.
We truly need to have a closer inspection of the rocket before launching. Taking into consideration different components of the rocket and worse case scenarios to have the highest level of safety and produce an overall better rocket.
Recovery
Recovery Requirements
...