8 vistas

Cargado por Anonymous swEs7SEg

inertia

- jntu aeronautical engineering R05 Syllabus Book
- In Vitro Toxicity of Aluminum
- Applied Mechanics and Graphic Statics Questions Answers
- Stiffening Rings
- Maximum Shear Stress in a Rectangular Cross Section
- Word Problem Examples
- WARNING AND DISCLAIMER.docx
- PMR Trial 2010 Math Q&A (Swk)
- E5 - Double Integrals I
- Launch Vehicle Project
- Nr 10105 Engineering Mechanics
- 3
- AISC en mm
- Zak s. Systems & Control_errata
- 1. Dynamic Simulation of Hydraulic Excavators With
- SAGOT
- Chapter 2 - Dimensioning
- Appendix C4
- Capitolul 3 - Dinamica
- 2006CM

Está en la página 1de 12

A.5.2.4.1 Elementary Theory

We calculate inertia matrices for each launch vehicle. Dynamics and Controls need these

matrices to design their controller to reasonable accuracy. To find these matrices for most

vehicles, nine separate values must be obtained. These values are: three moments of

inertia and six products of inertia. Figure A.5.2.4.1.1 displays the typical inertia matrix

that is required, along with a visual representation of the coordinate system we used.

I xx

I xy

I xz

I xy

I yy

I yz

I xz

I yz

I zz

(Brandon White)

The coordinate system we chose for the launch vehicle is the following: the z-direction is

along the length of the vehicle, while the x-direction and y-direction are along two

arbitrary radial directions. For the particular configuration of the launch vehicle, a crucial

assumption is made that all products of inertia are equal to zero. This assumption is valid

when the launch vehicle is symmetric about the axis of rotation. Our launch vehicle is

theoretically symmetric in the z-direction, which is the axis of rotation. However, due to

2

the fact that actual components of the vehicle will not be symmetric about any axis, this

A.5.2.4 Inertia Matrices

creates inaccuracies in our calculations. In Fig. A.5.2.4.1.2, the simplified inertia matrix

for use in final design is shown.

I xx

0

0

I yy

0

0

0

I zz

(Brandon White)

Another benefit to having a launch vehicle with a circular cross section is that the

moments of inertia in the x-direction and y-direction are going to be the same. The

theory employed by the team is to separate the entire launch vehicle into individual

components, find the moments of inertia for each component, and then sum the inertias

together to get the total moments of inertia for the launch vehicle.

The components of the launch vehicle that are used in inertia calculations are

summarized in table A.5.2.4.1.1.

Table A.5.2.4.1.1 Launch Vehicle Components and Approximate Shapes

Component

Nose Cone

Oxidizer Tanks

Fuel Tanks

Solid Fuel Casings

LITVC

Pressurant Tank

Inter-Stage Skirts

Propellant

Payload

Avionics 1st and 2nd Stage

Avionics 3rd Stage

Engine Nozzle

Shape

Hollow Cone

Hollow Cylinders with End Plates

Hollow Cylinders with End Plates

Hollow Cylinders

Point Mass

Hollow Cylinders with End Plates

Truncated Hollow Cones

Solid Cylinders

Point Mass

Truncated Hollow Cones

Point Mass

Truncated Hollow Cone

A.5.2.4.2.1 Cylinders

For the components that are approximated as cylinders, moments of inertia are found

using Eqs.A.5.2.4.2.1.1 through A.5.2.4.2.1.5.

Hollow Cylinders:

I zz

1

M Ro2 Ri2

2

(A.5.2.4.2.1.1)

where M is the total mass of the component (kg), Ro is the outer radius of the component (m), and Ri is the

inner radius of the component (m).

For the radial moments of inertia, the parallel axis theorem is employed to translate the

moment of inertia from the top of the component to the center of mass of the launch

vehicle.

I xx I yy

1

M 3Ro2 3Ri2 l 2 Mx 2

12

(A.5.2.4.2.1.2)

4

where M is the total mass of the component (kg), Ro is the outer radius of the component (m), Ri is the inner

radius of the component (m), l is the approximate length of component (m), and x is the distance from top

of component to the launch vehicle center of mass (m).

The approximate length of each component is found because many times the propellant

tanks are found to have hemispherical ends. To make calculations easier the tanks are

approximated, from table A.5.2.4.1.1, as hollow cylinders with end plates.

The

A.5.2.4.2.1.1 visually explains this approximation. For solid rocket motor casings, this

approximation is not used because the casing is designed as a hollow cylinder with square

ends.

R

2R/

Actual

Approximate

(Brandon White)

l L

4R

(A.5.2.4.2.1.3)

where L is the total length of the cylindrical component (kg), and R is the radius of the component (m).

Solid Cylinders:

I zz

(A.5.2.4.2.1.4)

1

MR 2

2

where M is the total mass of the component (kg), R is the Radius of the component (m).

(A.5.2.4.2.1.5)

1

1

l R 2 Mx 2

4

3

I xx I yy M

where M is the total mass of the component (kg), R is the radius of the component (m), l is the approximate

length of component (m), and x is the distance from top of component to the launch vehicle center of mass

(m).

For cylinders that are designed with hemispherical ends, the approximate values for

principal moments of inertia were found for a square cylinder with cylindrical plates on

each end. In the axial direction, Eqn. A.5.2.4.2.2.1 is used. Equation A.5.2.4.2.2.2 is the

moment of inertia in the radial direction.

I zz

(A.5.2.4.2.2.1)

1

1

MR 2 MR 2

2

2

where M is the total mass of the component (kg), R is the Radius of the component (m).

I xx I yy

1

1

_

MR 2 Mx 2 MR 2 M x

4

4

(A.5.2.4.2.2.2)

where M is the total mass of the end plate (kg), R is the radius of the end plate (m), x is the distance from

top of top end plate to the launch vehicle center of mass (m), and

A5.4.2.2.3 Cones

The principal moments of inertia for the nose cone are found by subtracting a small solid

cone from a larger solid cone. Figure A.5.2.4.2.3.1 shows this method.

(Brandon White)

I zz

3

MR 2

10

(A.5.2.4.2.3.1)

where M is the total mass of the component (kg), R is the Radius of the component (m).

3 2 3 2

L

R

20

5

I xx I yy M

(A.5.2.4.2.3.2)

where M is the total mass of the component (kg), R is the radius of the component (m), L is the vertical

length of the component(m).

At first glance, this method appears very simple. However, the only properties of the

nose cone that is known are the vertical length, thickness, outer radius, mass and material.

To use the solid cone equations, both the larger and smaller solid cones had to be created

with these properties. The volumes of each solid cone are found and associated with a

mass using the material density. These are the masses used in Eqns. A.5.2.4.2.3.1 and

A.5.2.4.2.3.2. Knowing the thickness of the material provides enough information for the

vertical length and radius of the smaller solid cone (Ex. The length of the smaller cone is

the length of the cone minus the thickness of the cone). The difference between the axial

moments of inertia for the two solid cones is the approximate axial moment of inertia for

the hollow cone. For the radial moment of inertia, the parallel axis theorem must be

included after finding the difference between the two solid cones. So, the radial moments

of inertia are the difference of the two calculations added to the product of the mass of the

nose cone and the square of the distance between the top of the nose cone and the vehicle

center of mass.

Certain components of the launch vehicle had to be approximated as truncated hollow

cones. To find the associated moments of inertia, the same method as for hollow cones is

used with an additional step. After finding a large hollow cone, a smaller hollow cone

was subtracted off the top, resulting in the truncated hollow cone approximation. Figure

A.5.2.4.2.4.1 visually depicts this.

(Brandon White)

Components of the launch vehicle with complete unknown geometry had to be

approximated as point masses. The only inertia property known about the payload

satellite, LITVC, and third stage avionics is the mass. Without any other information we

were hamstrung into making the decision to approximate them as point masses.

Fortunately, all of these components are very small in comparison to the rest of the

launch vehicle. This approximation results in small inaccuracies in final inertia values,

but it must be announced that this approximation does cause inaccuracies. Equations

A.5.2.4.2.5.1 and A.5.2.4.2.5.2 are used for each point mass component.

I zz 0

I xx I yy Mx 2

(A.5.2.4.2.5.1)

(A.5.2.4.2.5.2)

where M is the total mass of the component (kg), x is the distance from component to the launch vehicle

center of mass (m).

The inertia model went through four central design phases, with each achieving more

complexity than the phase preceding it. Phase I, shown in Fig. A.5.2.4.3.1, was very

basic. The model included a single propellant tank in each stage, external skin to the

propellant tanks, the propellant itself, and the nose cone. As much as we would have

liked to stop there, we knew the final launch vehicle design would not be very close to

this inertia design.

P

R

O

P

P

R

O

P

PROP

(Brandon White)

Phase II of the math model design incorporated three crucial design features. The first of

which was that THERE IS NO SKIN. There is no external skin wrapped around the

propellant tanks, the outer walls of the launch vehicle (for the most part) are the

propellant tank walls. Phase II also includes both oxidizer and fuel tanks in each stage,

rather than just one propellant tank. At this juncture in design, the team was still

considering cryogenic and storable propellants, which required more than one tank per

stage. Lastly, inter-stage skirts were added between stages. Figure A.5.2.4.3.2 represents

the conceptual launch vehicle design for Phase II.

O

F

O

F

O

F

(Brandon White)

Phase III was designed in accordance to final launch vehicle design. With the second and

third stages having solid rocket motors, the tanks were reverted back to only one tank in

those stages. For the first stage a hybrid motor was selected, which resulted in needing

approximations for a pressurant tank and oxidizer tank in addition to the solid propellant

needed for the hybrid motor. Engine nozzles were also included for each stage. Phase III

also included the possibility of having the inter-stage skirts being comprised of an angled

section and a straight section.

Phase III (seen in Fig. A.5.2.4.3.3) marked the first time that the payload and avionics

were included in the inertia approximation. The payload was approximated as a solid

cylinder inside the nose cone, with dimensions scaled down appropriately to fit. We

knew that the avionics were going to be centrally based in the second stage, so they were

approximated as a solid cylinder inside the inter-stage skirt between the second and third

stage.

10

Payload

S

Skirt

S

O

L

I

D

Skirt

Pressurant

Tank

Oxidizer

Tank

S

O

L

I

D

(Brandon White)

Phase IV marked the final inertia design that was actually used in final calculations. In

this configuration, LITVC is included as a point mass located at the base of the stage

nozzle, the payload and avionics in the third stage are point masses at the base of the nose

cone, and avionics in the first and second stages are truncated hollow cones that are wall

mounted to the inter-stage skirts. Figure A.5.2.4.3.4 displays Phase IV launch vehicle

configuration.

Payload,

Avionics

S

Avionics

Skirt

S

O

L

I

D

LITVC

Avionics

Skirt

Pressurant

Tank

Oxidizer

Tank

S

O

L

I

D

11

(Brandon White)

The purpose of the inertia math model is to provide the Dynamics & Controls group with

inertia matrices at certain time instances during flight. The values that D&C requires are

the matrices before and after propellant burn of each stage. Figure A.5.2.4.4.1 provides

these inertia matrices for the 200g payload. Figure A.5.2.4.4.2 provides these inertia

matrices for the 1kg payload. Figure A.5.2.4.4.3 provides these inertia matrices for the

5kg payload. All values are in kgm2.

0

0

25551

0

25551 0

0

0

751

First Stage,

Full 0

0

1417

0

0

1417 0

0

28

446

0

0

2766

0

2766 0

0

0

59

0

0.44

0

4.83 0

0 4.83

0

0 0.104

0

19795

0

19795

0

0

Second Stage,

Full

First Stage,

Empty0

0

19

Second Stage,

Empty

19

0

Third Stage,

Empty

(Brandon White)

0

0

13567

0 13567 0

0

0

381

First Stage,

Full 0

0

684

684 0

0 12.5

Second Stage,

Empty

0

10814

0 10814

233

First Stage,

25 0

0

Empty

25

0

1243 0

0 1243

0

0.60

25.6

Second Stage,

Full

6.75 0

0

6.75 0

0 0.14

Third Stage,

Empty

(Brandon White)

12

0

0

108065

0

108065 0

0

0

3632

First Stage,

Full 0

0

3326

0

0

3326 0

0

68

Second Stage,

Empty

0

76990

0

76990

1909

First Stage,

Empty

20 0

0

0

0

0

0

6663

0

6663 0

0

0

150

Second Stage,

Full

8.97

0

0

20

0

0 0.46

0

0

0

0.11

Third Stage,

Empty

(Brandon White)

8.97

0

- jntu aeronautical engineering R05 Syllabus BookCargado porARUN.A.J NAIR
- In Vitro Toxicity of AluminumCargado porlivethelife
- Applied Mechanics and Graphic Statics Questions AnswersCargado porMuhammadIqbalMughal
- Stiffening RingsCargado porDaniel L. Lievano
- Maximum Shear Stress in a Rectangular Cross SectionCargado porbmsschlotterbeck
- Word Problem ExamplesCargado porselventhira
- WARNING AND DISCLAIMER.docxCargado porA Ahmed
- PMR Trial 2010 Math Q&A (Swk)Cargado porSimPor
- E5 - Double Integrals ICargado porRaven Fame Tupa
- Launch Vehicle ProjectCargado porSabik Roauf Chowdhury
- Nr 10105 Engineering MechanicsCargado porSrinivasa Rao G
- 3Cargado porkkkraja
- AISC en mmCargado porclon_780
- Zak s. Systems & Control_errataCargado porTung Nguyen
- 1. Dynamic Simulation of Hydraulic Excavators WithCargado porVesna Jovanovic
- SAGOTCargado porAldrin Van Sta Maria
- Chapter 2 - DimensioningCargado porsaded05
- Appendix C4Cargado porAliceAlormenu
- Capitolul 3 - DinamicaCargado porAmelia Si Zeinel
- 2006CMCargado porFiore Carpino
- Or 10155 Engineering MechanicsCargado porVijay Prakash
- 120701 Perpendicular It yCargado porprasanthme34
- lec38Cargado pormanivith
- Engg Drawing June 2011regularCargado porsimalaravi
- GetTRDocCargado porvnyenugula
- ch3Cargado porCuriosoCuriosoCurioso
- ACP_PS4(1).pdfCargado porRyan Travers
- Bsc Physics Curriculum and Syllabus Cbcs 2018-19Cargado porRajalearn1 Ramlearn1
- ma102_spring2011_assignment5Cargado porirlmaks
- mensurationCargado porRavi Pratap

- Manufacturing ProcessesCargado porVinod
- Fatigue Analyses of Offshore StructuresCargado porgeeawhiz55
- Probabilistic Fatigue Crack Growth AnalysisCargado porAnonymous swEs7SEg
- Quick Strip TheoryCargado porAnonymous swEs7SEg
- Hydromechanics ExercisesCargado porPaolo Bertolli
- Program Scores-ship Structural Response in WavesCargado porAnonymous swEs7SEg
- Strip Theory of Ship MotionsCargado porAnonymous swEs7SEg
- Ctod for Growing CrackCargado porAnonymous swEs7SEg
- Integral G KCargado porAnonymous swEs7SEg
- FaquinhaCargado porAnonymous swEs7SEg
- 2014 Continuum Mechanics FinalCargado porAnonymous swEs7SEg
- pdstrip_documentation.pdfCargado porAnonymous swEs7SEg
- Rationally-Based Fatigue Design of Tankers (Owen Hughes and Paul FranklinCargado porKelvin Xu
- fillet weld size calculation.pdfCargado porAnonymous swEs7SEg
- PTC13 Paredes WierzCargado porAnonymous swEs7SEg
- Handling End-Of-File_ the READ Statement RevisitedCargado porAnonymous swEs7SEg
- J-Q Characterization of Propagating Cracks.1023_A-1007558400880Cargado porAnonymous swEs7SEg
- Manual Wamit 6.2Cargado porrbmehler
- PPTCargado porAnonymous swEs7SEg
- Fatigue Damage Evalution SSCCCargado porAnonymous swEs7SEg
- IPVP-D-13-00192Cargado porAnonymous swEs7SEg
- Bu ClinkCargado porAnonymous swEs7SEg
- ch01Cargado porCarlos Saenz Miranda
- Envelope Critical Crack SizeCargado porAnonymous swEs7SEg
- Finite Element Modeling of Vibration of BeamsCargado porAnonymous swEs7SEg
- Hutchinson NonLinear FractureMechanicsCargado porAnonymous swEs7SEg
- FRACTURE & FATIGUE - Advanced Fracture Mechanics - O'Dowd (Notes)Cargado pormanmathk

- SPM 2010 Paper 2Cargado porkysim
- 54676499-DC-Error-Correcting-Codes.pptCargado porSingamaneni Ashokkumar
- 4923a374Cargado porXagust
- B.Tech_1st_&_2nd_SemCargado porPromila Jangra
- CE Engineering MathematicsCargado porphanirajinish
- Main Matter LatestCargado porSushant Shukla
- Architecture_syllabus.pdfCargado portydger
- Efficient Calculation of the Reed-muller Form by Means of the Walsh TransformCargado porWalace Leal
- Optimal Pilot Matrix Design for Training- Based Channel Estimation in MIMO CommunicationsCargado porJournal of Telecommunications
- Clausner&Croft ConstrualsCargado porusamaknight
- venkatesanCargado porPrabhu Jaysus
- D. S. Chandrasekharaiah and Lokenath Debnath (Auth.)-Continuum Mechanics-Elsevier Inc, Academic Press (1994)Cargado poramit yadav
- MMAE 501 Book Matrices.pdfCargado porAshley Bill
- Lect 5 Reduction of Multiple Subsystems1Cargado porSśēmǾǿ Ŕämáďañ
- Symmetric Block Cipher Based on s BoxesCargado porchethan
- Lecture6-filled_out (2).pdfCargado porShanay Thakkar
- Mathematical ModelsCargado porJubi Singh
- Chapter 8 - Two Dimensional ArraysCargado porAhmadali
- EE6501 Power System AnalysisCargado porNadeem Khalid
- Butler MilCargado porJohn Erhinyo
- Equation EditorCargado porSreedhar Babu
- Flutter 21Cargado porAakriti Tripathi
- 11. IJECE -Performance Improvements - Raad FarhoodCargado poriaset123
- Chapter 5Cargado porSingh Karan
- FEM Lecture 2bCargado porAhmed Imran Syed
- lab1Cargado porcicosz
- TechRef_CableSystemCargado porAlonso Martí Portella
- Seat Racing Presented by Duncan HollandCargado porRowperfect UK
- Laws of MatricesCargado porRahul Ghadse
- sgbau syllabusCargado porRavishankar Kankale