Design a 100 lb search and rescue (S&R) Satellite into a circular Sun Synchronous orbit. The desired altitude is 165 km. The minimum orbital lifetime is 6 months to maximize the system's usefulness. The launch facilities at Poker Flat Research Range limit the total system mass to be less than 10,000 kg. Furthermore, we limit ourselves to environmentally friendly components and propellants.

1. Rapid Response Launcher System
(RRLS)

2. Ramirez, Uriel
Johnson, Lindani
Gonzalez, Austin
Solomon-Williams, Cordarryl M.
Smith, Joseph
Knill, Christian

3. Problem Statement
A rocket system to set a network of Search & Rescue Satellites?

4. “
“In light of the MH 370 tragedy in the spring of 2014,
an interest has arisen to investigate the feasibility of
a rapid response launcher system for a constellation
of simple, lightweight search satellites with a
minimum orbital lifetime of 6 months.”

5. Payload - 100lb S&R Satellite
Orbit - Circular Sun Synchronous at an altitude of 165 km
Launch Location - Poker Flat Research Range, AK
65.1167° N Lat, 147.4612° W Lon, 436.7 m above sea level
Mission Requirements

6. Extraneous Requirements
Environmentally Friendly Propellant System
Total system weight less than 10,000kg
Minimum orbital lifetime 6 months

7. Missing Planes
Poker Flat Research Range, AK
MH 370

8. Orbital Elements from STK
Period 5267.32 sec
SemiMajor Axis 6543.14 km
Eccencenity 9.33702 e-018
Inclination 96.2587 deg
Argument of Perigee 0 deg
True Anomaly 359.924 deg
Ascending Node 126.994 deg

9. Satellite Tool Kit Simulation Verification
(2D Graphic of Earth)

10. Satellite Tool Kit Simulation Verification
(3D Graphic of Earth)

11. Preliminary Design?

12. ΔV Design 1
Burnout Velocity -
Velocity of Launch site -

13. ΔV Design 2
Velocity Needed -
Design Velocity -
Assuming losses of 0.9km/s

14. Three stages:
Stage 1 will produce a ΔV = 3.5 km/s
Stage 2 will produce a ΔV = 3.5 km/s
Stage 3 will produce a ΔV = 2.25 km/s
Orbit Design
Source: Delta II Payload Planners Guide December 2006

15. Three Stage Design
Pros
◇ Reasonable ISP will
meet our needs
◇ Better finert values
Cons
◇ More complicated due
to more staging
◇ Larger inert mass

16. System Level
Performance?

17. Propellant Choice

18. Choosing H202 and
HTPB allowed us to
have a reasonable
ISP and good finert
that will not be
technologically
challenging
F2/H2 and O2/H2 had
a large ISP, but too
toxic.
O2/RP-1- Needed
oxygen tanks
Propellant Trade Offs

19. An initial mass of about 5500
kg, ISP of 285s and finert of
0.28 was chosen.
The ISP of 285 allowed us to
account for pressure losses in
our system with the chosen
propellant.
Preliminary Sizing: Stage 1

20. Helium pressurizes the propellant
tanks to force the fuel and
oxidizer tanks to the combustion
chamber
Pros:
◇ Simple, due to less
components
◇ Easy to maintain
Cons:
◇ Extra weight added because
of the pressurant tanks
Pressure-fed engine

21. Injector in a liquid rocket engine mixes the
fuel with the oxidizer to produce efficient
and stable combustion
This figure shows an injector designed with
propellant valves (remote control)
Injector

22. Injector Types

23. AUTOCAD DRAWING
Nozzle efficiency 97 %
Nozzle Sizes

24. Our design conditions were best met by
ablative cooling
The ablative material absorbs the heat as it
ablates
Cooling Type

25. Pros:
◇ Simple
◇ Capable of stopping
and restarting the
engine, as long there is
ablative material left
Cons:
◇ Increase of weight
◇ Limited life in the
engine (usually less
than 2000 seconds)
Typical ablative materials: Silica, Quartz,
or Carbon Cloth and resin composites
Cooling Type Trade offs

26. Material Density (kg/m3) Ultimate Tensile
Strength (GPa)
Specific Ultimate
Tensile Strength
(Gpa/(kg/m3))
2219 Aluminum 2800 0.413 15.04
Titanium 4460 1.23 28.81
4130 Steel 7830 0.892 11.23
Graphite 1550 0.895 58.88
SOURCE: Space Propulsion Analysis and Design, Humble, Henry, and Larson
Pressure Tank Material

27. Titanium has the best
mechanical properties,
but is difficult to work
with and extremely
expensive.
Steel is cheap and easy
to work with, but does
not have the properties
required for our design.
Composites meet the
property requirements
and are lightweight.
Our rocket cost
increases, within
reason.
Material Trade
offs
Due to the addition of the pressurant tanks, composite
materials were chosen to minimize the mass and
therefore increase the ΔV
This increased the cost of our rocket.

28. Final Predicted Design
Results?

29. ISP (s)
(from
RPA
code)
Initial
Mass (kg)
Propellant
Mass (kg)
Thrust
(kN)
Burn time
(s)
ΔV (m/s)
(Actual)
Stage 1 287 5550 3904 2698 4 3348
Stage 2 287 900 637 53 33 3317
Stage 3 287 200 109 12 26 2798
Total 9463
The actual ΔV, considering all the actual masses, is 2.5% bigger than
design.
Final Predicted Results

30. Altitude Simulation

31. Velocity Simulation

32. Mass Simulation

33. Conclusion
Theoretically, it is feasible.?

34. Justifications
1. Small propulsion
system to achieve an
orbit
2. Uses current
technologies proven to
work
3. Performs a
meaningful and
desirable task

35. THE END