1 / 23

Project METEOR Design and Optimization of a Small Scale Rocket for Pico-Satellite Launching

Project METEOR Design and Optimization of a Small Scale Rocket for Pico-Satellite Launching Team Members: Ray Mulato Joe D’Amato Joel Baillargeon Kent Etienne Guion Lucas Ryan Kuhns. Project Overview. Projected Flight Pattern. Project Overview. Hybrid Rocket

keely
Download Presentation

Project METEOR Design and Optimization of a Small Scale Rocket for Pico-Satellite Launching

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Project METEOR Design and Optimization of a Small Scale Rocket for Pico-Satellite Launching Team Members: Ray Mulato Joe D’Amato Joel Baillargeon Kent Etienne Guion Lucas Ryan Kuhns

  2. Project Overview Projected Flight Pattern

  3. Project Overview Hybrid Rocket • Classified as utilizing a liquid oxidizer and solid propellant to achieve thrust • Current Oxidizer: Nitrous Oxide (NOX) • Current Propellant: Hydroxyl Terminated Poly-Butadiene (HTPB) • Possible Propellant: Poly-Methyl Methacrylate (PMMA )

  4. Current Test Chamber Setup ChamberWall Hydroxyl-Terminated Polybutadiene (HTPB) Fuel Grain Snap Ring Injector Plate 2-D Nozzle Garolite Pre & Post Combustion Chambers

  5. Project Deliverable – Specific Impulse • Theoretical Isp for HTPB & NOX  320 s • Properties • Efficiency of propulsion system • Ratio of thrust to weight • Change in momentum per unit mass of propellant • Affected by combustion temp, chamber pressure, exit pressure, and mass flow rate

  6. Project Objectives • Optimization of: • Nozzle Geometry • Fuel Grain • Material • Geometry • Oxidizer Flow Rate • Ignition System • Data Acquisition • Temperature • Pressure • Thrust Specific Impulse of 220 s

  7. Project Specifications From Guidance Team for controlled flight to 90 km: mfuel = 10kg; mdot = 0.2kg/s; tburn = 50 s; T = 445 N (100 lb)

  8. Testing Purpose • Testing took place December 9th & 10th, 2006 • Vary Nozzle Geometry to see the effects on thrust • Conceivably measure mass flow rate of system • Weigh nitrous oxide tank and fuel grains prior and after each test • Come up with approximate O/F ratios • Introduce Team to current design

  9. Results

  10. Testing 11 Degree Half Angle

  11. Testing 11 Degree Half Angle

  12. September 16th, 2006 Test

  13. Observations Overall system setup Ignition system can be inconsistent in terms of time Oxidizer tank temperature varied considerably from test to test Teflon tape in feed system was tedious and led to increased time between tests Brass fittings can be cross-threaded and/or broken easily Noticeable inaccuracies in current mass flow rate measurement Power supply was convoluted 8 Degree Half Angle Nozzle design gave the best thrust results Nitrogen tank regulator was damaged, consistently leaks, had to develop a work around for it Conclusions Began to reduce time between tests Steady voltage and current supply is needed to minimize ignition time A method of controlling internal tank temperature is needed to remove guesswork Stainless steel can be used in place of brass and teflon combination Stainless steel fittings in oxidizer feed system should be used Means of gathering reliable mass flow is crucial – Coriolis flow meter or volumetric flow meter in combination with other values A generator might be a better means of running the operation Difficult to draw definite conclusion from this, as multiple variables play a role in thrust Need to order a more robust regulator First Testing – December 2006

  14. Feed System Equipment • Goals of adding additional feed system equipment: • Acquire a reliable value for mass flowrate in order to calculate a number of parameters • Regression rate • Test Chamber Pressure • Oxidizer-Fuel Ratio • Oxidizer Mass Velocity • Feedback Pressure Regulator • Constant supply pressure leads to overall experimental control • Capability to vary supply pressure • Optimization of nozzle for a supply pressure • Gas Tank Heating Blanket • Allows for a controlled internal tank temperature • Temperature control leads to internal pressure control

  15. Possible Test Chamber Improvements • Longer, wider chamber for longer burn and increased thrust • Injector plate – redesign hole pattern and sizing in order to increase burn efficiency and completeness • Use of Polymethyl Methylacrylate (PMMA) as a solid fuel in place of HTPB – possibly higher thrust • Redesign of Pre and Post combustion chambers to minimize viscous losses inside the chamber • Redesign of nozzle to take advantage of expansion of hot gas inside the diverging section of the nozzle rather than behind it • Redesign of fuel grain to optimize regression rate and thrust (increase surface area exposed to flame)

  16. Current Feed System

  17. Possible Feed System Improvements • Control of Oxidizer (N2O) Pressure via tank as well as before injector – installation of a feedback regulator • Use of Stainless Steel in place of Brass in Nitrous Oxide feed system due to N2O effect on brass components (shorter life, corrosion of surfaces) • Use of a tank “stand” to hold oxidizer tank inverted as well as to measure weights (for the current round of testing)

  18. Proposed Changes to Feed System Highlighted areas show where changes are being made

  19. Feed System Equipment Pressure Transducer Mass Flowrate Meter Tee Fitting Backflow Pressure Regulator Inline Flow Filter Test Chamber

  20. Design of Experiments High High 5 6 4 3 Factorial Factor B Factor B O.V.A.T. 1 3 1 2 Low High Low High Factor A Factor A 2 4 • Factorial Method vs. One Variable at a Time • Factorial method able to achieve comparable results with fewer tests • Factorial method able to correlate relationships between factors being tested

  21. NOX Pressure (Pre-Inj.) Length of Fuel Grain Post-Combustion Chamber Nozzle Injector Plate Fuel Grain Additive Fuel Grain Geometery 3 levels (∆ of 50 psi.) 2 levels (11” – 18”) 4 levels (1.5” - 3.0”; ∆ 0.5”) 2 levels 2 levels (4 holes/ 9 holes) 2 levels (Alum. Pwdr/ Non-Alum. Pwdr) 3 levels (Star, Circle, Cross) Design of Experiments Levels Independent Test Variables

  22. Design of Experiments Levels Variables In Next Test • Reasons for choosing these variables: • Short lead time for testing • See how pressure, and (L/D) ratio of the fuel grain effects thrust • No prior knowledge of injector plate design • Combustion chamber wasn’t chosen due to the additional changes to the system needed to accommodate that test. • NOX Pressure (Pre-Inj.) • Length of Fuel Grain • Injector Plate • 3 levels (∆ of 50 psi.) • 2 levels (11” – 18”) • 2 levels (4 holes/ 9 holes)

  23. Senior Design I Project Plan

More Related