Sunday, December 12, 2010

List of significant parts....

In trying to determine the scope of a Nano sat launcher project I generated the following list or physical hardware. There is an equivalent scope of work for Ground support, Software, Logistics, Regulatory issues etc...

  1. Nose cone/aero shell
    1. Aero shell separation system
  2. Nano sat mount
    1. Nano Sat ejection system.

  1. Avionics:
    1. GPS/ MEMS IMU Integrated system
    2. Avionics control
    3. Telemetry system
    4. Battery System

  1. Third Stage
    1. Tanks (assuming tanks are the structure)
    2. Valves and Actuators
    3. Pressurization System
    4. Motor
    5. Motor Thrust transfer structure
    6. TVC Actuators.
    7. Separation mechanism
    8. Fill and Drain Umbilical system.
    9. Roll Control TVC

  1. Second Stage
    1. Third Stage Support Structure
    2. Battery for second stage actuators.
    3. Tanks (assuming tanks are the structure)
    4. Valves and Actuators
    5. Pressurization System
    6. TVC Actuators.
    7. Motor
    8. Motor Thrust transfer structure
    9. Separation mechanism
    10. Fill and Drain Umbilical system.

  1. First Stage
    1. 2nd Stage Support Structure
    2. Battery for first stage actuators.
    3. Tanks (assuming tanks are the structure)
    4. Valves and Actuators
    5. Pressurization System
    6. TVC Actuators.
    7. Motor
    8. Motor Thrust transfer structure
    9. Fill and Drain Umbilical system.
    10. Launch Hold down mechanism


Andrew S. Mooney said...

Ooo. I get to be first. I am thinking about these sorts of things as well.

Have you considered any kind of heat disposal system to control heating to the upper stage tanks? The solar input to an upper stage might be an issue if the device is up there for any period of time, and you have to do a further burn to circularize an orbit. It obviously depends upon how hot the exterior might get but upon a small launch vehicle, it will become "baked" quickly. What about some sort of passive thermal heat insulation?

This stuff is pretty impressive and is almost as thin as a paint job:

Carl Tedesco said...

Speaking of thermal issues... some that address the vehicle are:

1. nosecone heating- I've heard that a thin layer of cork works well.

2. base heating- as the plume expands, radiant heating can be significant as you may already know.

I think you did a good job of covering most everything else.

Martijn Meijering said...

Flight termination system?

Paul Breed said...

FTS...The Falcon1 flew with an onboard GPS based system with simple thrust termination. A Dynospace FTS would weigh as much as the whole rocket. I'm hoping to do similar, this should probably be an add on to the Avionics catagory.

Martijn Meijering said...

Would they let you launch from the continental USA with a Falcon 1 type system?

Paul Breed said...

Kodiak, or ocean launch is the current concept.

Anonymous said...

Ocean launch, doesn't that require a tax deductible boat?

Jonathan said...

FYI about FTS: for Range Safety purposes at all current launch ranges (Kodiak,Cape,WSMR, etc), an FTS is not just a system that brings down the rocket. Typically it has to be a completely independent system from the main rocket system: separate antenna, computer, wiring, etc.

It sucks, but that's what current ranges mean when they say FTS. I can dig up some documentation for you to be more specific...the idea of a thrust cutoff is more than adequate, it just has to be isolated from the main system.

dave w said...

Well, system independence makes sense for an abort system, since it's intended to be a fallback in case of failures that might completely disable primary control functionality.

I think similar logic is behind the historical practice of having "the telemetry" as a completely separate system rather than part of the primary flight control: it can keep sending data if the main systems are failing, and it can fail without disrupting the flight control itself.