Subscribe to rss feed

Avionics mounting | Other subsystems | Forum

 
You must be logged in to post user permissions login Login register Register


Register? | Lost Your Password?

Search Forums:


searchicon 






Minimum search word length is 3 characters – Maximum search word length is 84 characters
Wildcard Usage:
*  matches any number of characters    %  matches exactly one character

topic

Avionics mounting

print
small tagNo Tags
UserPost

8:03 am
July 5, 2010


Luke Maurits

Adelaide, Australia

Admin

posts 1483

offline
link
print
1
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

I was reading the page about the amateur rocket Defiance, which is a N2O/PE hybrid like OHKLA, and saw that there's a moderate amount of detail on the avionics mounting system.  If you Ctrl-F for the phrase "It's time to start thinking about the gps telemetry system" you'll find the section I'm talking about.  Basically the electronics are mounted on a "sled" which slides into a tubular container which is inserted into the nose cone.  The avionics are put here rather than elsewhere because the nosecone is made of foam and fibreglass and hence is RF-transparent, whereas the rocket body is aluminium, which is not.  These are probably the sorts of materials we are likely to end up using and so I imagine we'll be in more or less the same boat.

This seems like a common approach.  This very detailed paper on the current Project Daedalus design shows them using a similarly shaped sled, except it's larger and made of aluminium rather than wood (due to the much higher dynamic loads of subortibal flight).

Can anybody see any problem with us basically using the same approach as in Defiance, except possibly with a metal rather than wooden sled?

Main CLLARE workgroups: Mission Planning, Navigation and Guidance. I do maths, physics, C, Python and Java.

10:40 pm
July 5, 2010


joe.haydu

Member

posts 16

offline
link
print
2
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

It seems like a convenient way to mount everything, so I'm all for using a similar design for our avionics package. I didn't see the weight of the whole sled assembly on their site, but it doesn't look too heavy, although it might be over the 1kg goal we are shooting for. I'm sure we can do some creative tweaks if need be.

11:36 pm
July 5, 2010


Luke Maurits

Adelaide, Australia

Admin

posts 1483

offline
link
print
3
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

I agree that it doesn't look particularly massive.  The 1kg thing on the other thread was more of a rough estimate as part of our mass model than a strict upper limit.  Obviously if we could get it under 1 kg that would be awesome, but really as long as it was under, say, 5, I'd be relatively content.  That should be easily achievable.

Main CLLARE workgroups: Mission Planning, Navigation and Guidance. I do maths, physics, C, Python and Java.

small tagNo Tags

About the CSTART – Collaborative Space Travel and Research Team Forum

Forum Timezone: UTC -6

Most Users Ever Online: 59

Currently Online:
8 Guests

Currently Browsing this Topic:
1 Guest

Forum Stats:

Groups: 4
Forums: 36
Topics: 512
Posts: 3809

Membership:

There are 1133 Members

There are 2 Admins

Top Posters:

Rocket-To-The-Moon – 685
brmj – 402
rpulkrabek – 348
DenisG – 69
antinode – 64
J. Simmons – 46

Recent New Members: jmwright, uhwuggawuh, seikialice88, bishvabis, alijayadv, harris

Administrators: Luke Maurits (1483 Posts), Rizwan (170 Posts)



 
share save 120 16