Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 6 Next »


Category Choice:

10K COTS vs 30K COTS vs 10K SRAD

ClassProsCons
10K COTS
  • We've done it before so we know what to do as a baseline so we could better ourselves.

  • It would be far cheaper.

    • We have hardware and parts for 10k so reusing them would keep costs low.

  • There's a lot more to a rocket besides going high that we can focus on (manufacturing techniques, avionics, simulations, presentations, etc.)

  • We're far from the best 10k at IREC, it may be smart to first make better 10ks then move on to 30k.

  • It would be just another 10k rocket.

  • We've done it before so it's not expanding and making a higher goal it's instead staying at the same level.

  • There may not be enough substance in a 10k rocket to keep everyone engaged and interested.

  • It wouldn't be as intense of a challenge.

  • A lot more competition in this class as it's the most "basic" .

30K COTS
  • It would test our skills in manufacturing because a higher apogee leads to less room for defects.

  • A higher apogee would be interesting and a good talking point.

  • People have already agreed on doing 30k.

  • Fewer competitors in this category

  • We haven't had a successful one before.

  • Much more expensive.

  • Higher altitude and airspeed means less freedom of design - some things may need to be cut or shrunk, rocket can pretty much only be 1 shape.

10K SRAD
  • Making our own motor would make the rocket more unique and it would bring in a different skill set to the team.

  • There is less competition in SRAD than COTS.

  • We've done 10k before so we know what to do as a baseline so we could better ourselves.

  • It would be far cheaper.

    • We have hardware and parts for 10k so reusing them would keep costs low.

  • There's a lot more to a rocket besides going high that we can focus on (manufacturing techniques, avionics, simulations, presentations, etc.)

  • Working on propulsion development gives us more for people to do.
  • We're far from the best 10k at IREC, it may be smart to first make better 10ks then move on to 30k.

  • If the SRAD part doesn't work we could always fall back to doing 10K COTS.

  • We've never launched SRADs as a team, so it is an unknown

  • Only one member is currently experienced in solids.

  • Nobody on the team has the proper certs to launch an SRAD

  • SRADs are harder to quantify, may make precise altitude targets tricky

  • It's more work for the team.


Vote Tally

OptionsVote Total
10K COTS
30K COTS
10K SRAD

Results:


Rocket Composition:

Full Fiberglass vs Full Carbon Fiber vs Hybrid Mix

OptionsProsCons
Full Fiberglass
  • Radio frequency can get through!
  • We can use COTS tubes which would save on manpower.
  • Easier to machine, (slightly) fewer safety concerns as well
  • Fiberglass can be dyed, so no need for paint weight
  • Buying COTS tubes would be fairly basic
  • Winding fiberglass may have unique challenges that we don't foresee.
Full Carbon Fiber
  • It'd be made of uniform composition keeping to the theme of the name.

  • We can manage carbon fiber manufacturing so it wouldn't be learning a new process from scratch.

  • We still have the materials for doing carbon fiber.

  • The lack of radio transparency.

  • Judges dislike carbon fiber or black airframes.

  • Black airframe will get hotter in the sun

Hybrid Mix
  • We could allow for radio frequency to go through as well as still having the custom carbon fiber aspect.
  • It would allow us to save money and use our previous resources.
  • Not having just one of the same type of material potentially creating fit issues in manufactured parts.
  • Judges may see carbon fiber booster as a radio "dead spot" if rocket is overhead

Vote Tally

OptionVote Total
Full Fiberglass
Full Carbon Fiber
Hybrid Mix

Results:


Payload Deployment Type :

Deployable vs Non Deployable

OptionsProsCons
Deployable
  • Unique, judges like to see deployed payloads

  • More complex, giving us more opportunities to learn

  • We haven't successfully recovered one before.

  • More complex, meaning it takes more man hours away from the rocket

  • 1/2 - 2/3 of payload volume taken up by recovery systems

  • Likely more expensive due to redundant IREC-required tracking and deployment systems
Non Deployable
  • Keep it simple which will potentially make it more successful.

  • Ability to swap for a dead mass at any time and not worry about deployment issues.

  • We don't have to deal with accidentally losing it in the desert.

  • Less interesting for the judges.

  • Limits what we are able to do in the payload.

Vote Tally

OptionsVote Total
Deployable
Non Deployable

Results:


Payload Ideas:

Payload Descriptions

Drone: This would be a remote controlled drone that has to be deployed under 400 feet due to regulations that could be used to track the rocket, release some sort of visual signal to find the rocket and it would be a fairly complex project which would look good for the payload challenge.

Rover: This would be a rover which can be deployed from the rocket and landed separate it will be remote controlled and can be used for tracking and visuals to find it / the rocket, it is again a fairly complex project which the judges for the payload challenge will enjoy.

"Black Box of Sensors":

Deployable Mass:

Reaction Wheel:

Actual Science Payload:

GPS Data Relay:

Adding Smoke System to Payload:


Drone vs Rover vs "Black Box of Sensors" vs Deployable Mass vs Reaction Wheel vs Actual Science Payload vs Adding GPS Tracking to Payload vs Adding Smoke System to Payload

OptionsProsCons

Drone

(Deployable)


  • Very complex
  • Licensing concerns

Rover

(Deployable)


  • Very complex
  • Rough Terrain

Black Box of Electronics

(Deployable or Non-Deployable)

  • Simple and able to evolve based on team needs
  • Inexpensive
  • Fairly basic

Deployable Mass

(Deployable) 


  • Pretty much nothing learned from it
  • Would likely not qualify for SDL (nonfunctional mass)

Reaction Wheel

(Deployable)

  • Good way to add more mass to payload
  • May not be allowed under IREC rules

Actual Science Payload

(Deployable or Non-Deployable)

  • Judges like to see real-world implications of what we do
  • Requires a lot of work and (probably) money

GPS Tracking/Data Relay

(Deployable)

  • Judges like to see real-world implications of what we do
  • Possible to do with COTS electronics
  • RF Black Magic Fuckery
  • Populating more radio channels frowned upon

Adding Smoke System to Payload

(Deployable or Non-Deployable)

  • Useful addition
  • May be difficult to reach 9 pounds

Vote Tally

OptionsVote Total

Drone


Rover
Black Box of Sensors
Deployable Mass
Reaction Wheel
Actual Science Payload
Adding GPS Tracking to Payload
Adding Smoke System to Payload

Results:


  • No labels