This is a collective page to informally document what we learn from preliminary research.
General guidelines:
What type of device (more specific than just “thermocouple”)?
What grade of device (on a range from hobby/DIY - industrial grade)
How do we use the device (power, signal connections, press a button, etc.)
How/where do we mount the device (epoxy, thermal tape, paste, frame, etc.)
What can go wrong with mounting and ways around it
EX: routing thermocouples in nose cone requires for wire to run into the airframe to reach the DAQ system, jeopardizing deployment of the nose cone
Potential solutions: use special wires that break during deployment, embed copper contacts into the airframe/nose cone shoulder
Based on the info collected above, what are the common price ranges?
Can you list some potential sensor candidates or suppliers? If so, please do.
Assignments:
Thermal - Eric & Juan
Vibration - Yasu
Chute/Airframe loads - Joanna & Jay
Flutter - Yasu
Thermal (Eric + Juan)
Omega's 5 Points:
1. Determine the application where the thermocouple will be used
2. Analyze the temperature ranges the thermocouple will be exposed to
3. Consider any chemical resistance needed for the thermocouple or sheath material
4. Evaluate the need of abrasion and vibration resistance
5. List any installation requirements
Sheath Considerations (for sheated thermocouples)
Other Notes:
https://www.epj-conferences.org/articles/epjconf/pdf/2017/12/epjconf_efm2017_02075.pdf
Calibration is key
Temperature Calibration Uncertainty detailed in Guide to exp. Of Uncertainty in Measurement
“Intrinsic Thermocouples” might give us better spatial resolution (microtips)
https://www.epj-conferences.org/articles/epjconf/pdf/2017/12/epjconf_efm2017_02075.pdf
Seebeck effect
G,C,D are for high temp, K for VERY high temp
NiCr-NiAl used in experiment is oxidation proof, resistant to higher temps, reducing atmosphere, and sulphur compounds
“The thermocouple-based method has some limitations. One of the major problems is attaching a thermocouple to the surface to be measured. Incorrect bonding may cause the device to show a temperature lower than the actual one. When a thermocouple is used to measure the temperature of an element in a high frequency radio circuit, it may change the electrical characteristics of that circuit. A thermocouple fixed to a small electronic element may be responsible for the removal of heat from the element. As a result, the temperature displayed is lower than the actual temperature, i.e. one measured before the thermocouple was attached. Decalibration may lead to an error in measurement; it may change the electrical characteristics, which will make the reading inaccurate. Finally, an open thermocouple junction may also cause errors in temperature measurement [19]. "
Possibly add IR Thermal camera for data fusion
Vibration (Yasu)
ceramic piezoelectric sensor/ accelerometer
single axis / triaxial accelerometer
Engineer’s guide to accurate sensor measurements: http://download.ni.com/evaluation/daq/25188_Sensor_WhitePaper_IA.pdf
what’s the effect of the constant acceleration/deceleration of the rocket on the sensors?
triaxial, +-500g, 2~7000Hz model(356B21): $1,125
figure: overview of triaxial accelerometers from NI (from white paper)
figure: dimensions of 356B21 accelerometer(from its product drawing, units in inches)
https://www.popsci.com/how-little-vibrations-break-big-rockets interesting article on the effect of vibration on rockets (but liquid-fueled rockets, so shouldn’t be a concern for us)
causes of vibration:
thrust oscillation
noise(pressure waves) from motor
explosive bolts
fluid flow phenomena
vibration mode of rocket
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-67208-8_34 Shock and Vibration Characteristic of Solid Rocket Vehicles
1979 paper from Japan
piezo vibration meters, flat response up to 2kHz
Falcon 9 User's Guide - SpaceXhttps://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/falcon_9_users_guide_rev_2.0.pdf Falcon 9 User’s Guide
(for SpaceX customers)
shock loads during flight:(p.26)
release of launch vehicle hold-down at liftoff
stage separation
(fairing deployment, spacecraft separation)
2018/09/30
acceleration about 90m/s2(~9g) for 2012 rocket -> must consider range of accelerometer
±200g range
up to 1000Hz(z axis), 1300Hz(x,y axes)
“cross-axis compensation”: ±1.4%: how much perpendicular acceleration is coupled to signal (https://www.mouser.com/pdfdocs/an32_crossaxis_compensation.PDF)
sensitivity: 5.8~7.2mV/g -> 0.59~.73mV/(m/s2) (need calibration?)
Arduino’s analogRead() is 10 bits, so as a result 4.8mV/unit, 6.5~8.1(m/s2)/unit
$25
±16g, output resolution 13 bits
up to 3200Hz sampling
1/32 = 0.031g/bit = 0.3 (m/ss)/bit
$18
Chute (Jay + Joanna)
Load testing: http://www.futek.com/product.aspx?t=load
Need to know what kind of weight this thing needs to take: too much capacity implies too little precision
Upper bound 2000 lbs
Type of cell / how to install
https://sensor-con.en.alibaba.com/productgrouplist-803400380/Load_Cell.html?spm=a2700.icbuShop.0.0.120b4eb17iN3Gv cheap load cells from Shenzhen
These look like they’ll work, as long as we select a generous/correct mass range. Doesn’t look like we have a huge precision loss as the mass range increases.
From NASA Langley case file, they had problems with lead wire breakage- we should make sure we prepare for this problem
https://www.omega.com/prodinfo/strain-gauges.html
Pretty good website, introduces different types of strain gauges and gives recommendations
Karma strain gauges are good for use over wide temperature ranges
Around $50-60 from Omega
http://www.ni.com/white-paper/3642/en/
Another really good site talking about different strain gauges
https://www.digikey.com/products/en/sensors-transducers/strain-gauges/559
Lots of strain gauges here, strain range goes from .5% - 1.5%, resistance tolerances range from .15% to 30%
-limit output of load cell to input of teensy
-size and weight and price (total budget is $2000)
Fin (Yasu)
http://web.mit.edu/rocketteam/www/usli/2011-12/MIT%20RT%20CDR%202012.pdf
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhwLojNerMU dope video demonstrating flutter
use GoPro?
GoPro Hero 7 black: $399
camera angle may be a problem, if you want to look at the fins
mirrorssss
A Historical Overview of Flight Flutter Testing - Wiredhttps://www.wired.com/images_blogs/autopia/2010/.../19960004074_1996104074.pd… A Historical Overview of Flight Flutter Testing
1995 NASA paper about Flutters
structurally ok?
2018/09/30
2012 rocket used a Casio digital camera
12.75MP photos
224x160 480fps
176g
GoPro Hero 7 Black
12MP photos
1080p 240fps
flutter frequency was about 35.3Hz for 2012 rocket (CDR 2012 p.59)
>70 fps camera required