University of Florida

CDR Presentation
Outline
 Vehicle Design
 Payload Design
 Recovery System
 Component Testing
 Subscale Flight
 Simulations
 Outreach
 Future Work
Vehicle Design
• Nose cone and 4 main sections
• Avionics Bay is fixed inside upper airframe and Mid Airframe
• Body diameter is 5.455”
Static Stability Diagram

CP
CG

 The center of pressure (CP) is located 86ʺ from the tip of the
rocket nose.
 The center of gravity (CG) is located 78ʺ from the tip of the
rocket nose.
 The maximum diameter of the rocket is 5.455ʺ. These
dimensions result in a static margin of 1.45, which is within the
range desired (between 1 and 2).
Tube Construction
 All three airframes (upper, mid, and lower) will be made
of phenolic tube wrapped in a composite mixture of two
layers of 4 ounce fiberglass and Aeropoxy. The first body
tube has already been made, as shown below
Upper Airframe
 45” long, 7.79 lbs. (w/ contents)
 From bottom: contains top of avionics bay, payload,
payload drogue, rocket drogue, nose cone insert
Avionics Bay
• 10” long, 2.83 lbs (w/ contents)
• Phenolic tube with 0.5” birch ply bulkheads
• Serves as coupler for Main Airframe – Upper Airframe joint, therefore it
does not add length to the rocket
• Screws into both of these airframes to prevent separation
Avionics Bay
• All-thread provides structural support
• Easy-to-use thumb nuts to wire igniter outputs and hook up ejection charges
• 1/8” G-10 fiberglass serves as platform for electronics mounting
• Contains two redundant PerfectFlite Altimeters (each powered by their own
9-volt battery), a GPS, and a transceiver (powered by a 9-Volt battery)
Mid Airframe
 30” long, 3.47 lbs
 From bottom: contains rocket main parachute and
bottom of avionics bay
Lower Airframe
 30” Long, 9.07 lbs, 3 Fins
 From Bottom: Contains 54mm motor mount, three
centering rings, and motor retention
Motor Retention
• Aluminum sleeve with indention and snap ring
groove
• Motor thrust ring pushes on aluminum indention
instead of phenolic tube
Motor Choice
 The motor has been changed to the Loki L1400
because of the unavailability of the AMW L1300
 Characteristics of the L1400
 Total Impulse: 2850.6 Ns (175.6 Ns greater than L1300)
 Peak Thrust: Officially 2710.5 N, but RockSim reports
1906.4 N, large discrepancy
 Burn Time: 2.0 s (same as L1300)
 Performance w/ Rocket
 Thrust-to-Weight Ratio: 11.1
 Rail-exit-velocity: 72.4 ft/s (with 7 foot rail)
L1400 Thrust Curve

 Source: thrustcurve.org
Outline
 Vehicle Design
 Payload Design
 Recovery System
 Component Testing
 Subscale Flight
 Simulations
 Outreach
 Future Work
 Payload Housing and Integration
• Folds up while inside upper
airframe
• A torsional and tensional spring in
each leg creates a sprawling motion
once payload is deployed
• Wheels allow easy vertical sliding of
payload
• Rests in “shoes” during flight, which
are fixed to inside of Upper Airframe
• Tube is made out 1/8” T6-6061
Aluminum, with an outside diameter
of 3.25”
• Legs are made out of 1/16”
Aluminum U-Channel
•*Note* - video cameras, parachute
compartment, and payload lid not
shown in this drawing
Payload Electronics
• Contains two redundant R-DAS Tiny altimeters that control the payload’s main
parachute deployment and record all sensor data. Each R-DAS Tiny has its own 11.1V
flight battery
• Contains two analog temperature and two analog humidity sensors
• Contains a GPS and transceiver powered by the batteries on their respective
boards
• Similar structural design as the Avionics Bay
•Two video cameras attached to the outside of the payload bay
Payload Lid
• Serves as mount for UV sensors and solar cells
Payload Wiring Schematic
Outline
 Vehicle Design
 Payload Design
 Recovery System
 Component Testing
 Subscale Flight
 Simulations
 Outreach
 Future Work
Recovery Method
• Two recovery systems because of payload separation
• Redundant PerfectFlite altimeters will control the rocket’s dual deployment
• Redundant R-DAS Tiny altimeters will control the payload’s dual deployment
• The payload will use streamers as a drogue to prevent shading of the solar and
UV sensors
• 5/8” tubular nylon will connect all sections of both rocket and the payload to
their respective parachutes

Rocket Drogue: 36” round Payload Drogue: Heavy Duty Streamers

Descent Rate: 64 ft/s Descent Rate: Undetermined
Rocket Main: 96” round Payload Main: 36” round
Descent Rate: 21 ft/s Descent Rate: 19 ft/s
Outline
 Vehicle Design
 Payload Design
 Recovery System
 Component Testing
 Subscale Flight
 Simulations
 Outreach
 Future Work
Wind Tunnel Testing
 Undergraduate low-speed wind tunnel on campus

 Open-circuit, max speed of 120 mph

 Test section: 12”x12” cross-section, 24” long
Experiment 1 - Fins With Varied Paint
 Fin 1 – Control Fin Combinations
 Fin 2 – Paint
 Fin 3 – Primer & Paint
 Fin 4 – Primer, Paint, & Gloss
1.6

1.4 Fin 1 - Control (No Paint)

Quadratic Curve Fit
Fin 2 - Paint
Fin 3 - Primer and Paint
1.2 Fin 4 - Primer, Paint, and Gloss

y = 0.0005*x 2 - 0.0049*x + 0.013

1
Drag (Newtons)

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Hertz
Experiment 2 – Fins With Varied Shape
 Fin 1 – Control Fin
Combinations
 Fin 5 – Rounded LE
 Fin 6 – Tapered TE
 Fin 7 – Rounded LE and Tapered TE
1.6

1.4 Fin 1 - Control (No Shaping)

Quadratic Curve Fit
Fin 5 - Rounded Leading Edge
Fin 6 - Tapered Trailing Edge
1.2
Fin 7 - Rounded Leading Edge,
and Tapered Edge
y = 0.0005*x 2 - 0.0049*x + 0.013
1
Drag (Newtons)

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Hertz
Wind Tunnel Results
• Greatest Reduction in drag from the rounded LE, tapered TE fin
• The tapered TE fin showed no drag reduction at all.
• The fins that were painted but not glossed showed higher drag reduction
that the glossed fin
• Drag Coefficient calculation assumptions:
•There is a linear relationship between compressor speed and airspeed
•The structure holding the fins produced negligible drag in addition to
the fin.
• For higher accuracy, the drag from the test structure needs to be
accounted for and the speed airspeed needs to be calibrated properly
Drag Reduction Approximate
Fin Design Vs. Control Fin (%) Coefficient of Drag
Paint 4.39% 0.3313
Paint and Primer 4.39% 0.3313
Paint, Primer, Gloss 2.05% 0.394
Rounded Leading Edge (LE) 5.26% 0.3283
Tapered Trailing Edge (TE) 0% 0.3465
Rounded LE, Tapered TE 8.48% 0.3171
Recovery System Testing
 Dual Deployment Test with PerfectFlite
 Hooked up Christmas lights as imitation igniters
 Placed altimeter inside avionics bay
 Extracted air from the tube and both Christmas bulbs lit up after air
was passed back into the tube and air pressure was restored
 The data was checked to ensure that the igniters were fired at the
correct altitude
 Subscale ejection charge testing
 The first charge needed to eject the payload at least 15 feet from
the rocket without causing overwhelming stress on any components
 The second charge needed to eject the lower airframe at least 15
feet from the rocket without causing overwhelming stress on any
components
 Three grams of black powder met the criteria of both charges, and
worked successfully in the subscale test flight
Payload Testing
 Temperature and humidity sensor testing complete
by seeing change in voltage in varying temperature
and humidity climates

 GPS and XBEE are now functioning correctly with the

software on the ground after much trial and error
Vibrations Testing
 Evaluate deformation characteristics during flight
 Are modal frequencies within gust spectrum?
 What mode shapes result from stiffness/mass distribution?

 Ground vibration test (GVT)

 Soft support was bungee
 Sine sweep from 10-1500 Hz
 2 lb force actuator
 Impact hammer
 Measured vibrations
 Laser Doppler vibrometer (LDV)
 Accelerometers

 Load cell measured force input

 Utilized subscale rocket after launch
Vibrations Testing
Experimental setup

Laser on structure

Actuator and load cell

Vibrations Testing
 Found variety of mode shapes
 Similar to 2 beams cantilevered around high stiffness near avionics bay
 Mode shapes indicated tip deflections were not large even with
pounds of force
 No additional stiffness seems required for flight safety during short
portions of flight with high dynamic pressure
Outline
 Vehicle Design
 Payload Design
 Recovery System
 Component Testing
 Subscale Flight
 Simulations
 Outreach
 Future Work

Subscale Flight
January 8th, at NEFAR
 18 mph winds, 10° launch angle
 88.5” length, 3” diameter, 8.75 pounds
 The Gorilla I235 motor was used, and the same motor retention concept for the full
scale was used
 Successful dual deployment and payload separation, rocket’s main parachute
deployed at 300 feet to avoid excessive drift
 Payload contained only a main parachute that was deployed at apogee, which
resulted in excessive drift of the payload
 The payload spun at a relatively fast rate while descending, which could be an issue
for our full scale payload which will need to take quality video and land without
turning over; a swivel bolt has been considered to mitigate this problem
 Subscale Static Test
 Created our own static test stand
 Tested the I235 to input into our MATLAB program to simulate
subscale flight

I235 Thrust Curve

80.0

70.0

60.0
Thrust (pounds)

50.0

40.0

30.0

20.0

10.0

0.0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6
Time (s)

 We also plan to test our full scale motor

Subscale Altitude Results
• Maximum altitude from the PerfectFlite was 890 feet
• The main parachute was deployed at 300, as can be seen from the
graph below
• The main chute descent rate calculated from this data was about 20
ft/s, which is in the desired range

Subscale Flight 1 - Altitude vs. Time

1000
Altitude AGL (feet)

800
600
400
200
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Time (seconds)
Outline
 Vehicle Design
 Payload Design
 Recovery System
 Component Testing
 Subscale Flight
 Simulations
 Outreach
 Future Work
Flight Simulations
MATLAB 2DOF
 MATLAB has been updated to include downrange motion
of the rocket
 Downrange motion is only affected by launch angle; no
angle of attack
 Better reflection of physical system
 Still lacks: X Position vs Y Position
6000

 Winds 5000

4000
 Parachutes
Y Position (ft)

3000

 Oscillations 2000

 Rotations 1000

-1000
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
X Position (ft)
Drag Coefficient
 Lack of knowledge of the true coefficient of drag prevents
accurate simulation. True for RockSim and MATLAB
 In order to achieve a better estimate of the drag coefficient,
the max altitude of the MATLAB 2DOF was matched to the
max alt. of the subscale launch altimeter data
Altitude vs Time
900

800

700

600 MATLAB Simulation 2DOF

Altitude (ft)

Subscale Launch Data

500
MATLAB Simulation 1DOF
400

300

200

100

0
2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Time (s)
Full Scale Max Altitude Optimization
 Ran RockSim model at various wind conditions with the L1400
 Found that, to minimize downrange drift, the launch angle into the wind should
increase by one degree for every mph of wind
 Found the additional mass needed to reach a mile depending on the launch angle
 On launch day, once launch conditions are known, the additional mass needed will
be added with modeling clay in between the top two centering rings (near the
center of gravity), then the top centering ring will be screwed in place
Launch Angle (°) Wind Condition (mph) Altitude no mass added (ft) Mass added to achieve mile (oz)
0 0 5668 26
0 5 5663 26
0 10 5647 25
5 0 5620 23.5
5 5 5589 21.5
5 10 5545 18.5
10 0 5479 14
10 5 5424 10
10 10 5356 5
15 0 5252
15 5 5178
15 10 5091
Outline
 Vehicle Design
 Payload Design
 Recovery System
 Component Testing
 Subscale Flight
 Simulations
 Outreach
 Future Work
Educational Engagement
 Presented to 150 5th graders at Hidden Oak Elementary
School for one hour
 PowerPoint presentation taught students about the basics of
rocketry, how to get involved, and how to remain safe
 Three model rockets were launched to give the students an
first-hand example of rocketry
Educational Engagement
 Presented to sixty 4th-8th graders at Millhopper Montessori
School (private school) for one hour
 Similar presentation to the one at Hidden Oak, but the
subscale rocket was also shown
 Like at Hidden Oak, three model rockets were launched in a
nearby field for the students to see
Educational Engagement
 Thank you note from
Hidden Oak Student
Educational Engagement
 Engineering-Fair
 This department wide event occurs on February 22nd and 23rd
and brings in elementary, middle, and high school students from
the local area to teach them about engineering
 The USLI team plans on sharing a booth at this fair with AIAA and
will teach students the basics of rocketry and what to do in
school to better their chances at getting into UF
 Aerospace Day
 UF AIAA chapter brings together middle school students from
around the local area to build gliders, bottle rockets, and small
model rockets
 The USLI team will provide support in model rocket building and
launching and will also launch some higher power rockets to
influence the students to pursue engineering studies. Date is
uncertain
Industry
 Presented to three SpaceX employees
 Used PowerPoint to describe the work done over the past
two years, and what the team is working towards
 Showed the subscale rocket, our static test stand, and the
data from the wind tunnel experiments

 Also plan to present to Northrop Grumman

representatives in late February
Outline
 Vehicle Design
 Payload Design
 Recovery System
 Component Testing
 Subscale Flight
 Simulations
 Outreach
 Future Work
Continue MATLAB adjustments
 Parachutes added to modify descent rate – improve
downrange displacement estimation
 MATLAB model will be extended to 3DOF
 More altimeter data collected from second subscale launch
and full scale rocket launch to adjust coefficient of drag
 Continued wind tunnel testing to compare experimental CD
values with RockSim CD values
 Compare with RockSim for various wind speeds
 RockSim and MATLAB models compare to launch data. Best-fit
determined
Payload Testing
 Sensor conversion constant verification
 Solar cell has range of 430 to 1100 nm. Test the voltage to
W/m2 conversion constant
 UV sensor voltage to W/m2 conversion constant (1.962)
 Sensor-to-RDAS configuration
 R-DAS Tiny altitude testing
 Will be tested with second subscale flight and compared
with PerfectFlite altimeter
 Video camera vibration testing
 Battery voltage check
Recovery System Testing
 Full scale ejection charge ground testing
 Need parts to be ejected at least 15 feet apart from each other
without significantly damaging components
 Payload streamer descent rate verification
 Need a descent rate between 50 and 100 ft/s
 Payload bay separation testing
 Sliding in and out of upper airframe, legs springing out
 Payload landing testing
 At a maximum allowable velocity of 22 ft/s
 With horizontal motion, rotation, and tilt angles
 R-DAS & GPS testing in Avionics Bay and Payload Bay
Static Motor Testing
 The L1400 will be tested on a different test stand
provided by our mentor, Jimmy, which is capable of such
large motors
 This will test our ignition method
 This will help verify which motor characteristics that should
be trusted- the official one provided by the NAR or the one
provided by RockSim
 The motor will also be tested with the retention device
connected, just in case it effects the exhaust flow at all
 UF Rocket Team Timeline
Avionics Testing Nov 19-Dec 8
Subscale rocket construction Nov 19-Jan 7
Presentation to Middle School Nov 30
Presentation to Elementary School Dec 2
Recovery Testing Jan 4-Jan 7
Subscale Launch 1 Jan 8
Flight Analysis 1 Jan 8-Jan 24
Full Scale construction Jan 9-Feb 11
Payload bay construction Jan 9-Mar 11
Sensor Testing Jan 9-Mar 11
CDR due Jan 24
Subscale Launch 2 Feb 12
Flight Analysis 2 Feb 12-Mar 12
Static Motor Testing Feb 13-Feb27
Payload bay Ejection Testing Feb 13-Mar 11
Full Scale Launch 1 Mar 12
Full Scale Launch 2 Mar 19
Flight Analysis 3 Mar 12-Mar 21
FRR due Mar 21
Travel to Huntsville Apr 13
Launch Day Apr 16
PLAR Due May 9
Questions?