Small Satellite Launch Vehicle Design

Our design will address practical issues for future space missions as it was optimized for an increase in performance with a reduction in price, structure, and mass. With more affordable costs, countries are able to increase the number of payloads or structures to deliver into orbit for an increase in services or space exploration provided on Earth.

Some of the factors that heavily contribute to our design innovation are the fact that our designed rocket is far more efficient in terms of cost and fuel efficiency. Our design was intended to carry a 50 kg payload to orbit. We decided to innovate our design in a way that would still allow us to accomplish a sun-synchronous orbit around the earth while still being able to carry out our initial goal. This allowed us to use less material as well as expend less fuel for the same end result.

In terms of effectiveness, we have thoroughly researched and simulated various scenarios to determine the most optimal flight performance. The engineering analysis involved simulating an ideal moment controller in order to maintain a stable orbit despite continuously changing the rocket parameters due to our ongoing optimization. 

By finding standardized nomenclature and comparing it to our software, we have found a way to assert validation and verification practices in our simulations. This ensures that we have an appropriate solution with confidence that it will work and perform as expected. 
The first step in verifying our design is confirming that the software MAPLEAF we were using produced accurate flight data results. We conducted this validation using the Falcon 1 as it is an existing rocket with clearly defined specifications and similar capabilities to what our sponsor is seeking.  We specifically examined the change in velocity MAPLEAF computed from its simulation compared to theoretical flight data that was computed using the Tsiolkovsky rocket equation for the change in velocity. In the results, it was determined that MAPLEAF did produce accurate feedback for flight data.

The change in velocity for stage 1 and stage 2 was drastically different between the simulation and our calculations as seen in the left table. This is likely due to frictional and gravitational effects. The max changes in speed computed in MAPLEAF are smaller than the theoretical calculations from the rocket equation (where gravity is not considered).

The next stage of software verification was examining the orbit simulations that MAPLEAF produced. Going back to Falcon 1, the average velocity for this orbit was 7687 m/s with a standard deviation of 13.5 m/s. Using Excel we calculated the theoretical orbital velocity at 372 km to be 7688 m/s which is accurate to the simulation results and further verifies the validity of using MAPLEAF for running simulations.

After the software was validated we focused on different prototypes to evaluate. There were a total of 2 prototypes created: starting with the M1-Ver.1, This version of our rocket design was used as a test model to see if a smaller model could successfully orbit which we were able to achieve. 

The M1-Ver. 3 is the next prototype. This version came after our chosen design (M1-Ver. 2) and was initially used to try and achieve a higher sun-synchronous orbit but after some simulations, we found that if we wanted to achieve an orbit in the typical 600-800 km range we needed more fuel which would have increased costs so we decided to aim for a lower sun-synchronous orbit of 274 km. 

No longer needing more fuel we went back to M1 Ver.2 which was originally made to be similar in weight to the Electron rocket to test how small we can make our rocket while still being able to reach our orbit goals. 

SOLIDWORKS software was utilized to get the weight estimations for the rocket. The weight estimation results of the structural components are shown in this table. Version 1 and 3 are the prototypes and Version 2 is the final design. From this table, version 2 is the lightest. A note to add would be that these weight estimation results pertain to the shell of the rocket, and do not include any internal components such as payload attachments or engine components as we obtained those parameters from external sources. The material used in the final rocket design is Aluminum Alloy Plate 2219, we chose this material because it costs less and has a good balance of strength and low weight which makes it a great fit for our rocket. Also being an alloy it has good properties such as stress corrosion cracking resistance and high tensile strength[6].

This design can be considered a very feasible way to launch an increased number of payloads into space since it accomplishes both the sun-synchronous goal as well as the goal of being able to carry a 50 kg payload while being considerably less expensive with the same amount of orbit stability that would be seen in other traditional launch vehicles. 

Utilizing the research provided by the European Conference for Aeronautics and Space Sciences to estimate the development costs of rocket development, we estimated that the total development cost of the rocket is 11 Million USD. This is in line with Small Satellite Launch Vehicles being developed in other countries such as the Blue Whale 1 and the Launcher 1 developed by Virgin both of them being approx. 12 Million USD [4] [5]. This is significantly lower than the 90 Million USD that was required to develop the Falcon 1, as such, makes this a more viable option for us.