ࡱ; vl;<  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuwxyz{|}~R FjnCompObj\WordDocumentObjectPoolnjn  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:<?@ABCDEHJMNOPQRS FMicrosoft Word 6.0 DocumentNB6WWord.Document.6; L;e! ࡱ;   MSWD "Y!_{#"Y#R#"Y#"Y##ܥhO eU;38 @@@D4B{Rf( ~Bd&bX^QfRL II OF TEXAS Mission Final Report ASE274L/174M - Spacecraft Design University of Texas at Austin May 5, 1995 Prepared By: Joe Enzminger Brett Pickin Allison Floyd Mike Jackson Paul Milne Gini Reel Brett Jacobson SAE, Incorporated II OF TEXAS Mission Signature Page This report is submitted in response to the Request for Proposal prepared by Dr. Wallace Fowler for ASE274L/174M. A directory of participating team members is contained in Appendix A. Joe Enzminger: Project Manager Brett Pickin: Chief Engineer Allison Floyd: Engineer Mike Jackson: Engineer Brett Jacobson: Engineer Paul Milne: Engineer Gini Reel: Engineer II OF TEXAS Mission EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Public interest in space has declined steadily since the first landing on the moon in 1969. The public has taken the attitude that the conquest of space will take nothing more than time to achieve. This attitude, combined with a general lack of knowledge regarding the contributions of the space program to society, has led to a general funding decrease for NASA and other space related agencies. NASA, recognizing the need to recapture the same spirit of public interest that sustained the Apollo program, is seeking to develop low-cost space missions that will serve as both scientific and technical advancements and as a means of captivating public interest. NASAs response to this need was their solicitation for proposals under the Discover Mission Guidelines. The Discovery class missions are small-scale space programs, funded by NASA, that achieve a tangible and important scientific or technical result. However, these missions are to be designed as showcase missions. Therefore, the probability of success should be high, yet the mission must be sufficiently novel to capture public interest. This project presents a mission concept and preliminary design for a space mission that will meet these objectives. Public research shows that most Americans find a manned return to the moon to be the most interesting aspect of the space agenda. In response, this document outlines an unmanned mission to the moon to prove that the basics of life, oxygen and water, do exist and can be extracted from lunar resources. It is suggested that by proving that the resources required to establish a viable working environment are present on the lunar surface, public interest in returning men to the moon will be sparked. The mission will serve as a technology demonstrator for methods of lunar oxygen extraction and will help verify or disprove theories regarding the existence of water beneath the lunar surface. From a technical standpoint, such a mission would provide tangible benefits for future space exploration. Oxygen is both a major component of spacecraft fuel and is required for life support systems. Furthermore, if water is found on the moon, it likewise could be utilized both for spacecraft fuel requirements and life support. The ability to produce fuel on the moon, rather than transporting it from Earth, will drastically reduce the cost of future space missions and pave the way for eliminating this barrier to human space travel. This document contains a preliminary design for carrying out this mission. This project will be supported by universities throughout the State of Texas, and the final proposal will be developed from individual contributions from each university. In this way, the vast aerospace resources of the State of Texas can be exploited. This semester, the University of Texas has focused on the subsystem design and systems integration for the lander portion of the total mission concept. In order to accomplish this, a small corporate entity named SAE, Inc. was formed. The mission plan calls for the launch of a small spacecraft into trans-lunar orbit. Arriving at the moon, the spacecraft will maneuver into a polar lunar orbit. A small lander, carrying oxygen production and water detection equipment, will separate from the spacecraft and land on a predetermined site on the lunar surface. The unit will operate on the lunar surface for approximately 2 weeks, carrying out its science and technology objectives. Meanwhile, the orbiter will continue to orbit, serving as a communications relay and as a platform for remote sensing of the lunar surface. It will release small penetrators near the lunar poles to conduct a search for water. The Apollo missions established the moon as a desolate, barren landscape with no ability to provide the needs for human life. There will be strong public appeal in the notion that while the moon cannot support life alone, human work and innovation can transform even this barren landscape into a habitable home for future generations. NASAs role, through this program, in bringing this notion into being will position the agency to pursue much more aggressive programs in the future. Table of Contents  TOC \o "1-3" 1 Introduction  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587722  PAGEREF _Toc324587722 1 1.1 Mission Background  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587723  PAGEREF _Toc324587723 1 1.3 Project Goals  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587724  PAGEREF _Toc324587724 3 2 Science  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587725  PAGEREF _Toc324587725 3 2.1 Oxygen Production  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587726  PAGEREF _Toc324587726 3 2.1.1 Mechanism  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587727  PAGEREF _Toc324587727 3 2.1.2 Landing Site Selection  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587728  PAGEREF _Toc324587728 4 2.2 Water Detection Mission  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587729  PAGEREF _Toc324587729 5 2.2.1 Theoretical Background:  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587730  PAGEREF _Toc324587730 5 2.2.2 Previous Mission Data  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587731  PAGEREF _Toc324587731 6 2.2.3 Sensing Devices  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587732  PAGEREF _Toc324587732 6 3 Spacecraft Design  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587733  PAGEREF _Toc324587733 7 3.1 Orbiter  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587734  PAGEREF _Toc324587734 7 3.1.1 Structure  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587735  PAGEREF _Toc324587735 7 3.1.2 Power  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587736  PAGEREF _Toc324587736 7 3.1.3 Thermal  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587737  PAGEREF _Toc324587737 9 3.1.4 Communications  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587738  PAGEREF _Toc324587738 9 3.1.5 Computers  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587739  PAGEREF _Toc324587739 11 3.1.6 Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC)  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587740  PAGEREF _Toc324587740 12 3.1.7 Future Work  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587741  PAGEREF _Toc324587741 13 3.2 Lander  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587742  PAGEREF _Toc324587742 13 3.2.1 Structure  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587743  PAGEREF _Toc324587743 14 3.2.2 Propulsion  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587744  PAGEREF _Toc324587744 20 3.2.3 Power  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587745  PAGEREF _Toc324587745 24 3.2.4 Thermal  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587746  PAGEREF _Toc324587746 25 3.2.5 Communications  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587747  PAGEREF _Toc324587747 26 3.2.6 Computers  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587748  PAGEREF _Toc324587748 26 3.2.7 Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC)  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587749  PAGEREF _Toc324587749 27 3.2.8 Future Work  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587750  PAGEREF _Toc324587750 28 4. Penetrators  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587751  PAGEREF _Toc324587751 28 4.1 Background  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587752  PAGEREF _Toc324587752 29 4.2 Penetrator Subsystems  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587753  PAGEREF _Toc324587753 29 4.2.1 Water detector  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587754  PAGEREF _Toc324587754 29 4.2.2 Soil Acquisition Unit  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587755  PAGEREF _Toc324587755 30 4.2.3 Communications Subsystems  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587756  PAGEREF _Toc324587756 30 4.2.4 Umbilical Cable  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587757  PAGEREF _Toc324587757 30 4.2.5 Computer Subsystem  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587758  PAGEREF _Toc324587758 31 4.2.6 Structure  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587759  PAGEREF _Toc324587759 31 4.2.7 Thermal Management  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587760  PAGEREF _Toc324587760 32 4.3 Deployment and Emplacement  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587761  PAGEREF _Toc324587761 32 4.4 Future Work  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587762  PAGEREF _Toc324587762 34 5 MANAGEMENT PROPOSAL  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587763  PAGEREF _Toc324587763 34 5.1 Technical Tasks  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587764  PAGEREF _Toc324587764 34 5.2 Distribution of Tasks  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587765  PAGEREF _Toc324587765 35 5.3 Scope  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587766  PAGEREF _Toc324587766 36 5.4 Organizational Structure  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587767  PAGEREF _Toc324587767 37 5.5 Project Management  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587768  PAGEREF _Toc324587768 37 5.6 Schedule  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587769  PAGEREF _Toc324587769 38 5.6.1 Major Milestones  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587770  PAGEREF _Toc324587770 38 5.6.2 Project Timeline  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587771  PAGEREF _Toc324587771 38 5.7 Configuration Management  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587772  PAGEREF _Toc324587772 39 5.8 Cost Tracking  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587773  PAGEREF _Toc324587773 40 5.9 Meetings  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587774  PAGEREF _Toc324587774 40 5.9.1 Inter-state Meetings  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587775  PAGEREF _Toc324587775 41 5.10 Cost  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587776  PAGEREF _Toc324587776 41 5.10.1 Direct Labor Estimates  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587777  PAGEREF _Toc324587777 41 5.10.2 Materials Estimates  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587778  PAGEREF _Toc324587778 42 5.10.3 Calculation of Total Costs with Applicable Overhead  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587779  PAGEREF _Toc324587779 42 6 REFERENCES  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587780  PAGEREF _Toc324587780 44 7 APPENDICES  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587781  PAGEREF _Toc324587781 46 APPENDIX A SAE TEAM MEMBERS AND CONTACT POINTS  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587782  PAGEREF _Toc324587782 46 APPENDIX B NASTRAN MODEL OF LANDER FRAME  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587783  PAGEREF _Toc324587783 47 APPENDIX C PENETRATOR ESTIMATES  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587784  PAGEREF _Toc324587784 56 APPENDIX D Cost Analysis  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587785  PAGEREF _Toc324587785 57 Appendix E  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587786  PAGEREF _Toc324587786 60 APPENDIX F MASS ANALYSIS  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587787  PAGEREF _Toc324587787 65 APPENDIX G COMPUTER SIZING ESTIMATE  GOTOBUTTON _Toc324587788  PAGEREF _Toc324587788 67  1 Introduction This final report is written in response to the RFP submitted on February 22, 1995, to design a lunar exploration vehicle to produce oxygen and to search for possible sources of water. Within this document, S.A.E. will define the approach to accomplish the mission objectives and to review the preliminary design. This report has four main sections: Introduction, Science, Mission and Spacecraft Design, and Management Status. 1.1 Mission Background On July 28, 1994, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) issued the Discovery Mission's Announcement of Opportunity. This announcement called for the proposal of future space missions that would recaptivate public interest in the space program. In addition, these Discovery missions are expected to return tangible scientific information and provide a basis for future space endeavors. From the submitted proposals, NASA will select a certain number of them to fund. This document outlines a mission to return to the moon to prove the feasibility of oxygen production and to search for water. By proving mans ability to create two of the necessities of life - oxygen and water - this mission will captivate the public and serve to allow scientists and engineers to begin planning to use these resources in future space missions. The lunar regolith is composed of about 45% oxygen by mass. Oxygen is a necessity for human life and is a primary component of spacecraft fuel. The ability to extract and use oxygen on the moon would allow future inter-planetary travelers to launch less mass from Earth, therefore drastically reducing the cost of space flight. Many possible extraction techniques have been proposed, yet these techniques have not been demonstrated on the moon. The presence of frozen water at the lunar poles has been suggested by various scientific theorists and given more credence by the recent flight of the Clementine mission. If water can be found on the moon, even in very small quantities, it would allow future lunar explorers to take advantage of this resource both as a life sustainer and as a potential fuel source. University resources throughout the State of Texas will be utilized towards completion of this project. Coordination of these resources will involve delegation of responsibilities and superior team communication. This proposal outlines the University of Texas areas of responsibility for this project and contains technical, management, and cost proposals for meeting these areas of responsibility. The main focus of the University of Texas effort for this semester will be on systems integration and subsystem design for the lander. The WORLD-M proposal will serve as both a basis for the technical and scientific approaches to the mission goals and as a framework for the entire mission. This mission will involve the launch of a small spacecraft on a trans-lunar trajectory into lunar orbit. From lunar orbit, a lander will separate from the orbiting spacecraft and descend to the lunar surface. Upon landing, the spacecraft will set up a communications link with Earth (either direct or through the orbiter), and begin to produce oxygen using a small-scale Lunar Oxygen (LLOX) plant. In addition, the spacecraft will collect and analyze samples returned for the presence of Lunar Water (LH20). The orbiter will provide a platform for remote sensing of the Lunar surface, contributing to the search for LH2O and returning visual images of the Moon to enhance the public appeal of the mission. 1.3 Project Goals The goals for this mission are: Demonstrate the capacity for oxygen production from lunar regolith Conduct a search for LH20 Provide remotely sensed data of the lunar surface Captivate public interest in the space program, particularly in future manned missions to the moon 2 Science 2.1 Oxygen Production 2.1.1 Mechanism The primary goal of this mission is to demonstrate the technological ability to produce oxygen on the moon. The lander unit will be designed to deliver an oxygen production plant to the surface of the moon, where a soil sample will be collected for oxygen extraction. In accordance with the scope of our design, the actual mechanism for oxygen production is being treated as a black box system to be designed by Baylor Universityin fall 1995. The suggested mechanism, taken from the WORLD-M proposal, is hydrogen reduction of ilmenite. The reasons for selection of this process include the simplicity of the reaction mechanism for extraction and detection of oxygen, the availability of a power source (sunlight) for the process, and the ease of availability of the substrate material, ilmenite, in ordinary lunar soil. In the event that another method of oxygen production is selected, the alternative method is expected to conform to these criteria. 2.1.2 Landing Site Selection From an operational perspective, the oxygen production mission has two requirements. First, the base material for extraction of oxygen must be readily available without undue effort; no extensive mining operation is to be undertaken. Second, since the power source for the production plant is to be sunlight, the landing site must not be shaded. Thus an ideal landing site would be a geologically well-mapped region containing the necessary regolith resources, preferably in the direct sunlight of the lunar equatorial regions. Landing near the equator would also minimize the possibility that the chosen site would be permanently shaded by a crater overhang or other natural rock formation. 2.2 Water Detection Mission 2.2.1 Theoretical Background: According to Brandt (1993), large amounts of water may have been deposited on the lunar surface by cometary impact over the last few billion years. Hypothesizing that a few hundred comets of 1-2 km diameter have impacted on the lunar surface in that time period, and that one hundredth of one percent of that water has been retained over the intervening years, the resulting water resources on the moon should total about 109 kg. Water may have remained on the lunar surface either as ice or in hydrated compounds. Watson et. al. (1961) suggested that the sublimation of ice in a vacuum would be limited to 8m per billion years at 120 K, and the rate of sublimation would halve for every 1.6 K drop in temperature. Thus, at temperatures below 100 K, the rate of water loss would be reduced to less than 1 cm per billion years. At the lunar poles, in areas of permanent shadow, surface temperatures are not expected to exceed 97-99 K. Thus, if ice were deposited at the lunar poles, it is highly likely that some quantity would still remain. In addition, much of the lunar surface consists of silicate compounds, which are readily hydrated. The binding energy of hydration is particularly great; terrestrial laboratories have verified that significant amounts of water remain associated in silicate hydration in vacuum at temperatures of up to 400 K, which is higher than the maximum expected lunar surface temperature. Thus, even if surface ice is not present, hydrated compounds from which water could be extracted are very likely to exist. 2.2.2 Previous Mission Data Clementine Data: Although the UV-Vis data from the Clementine mission have not been completely reduced, preliminary results look promising for the presence of water at the lunar poles. A region of high reflectivity at the lunar south pole suggests the presence of ice deposits, although this observation does not constitute proof. Furthermore, a large crater on the south pole has been observed. This crater encompasses an area of about 30,000 sq. km. which is in permanent shadow in the current stage of lunar precession. The moons axis of rotation is almost perpendicular to the ecliptic plane, and its maximum precession results in no more than a 1.6o variation in the incidence angle of the sun at the poles. As a result, most of the area currently in shadow has been shaded for billions of years. Temperatures in this region would be well within parameters expected to minimize loss of water ice. 2.2.3 Sensing Devices Remote sensing from the lunar orbiter with a gamma-ray spectrometer would be able to detect surface ice, as well as hydrated compounds and hydroxides up to a depth of 1 m beneath the lunar surface. In addition, surface penetrator units will be deployed in the south polar region of the moon to detect water at a depth of 3-5 m. If water has already been detected by use of remote sensing, the penetrator units can be deployed in a pattern to elaborate upon the extent and range of the water resources. 3 Spacecraft Design 3.1 Orbiter 3.1.1 Structure The orbiter structure is estimated at 43 kg, less than the original World M proposal estimation of 49 kg. This change is a feflection of the change in the mass of the GNC package being designed by Texas A&M University. This mass estimate includes solar arrays, antennas, and appendages. 3.1.2 Power 3.1.2.1 Solar Array sizing The orbiters power system must provide 160W continually during the mission. The orbiters period is approximately 53 minutes with half of the period in eclipse ( without sunlight). Using the solar array sizing method described in Wertz and Larson[15] and calculated in Appendix E, a 3.31 m2 solar array will be needed to generate the 470 W to power the orbiter through one period of sunlight and eclipse. The 470W includes the power needed to keep the orbiter operational and also to store energy in the batteries. The solar cells to be used are the silicon cells which are inexpensive and convert approximately 14% of the incident solar radiation into electricity. Galinium Arsenic (GaAs) cells provide an 18% conversion, which would decrease the solar array area to 2.44 m 2 , but they are more expensive. We concluded to use the Silicon cells. 3.1.2.2 Battery sizing The battery capacity of the orbiter is calculated using a standard voltage bus of 28Vdc, a depth of discharge (DOD) of 0.3 and three batteries. The capacity (Cr) was 186 W-hr, or 6.64 A-hr. The mass of the orbiter batteries is 5.315 kg using the Wertz mass relationships to W-hr. A NiH2 battery has many advantages over the NiCd battery. The Specific energy density of the battery is larger which would make the battery have a longer lifespan. The depth of discharge would also be increases and the mass of the batteries would be decreased by 1.2 kg. Unfortunately, the NiH2 is still being tested for space applications and more research and development would be necessary before the batteries could be used. The NiCd batteries which have already been tested an approved for space applications is the more cost efficient solution. The The orbiter will have a 6.764 kg NiCd battery for energy storage and to provide power during the elipse time. 3.1.3 Thermal The thermal subsystem for the orbiter is necessary to provide protection to the orbiter and the different subsystems on the orbiter from solar flux, lunar shadow, and the heat generated from the subsystems. The thermal subsystem is being designed by the teams at Prarie View A&M and UT Pan American. The Prarie view design involved passive thermal control . An Aluminum alloy face sheet with honeycomg filler will be used for skin of the orbiter, and a white paint by 3M will provide extra sheilding. The PanAmerican group hasn not developed a specific system, but they are concentrating on passive control. More information about the temperature limits of the subsystems and various sensing devices needs to be determined to specify the thermal control necessary. [16] 3.1.4 Communications The communications subsystem, also called the telemetry, tracking, and command (TT&C) subsystem, is essential to the operation of any space mission. The TT&C subsystem transfers collected data from the spacecraft to the ground system, and receives commands to control the spacecraft [15:367]. For this mission, it has been decided to utilize the orbiter as a relay link between the lander and ground station for contigency. The lander will have equipment to transmit directly to Earth when possible. The penetrators will need a system powerful enough to communicate with the orbiter for data relay to Earth. However, both the orbiter and lander must have a data storage device since there will be times when the Earth is occulted from the lander and orbiter. The communications system design depends on the frequency chosen for the carrier signal. However, this parameter is one that designers have the least control of due to heavy regulation by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and other world organizations. Since the frequency allocation is unknown, a frequency in the Ka band is chosen to utilitize the Deep Space Network. A typical frequency would be 31.9 GHz for the downlink signal and 34.3 GHz for the uplink signal. Using this frequency and a beam width of 1.87 (covering the entire Earth, found from geometry), then the diameter of the antenna needs to be 0.4 m. The power requirements for this configuration is 25W. The mass of the antenna is approximately 6 kg [15:Table 13-16], and the transponder and other equipment masses about 10 kg for an orbiter subsystem total of 16 kg [15:Table 11-25]. The orbiter will generate a downlink signal that is phase coherent with the uplink signal so the ground station may know more exactly the downlink signals frequency and to measure the Doppler shift. Range-rate information can be calculated from the Doppler shift of the phase coherent signal to track the communication frequencies. The downlink signal is precisely offset from the uplink signal by an offset, the turnaround ratio. The turnaround ratio for the phase coherent signal will either be 240/TBD (as of July, 1992) to be compatible with NASAs Deep Space Network (DSN). 3.1.5 Computers The computer subsystem for the orbiter must manage communications, attitude determination and control, autonomous actions, fault detection, power management and thermal control [15:621]. A throughput estimate for the computer subsystem is 1400 kips. The initial mass estimate for the orbiters computer subsystem is 15 kg, requiring 20-25W of power. The specific computer to be used on this mission must still be chosen. Possible CPUs include those from Honeywell, Telenetics, Loral RAD6000 (using IBMs RISC 6000 series processor), and Southwest Research Institute (SC-5). The computers must be radiation hardened to protect the processor. An off-the-shelf hardware selection like this dramatically cuts final cost and increases reliability of the subsystem. The orbiter and lander will need a data storage device to store data that can not be immediately relayed to the orbiter or the Earth. This may occur when the orbiter is out of view of the lander, or during a temporary malfunction of one of the orbiters subsystems preventing data relay to Earth. There are three types of data storage devices to be considered: magnetic tape recorders, solid-state recorders, and bubble memory units. Tape recorders may hold a large amount of data, have a short lifetime, but are more massive than the alternatives. Solid state units hold less but last longer and weigh less. Specific data storage devices for consideration include tape recorders by RCA and Lockheed Sanders, and solid state memory units by TRW and Fairchild. The data storage size requirement must be estimated using the amount of time the orbiter/Earth will be out of communication and the amount and frequency of data collected from the UV/Visible camera. Data compression can significantly reduce the data storage requirement, on the order of 4x-20x from the Clementine mission [2]. 3.1.6 Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC) The GNC information was provided 27 March 1995 by Texas A&M University [14]. The sensors onboard the orbiter consist of the IMU, star trackers, accelerometers, and rate gyros. The IMU we are currently looking at is Delco's 3-axis single string space inertial reference unit utilizing hemispherical resonator gyros. This is a highly reliable strapdown system that is good for lightweight applications (3 kg). The Artemis IMU built by Honeywell could also be used. The Wide Field of View star tracker built by the Lawrence Livermore National Labs provides the means of updating the IMU and obtaining the initial attitude acquisition. Two star trackers will be used to provide complete attitude determination. The primary means of correcting or adjusting the spacecraft attitude will be with momentum wheels due to their superior pointing accuracy over RCS jets. The RCS jets will provide all momentum dumping. Some initial requirements for the orbiter's GNC system are shown in Table 3.1.1. Table 3.1.1 : Orbiter GNC Configuration Power (W)Mass (kg)VolumeTemperature(C)IMU2038x6.5x4.8-34 to 71Star Trackers 111Momentum Wheels2816Computers Multi & Demultiplexers2517 TOTALS 84 37 3.1.7 Future Work 3.2 Lander Figure 3.2.1 displays a conceptual drawing of the lunar lander as currently envisioned by SAE.  Figure 3.2.1. Conceptual Drawing 3.2.1 Structure The following section describes the design of the lander frame structure, refer to Figure 3.2.1 for general layout. Support Frame Figure 3.2.1.1 displays the proposed frame of the lander. The support frame consists of four basic elements: 1. horizontal (purple) 2. diagonal (green) 3. vertical (red) 4. octagon rings (blue). Each element is made of aluminum and is tubular with an outside diameter of 2 inches. The inner diameter of each element may vary vary depending on the load in which it needs to carry.  Figure 3.2.1.1. Frame Structure of the Lander Two types of analysis will be conducted on this frame. The first is "pseudo-static" loads analysis. In this analysis, the stresses due to the payloads, orbiter, and propulsion system on the frame are determined in each element. The second is normal modes analysis. In the normal modes analysis, the modes of vibration and undamped natural frequencies of the frame under free vibration are determined. The undamped natural frequencies include both axial and lateral frequencies. The constraints on the "pseudo-static" loads analysis that the stresses must be less than the yield stress of aluminum (48 ksi) and less than the Euler buckling stress of each element, divided by a factor of safety of 1.5. For the normal modes analysis, the constraints are that the natural frequencies of the frame must be greater than the fundamental frequencies of the Delta II (15 Hz for lateral and 35 Hz for axial). "Pseudo-Static" Loads Analysis For this analysis, the stresses in each element experienced during ascent were analyzed. In modeling the frame structure, several assumptions were made about the frame structure and the load environment in which it is to operate. 1. Frame is the only load bearing member of the lander (i.e. skin, honeycomb protection, wires, etc. do not carry any load) 2. Frame elements are ideally connected 3. Load due to the orbiter is evenly distributed across the top octagon ring 4. Load due to the oxygen production plant is evenly distributed across the middle radial elements 5. Loads due to the remaining payload (computers, communications, etc.) are evenly distributed across the bottom radial elements 6. Load due to the propulsion system is evenly distributed across the bottom radial and octagon-ring elements 7. Propulsion system is not attached to the fairing 8. Ignore the steady increase in acceleration during ascent and just use the maximum acceleration experienced ( 5.7 g's) 9. Bottom nodes are ideally connected to the fairing (i.e. cannot move or rotate in the x-, y-, and z-directions) NASTRAN was utilized to determine the maximum stress in each element under maximum acceleration due to launch, approximately 5.7 g's [13]. Appendix B contains the NASTRAN model used. Several iterations were performed in order to optimize the frame structure (i.e. reduce the weight). The final cross-section of each element has a diameter of 2 inches and a thickness of 1/16 inches. The optimized frame elements yields a mass of approximately 40 kg. Table 3.2.1 summarizes the results obtained. Table 3.2.1. Results of Pseudo-Static Analysis Element SetMaximum Stress (ksi)Yield Stress/ Factor of Safety (1.2) (ksi)Euler Buckling Stress/ Factor of Safety (1.2) (ksi)Top Horizontal26.854017.15Middle Horizontal3.464017.15Bottom Horizontal11.954017.15Top Octagon Ring10.244026.79Middle Octagon Ring0.374026.79Bottom Octagon Ring16.554017.15Top Vertical4.174017.15Bottom Vertical15.994010.15Top Diagonal0.94405.93Bottom Diagonal5.15402.98 All of the elements meet our constraints of having maximum stresses below the yield stress of aluminum and the Euler buckling stress of each element. The stresses resulting from the impact on the lunar surface were not analyzed due to several factors. These factors include insufficient information on how the landing gear (designed by Lamar) will absorb the impact and where and how they will be attached, how the frame elements are connected (welded or fastened), impact is a highly non-linear problem and very difficult to model, and time constraints. Normal Modes Analysis NASTRAN was again utilized to determine the lateral and axial natural frequencies of the lander frame structure. The orbiter and payload (oxygen production plant, robotic arm, communications, computers, etc.) were modeled as concentrated masses at various locations (see Appendix B contains the NASTRAN model used for this analysis). The results showed that each mode was coupled in all directions; therefore, the frame does not have a natural frequency in the lateral or axial directions. Twenty-one of the modes did have frequencies below axial fundamental frequency of the Delta II. These modes and the corresponding frequencies are shown in Table3.2.2. Table 3.2.2. Results of Normal Modes Analysis ModeEigenvalueFrequency (Hz)12911.0378.58704924325.85110.4678134610.87410.8071646271.49312.6039256587.21312.9172869080.91715.1664979455.24215.4759289740.49915.7076399774.07515.73468109968.98515.890791112229.1917.600251215998.5220.130751317119.9820.824361418009.6621.358611525205.4525.267791626517.2925.9171726643.9225.978811827207.2426.2521935705.1330.07362044299.133.49792147289.3534.61002 Landing Gear The landing gear is being designed by Lamar University. The group originally designed a three-legged system for a hexagonal lander, but changed their system to a four-legged design for our octabonal lander. The landing gear will be made from 7075 Aluminum Alloy (T651 conditioned). The mass is yet to be determined, but it will be under 10kg. The height of the landing gear is 48 inches. Each leg has three menber, two compression members and one tensile member with a pressure cylinder. The legs will attach to the base on the lander by pivoting joints. The pressure cylinder on the tensile menber forces the leg out on release to lopen up the landing gear. When all legs touch the ground, the members lock into place. The landing gear was modeled using NASTRAN for Windows. Due to complexity and time constraints, only static loading was modelled, as opposed to static and dynamic. A vertical load of 1600lbf was applied per leg. Horizontal loading weas neglected, as well as buckling stress. Normal and bending stresses were modeled only. The stresses and leg diameters claculated for the compression and tension members are shown in Table 3.2.3. Table 3.2.3 NASTRAN Analysis on Landing gear Members Critical Stress ( ksi)Max Stress (ksi)Ouside dia. (in)Inside dia. (in)Compression41254.03.96Temsionnot given39.82.01.914 An overall factor of dafety of 1.8 was used in the design. Spring dampners can be integrated into the legs to reduce impact, and the diameter of the legs can be enlarged to reduce buckling stress. Robotic Arm The purpose of the robotic arm on the lander is to provide a means to collect soil samples and to deposit these samples in the lunar oxygen sensor. The robotic arm will be designed by Texas Southern University. 3.2.2 Propulsion The requirements for the propulsion system are as follows: Place the orbiter and lander in orbit around the Earth; Transfer the vehicle to Lunar orbit; Place lander on Lunar surface; and Provide attitude control and orbit maintenance through all phases of the mission. 3.2.2.1 Launch Vehicle Placing the orbiter and lander in orbit around the Earth The launch vehicle must place the orbiter and lander in orbit around the Earth. The Mission requires that a three-stage Delta II is used to transfer the vehicle to its initial orbit around the Earth. The first and second stage of the Delta II will place the vehicle in a 185 km circular orbit. The third stage will transfer the vehicle into a 185x9,256 km elliptical orbit. 3.2.2.2 Lunar Orbit Transfer Transferring the vehicle to Lunar orbit The vehicle must be transferred to Lunar orbit. After the vehicle is placed in the 185x9,256 km elliptical orbit it will be boosted into a larger elliptical orbit. The new elliptical orbit will intercept the moon's orbit at perigee. Once the vehicle reaches the moon the vehicle will be inserted into lunar orbit. Based on delta-V estimates from the Texas A&M University the estimated delta-V for the transfer and insertion to lunar orbit is 2.905 km/s not including midcourse corrections. An estimated 5000 N of thrust will be needed for this maneuver. 3.2.3.3 Lunar Landing Placing the lander on the lunar surface Once the vehicle is in lunar orbit the lander and orbiter will separate. The main engine for the orbit transfers and the lunar landing will be attached to the lander. After separation the orbiter will have no need for anything more than a few attitude thrusters for orbit maintenance; therefore, using one single engine for orbit insertion and landing reduces the mass and complexity of the propulsion system. This idea was originally proposed in the Oasis project and used in the World-M proposal. The lander will descend to 100 m at which time the main engine and empty fuel tanks will be jettisoned. Small thrusters will be used to 10 m above the surface. For the last 10 m the lander will free-fall to the surface. This method of landing will help to prevent contamination of the soil which may interfere in the oxygen production experiment. Based on estimates from World-M, Oasis, and Apollo-17 the estimated delta-V for the lunar landing is 2.150 km/s. An estimated 12,000 N of thrust will be necessary to perform this maneuver. 3.2.3.4 Attitude Control and Orbital Maintenance Providing attitude control and orbit maintenance An estimated 20 m/s delta-V is needed for midcourse corrections for transfer to lunar orbit and lunar orbit insertion. A thrust range of 5-10 N will be sufficient to handle midcourse corrections. For 1 year of orbit maintenance for the orbiter, the estimated delta-V requirement is 16 m/s. 3.2.3.5 Engine selection A engine that can provide a thrust range from 5-12,000 N is necessary for the mission. Solid rockets, monopropellant systems, and bipropellant systems were investigated. Solid rockets are impractical because they can only provide one burn. Monopropellant systems can not provide the thrust necessary to the mission. Bipropellant systems can provide the levels of thrust required, though they are more complex. Also the mass of fuel needed for a bipropellant is much less then that of a monopropellant. This is a direct result of the specific impulse of the propellants used in both systems; the specific impulse is much larger for bipropellants (300-450 s) as opposed to monopropellants (150-300 s). Main Engine The Rocketdyne XLR-132 was chosen for the main engine. It uses N2O4 and MMH as propellant and produces a specific impulse of 340 seconds. Its mass is 51.26 kg and it can produce thrusts from 5-16,700 N. This engine weighs 10-30 kg less than other engines with similar specific impulse ratings. Its thrust level is slightly lower than other engines with similar specific impulses but its thrust level is well within mission requirements and the low mass makes it attractive. Thrusters Three Marquardt R4-D thrusters were chosen for the thrusters that will be used for last portion of the landing. This was chosen as the thruster for two reasons. First it was chosen because it uses N2O4 and MMH as a propellant. This simplifies the fuel supply, with only one type of fuel for all engines storage requirements become easier to handle. Secondly the mass of this thruster is 3.76, 1-10 kg less than other thrusters with similar specific impulses and thrust ranges. The specific impulse for this thruster is 310 seconds with a thrust of up to 489 N. 3.2.3.6 Fuel and Mass estimates The following table summarizes the fuel estimates. Table 3.2.3.6.1 Mass of Fuel ManeuverComponentdelta-V (m/s)Initial mass (kg)Fuel Mass (kg)LOIorbiter + lander2905723250Orbit maint.orbiter201571.0Landinglander2150383182Total604with GNC620 3.2.3 Power 3.2.3.1 Solar Array sizing A 3.238 m2 Silicon solar array will be needed to generate 325W continually during the mission.. The landers period is approximately 27 days with half of the period being in eclipse ( without sunlight). Using the solar array sizing method described in Wertz and Larson[15] and calculated in Appendix E, 3.238 m2 solar array will be needed to generate the wattage to power the orbiter through one period of sunlight and eclipse. Gallium Arsenic (GaAs) cells would decrease the solar array area to 2.497 m 2. As with the orbiter, the silicon cells will be utilized for the solar array. 3.2.3.2 Battery sizing The lander will have 2 NiCd batteries for energy storage. The battery capacity of the orbiter is calculated using a standard voltage bus of 28Vdc, a depth of discharge (DOD) of 0.8 and two batteries. The capacity (Cr) was 7000 W-hr, or 250 A-hr. The mass of the lander batteries is 200 kg using the Wertz mass relationships to W-hr. A NiH 2 batteries would decrease the mass to 155 kg, but they would still be more expensive to integrated into the design. The orbiter will have a 6.764 kg NiCd battery for energy storage and to provide power during the 13 day ellipse time. 3.2.4 Thermal The thermal subsystem is necessary to provide protection to the lander and different subsystems on the lander from solar flux, lunar night, and the heat generated from nearby systems. This subsystem is currently being designed by Prairie View A&M University. The Prairie view design involved passive thermal control . An Aluminum alloy face sheet with honeycomb filler will be used for skin of the lander, and a white paint by 3M will provide extra shielding. The mechanical engineers at Pan-American group also implements passive control for the lander, but they possibly may include some active control systems, like heat pipes or cold plates, for the computers and oxygen production plant. The details of the thermal subsystem will not be possible to complete until the layout of the lander and the temperature limits of the subsystems are determined. [16] 3.2.5 Communications The lander communications subsystem is initially estimated to act on the same frequencies as the orbiter, but with a beam width of 140( to reach the orbiter. A beam width of 1.87( to reach Earth for the high gain antenna. This prescribes a low gain antenna diameter of 0.1 m and a mass of approximately 1.2 kg. and a transponder mass of 13 kg for a total subsystem mass of 15 kg, similar to the orbiters. The high gain antenna will be like the orbiters, with a dish diameter of 0.4m. The lander communications subsystem will require 20-25W of power. 3.2.6 Computers The lander computer subsystem will resemble that of the orbiters computer subsystem. The landers housekeeping computer will use the same main processor as that of the orbiters, with the addition of an image processing computer (eg., a digitial signal processing module). The computer requirements for the image processing on board the lander (ie., to collect data from the UV/Visible camera and manage data acquisition) demands a great deal of CPU power ( 1700 kips. An initial throughput estimate for orbiter image processing is 8400 kips. Data acquisition considerations must also be taken into account, specifically the amount and frequency of data collected. The lander will also need a data storage device similar to that on the orbiter. The computer subsystem mass and power estimates will be assumed to be similar to those of the orbiters computer system. 3.2.7 Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC) The GNC Information was provided by Texas A&M University 27 March 1995. [14] The lander makes use of the same IMU as the orbiter. Since this IMU will only be used for a short period of time a separate star tracker system for updates is unnecessary. All attitude correction is done with the RCS jets only since precise attitude control is not as critical as on the orbiter. The lander also has a UV/visual landing radar that will provide altitude and velocity information. Some initial lander configurations are shown in Table 3.2.6.1. Table 3.2.6.1. Lander GNC Configuration Power (W)Mass (kg)Volume TemperatureIMU (W)2038x6.5x4.8-34 to 71 Laser(kg)2011Low Res. UV/Vis laser ranger51 TOTALS 45 5 3.2.8 Future Work 4. Penetrators Many options were considered as devices to detect water on the moon. Two of these options were mobile lunar rover and penetrators. The rover system of water detection has three main disadvantages. First, the rover would be limited to a square kilometer about the lander, especially if a tethered power system is used. Second, the robotics of the mobility system would create a complex, dynamic system. Third, the rovers would have to be deployed from the lander and, therefore, would require the water detection and oxygen productions devices to be located in a close proximity to each other. A landing at the equator will increase the likelihood of success of the oxygen production mission, and a landing at the poles will do the same for the water detection mission. For this reason, independent operation of the oxygen production and water detection devices is desirable. Our second option, multiple penetrators, offer independence of the two mission goals. Since penetrators will be deployed from the orbiter, the lander will be free to land at the equator and commence the oxygen production mission. Penetrators also offer the possibility of multiple deployment sites in the event that other potential penetration sites are discovered during the mission. Another advantage of the penetrator system is its simplicity. It is a static system and will not require the same amount of moving parts a rover system will require. 4.1 Background May, 1990, Mark E. Johnson wrote a thesis for the University of TX entitled Mars Balloon and Simple Penetrator Design Study. In this thesis, Mr. Johnson described a Mars Surface Multi-Probe to gather atmospheric and soil information on Mars and to map the Martian landscape. One of the penetrators described in this thesis is the model on which our water detection device is based.[12] The Mars mission described in Mr. Johnsons paper uses a primary surface penetrator with a wide variety of surface and atmospheric testing equipment, most of which is not necessary t simply detect water. For our project, the payload of the penetrator can be reduced to the soil acquisition unit, water detector, power subsystems, communications package, and the umbilical cord. [12] 4.2 Penetrator Subsystems 4.2.1 Water detector This instrument is actually a water detector and Hydrated Mineral Analyzer. The instrument consists of a P205 electrolytic cell and integral sample chamber. The resistance of the cell is measure before the sample is introduced to determine the background water vapor content. The soil sample is dropped into the chamber. The resistance heater in the chamber increases the temperature of the sample and checks the vapor content against the original every 5 degrees C. [12] 4.2.2 Soil Acquisition Unit This unit is comprised of a deeply fluted drill in a non-rotating sleeve. The drill discards samples taken within 10 cm of the penetrator to avoid thermal contamination from the impact. The soil is fed into the experiment chamber by a drop chute [12]. 4.2.3 Communications Subsystems The Penetrator communicates with the relay orbiter. The antenna, transmitter and receiver are located in the aft section ( above ground). Since the crash landing of the penetrator would be too harsh for a dish antenna, a quadrifilar helix configuration is chosen instead. The data transmission occurs at 10,000 BPS. The transmitter has a power of 1w and a frequency of 400 Hz. The control link margins are 3.4 dB for uplink (telemetry to orbiter) and 4.9 dB for downlink. This analysis is from Mr. Johnsons assumption of a 500 km altitude. [12] 4.2.4 Umbilical Cable This is a 5 meter cable used to keep the fore and aft section connected after the fore section is buried in the ground. The cable is in a high-speed , conical bobbin formation that releases on fore and aft separation. 4.2.5 Computer Subsystem Information is processed by an on-board microprocessor, associated memory and mass storage. To minimize size and power requirements, most system functions are software controlled instead of hardware controlled. The microprocessor used is compiled of 64 analog input/output channels. 512 digital in/out channels and uses a 12-bit word. CMOS (Complementary Metal Oxide Semiconductor) technology is used for RAM. All experiment programs and system configuration are on CMOS read-only memory. These qualifications meet the standards for Martian operation, but will have to be evaluated for lunar operation. The solid state magnetic bubble memory was chosen by Mr. Johnson for nonvolatile mass storage. This system has semi-random data access, high reliability, low access times, low power requirement, and radiation hardness. This is an improvement over the usual magnetic tape recorders. [12] 4.2.6 Structure Due to the robust structural system, the structure is a major mass component. Steel is used as the major structure casing component. The penetrator must survive the robust landing and descend sufficiently into the soil to bury the soil acquisition unit. The penetrator utilizes a conical nose with a length-to-diameter ratio of 2. The remainder of the fore section is cylindrical. The aft section has a conical flare at the fore section connection point. The second cylindrical section follows with a quadrifilar helix antenna exposed at the end. Aluminum honeycomb regions are within the penetrators, around and between the components. These regions crush on impact to absorb some of the impact energy. Total structural mass for the penetrator is approximately 11 kg.[12] 4.2.7 Thermal Management The batteries are the only subsystem to be protected form the extreme temperatures. The Batteries must operate in a range of 225 - 325 K. Any excess heat is conducted to the rear of the fore section by variable conduction pipes and is then transferred to the soil. 4.3 Deployment and Emplacement The depth of emplacement depends on soil type and nose cone shape. According to the analysis by Mr. Johnson for the Mars penetrator, a hard soil landing, rock, would penetrate 1.65 meters with soil acquisition at 0.95 m. For a soft landing, medium to coarse sand, the penetration would be 4.08 meters with soil acquisition at 3.38m. This analysis can be reconfigured to fit the lunar mission. The penetrator is deployed from the orbiter and fired at the surface of the moon. The penetrator is designed in two sections, fore and aft, with a conical flare at the junction. When it pierces the surface, the for and aft sections separate allowing the fore section to continue underground (see Fig ???). The two sections are connected by a shielded umbilical cord to provide communication between the fore and aft sections. The aft section contains the communication package and the umbilical cord. The antenna is also located in the aft section to allow it to remain above the surface. The fore section contains the soil acquisition unit and the water detection device. See Appendix C After deployment, the soil acquisition unit begins to acquire soil samples to feed into the water detection unit. The data processed is transmitted to the orbiter.  Figure 4.3.1 Penetrator Deployment 4.4 Future Work Finalize design parameters penetration depth loads applied mass and size Cost estimate Number of penetrators 5 MANAGEMENT PROPOSAL 5.1 Technical Tasks The following technical tasks must be performed in order to carry out the project concept: 1) Determine landing site and landing accuracy 2) Determine orbital configuration for the lunar orbit 3) Determine trans-lunar trajectory and lunar orbit insertion parameters 4) Determine fuel requirements for trans-lunar trajectory, orbit insertion and landing 5) Define subsystems a) Launcher b) Lander c) Orbiter 6) Design subsystems a) Launcher b) Lander c) Orbiter 7) Determine lander mobility configuration 8) Integrate various subsystems a) Launcher b) Lander c) Orbiter 5.2 Distribution of Tasks The scope of this project requires that many different groups focus on separate areas of responsibility in order to insure that each of the aforementioned technical tasks is completed. This section presents the current participants and their respective areas of responsibilities in this project. It should be noted that several technical tasks and subsystems are not accounted for. Participant Areas of Responsibility Technical University of Texas Overall systems integration 1,2,5abc,6b,7 Subsystem Definition 8b Mission Design Lander Texas A&M University Guidance, Navigation and 3,4,6bc Control for the Lander and Orbiter Prairie View A&M Lander Thermal Control 6b Texas State University Robotic Arm for LLOX production 6b Baylor University Sensors 6b Lamar University Landing Gear 6b This technical proposal will address the tasks set forth for completion by the University of Texas team. In addition, conceptual ideas for the remaining tasks will be presented for future consideration. 5.3 Scope This section outlines the management structure and methods that were employed during project execution. The organizational structure, schedule, configuration management methods, manpower usage, cost tracking methods and communications will be detailed. 5.4 Organizational Structure SAE employed 7 persons in order to accomplish the proposed activity. Each person was assigned a specific area of responsibility within the project and was responsible for reporting to the project manager. The project manager was responsible for maintaining control of all activities and insuring that budgetary and schedule constraints were met. Figure 1 outlines the organizational structure and employees involved.  EMBED Word.Picture.6  Figure 5.4.1 Organizational Structure 5.5 Project Management The project manager for this program was: Joe Enzminger jre@io.com 418-1124 Mr. Enzminger is the primary point of contact for issues regarding this project. Appendix I in section 6.0 contains a list of other project participants and their points of contact. 5.6 Schedule 5.6.1 Major Milestones Event Date Proposal 22 Feb 95 Configuration Requirement Document 01 Mar 95 Preliminary Design Review 1 24 Mar 95 PDR1 Report 24 Mar 95 Subsystem Preliminary Designs Complete 31 Mar 95 Lander Subsystem Integration Completed 24 Apr 95 Final Presentation 01 May 95 Final Report and Delivery of Deliverables 01 May 95 5.6.2 Project Timeline  Figure 5.6.2.1 Project Timeline 5.7 Configuration Management Since this project is a statewide endeavor, configuration management was performed on two distinct levels. First, all documents regarding design changes were date-tagged. The person responsible for the change noted prominently if the change affects weight estimates and also noted if the change affects any other subsystem or mission component. The project manager reviewed all design documents each week and notified the contracting officer of any changes that affect any other University participants. Any such changes were posted on the WWW server dedicated to this project. The address of the project web site is http://www.utexas.edu/depts/tsgc/world/subsystems.html. In addition, since the University of Texas is responsible for overall systems integration, a systems integration document was developed and distributed for use by all participating universities. This document outlined universal procedures for design changes, notifications, and specification alterations. This helped insure that all participants are constantly working toward meeting current specifications. 5.8 Cost Tracking The project manager was responsible for insuring that the project remains within the cost estimates specified in the design proposal. The major cost contributor in this project will be manpower costs and communications cost. Each team member will be responsible for notifying the project manager of time expended during each week, and the project manager recorded this information to track direct labor costs and predict if costs will be higher or lower than expected. In addition, each team member was responsible for reporting communications cost to the project manager. The time reports and communications reports will be included in the Project Notebook. 5.9 Meetings SAE held two briefings, one mid-way through project completion and one at project completion, for the contracting officer. Accompanying these briefings were comprehensive reports detailing the work performed in pursuit of project completion. In addition, SAE conducted Technical Direction/Technical Interchange Meetings at the contracting officers request. SAE held weekly status report meetings with the contracting officer. 5.9.1 Inter-state Meetings Bi-weekly conference calls were scheduled so that each participating team member can be brought up to date on new developments and changes which might affect their work. SAE maintained a record of these conferences and included this information in the Project Notebook. 5.10 Cost 5.10.1 Direct Labor Estimates These estimates were made based on 12 hours per week per person. Rates were determined from section 6.4.7.3 of the RFP. Project duration is 16 weeks. Title Hrs/Wk Rate/hr. Total Team Member Project Manager 14 $35 $7,840 Joe Enzminger Senior Engineer 14 $27 $6,050 Brett Pickin Engineer 12 $20 Allison Floyd $3,840 Brett Jacobson $3,840 Gini Reel $3,840 Michael Jackson $3,840 Paul Milne $3,840 Total Direct Labor $33,090 5.10.2 Materials Estimates Materials for development of various deliverables were required. These materials include the project notebook, supplies for building the model of the lander, and various related materials. Total estimated materials cost will not exceed $300. 5.10.3 Calculation of Total Costs with Applicable Overhead The RFP does not specify application of overhead for calculation of total cost. However, based on sound business practice, SAE has included this information in the estimate of total project cost. Applicable overhead rates are: Engineering Overhead: 110% Materials Overhead: 12.9% G&A: 20% Profit: 0% Direct Labor: $33,090 EOH @ 110% $36,400 Total Direct Labor: $69,490 Materials: $300 MOH @ 12.9% $60 Total Materials $360 Subtotal $69,850 G&A @ 20% $13,970 Total Project Cost: $83820 Expended to Date: $62,000 6 REFERENCES [1] Water and Oxygen Resources: A Lunar Discovery Mission. ASE396-Space Systems Design, University of Texas at Austin, 7 December, 1994. [2] Paul Regeon and R. Jack Chapman, Clementine Orbiter Spacecraft System Design, AAS/AIAA Spaceflight Mechanics Meeting, pg. 9, Albuquerque, NM, 13-16 February, 1995. [3] The Austin Cynthesis Corporation, Common Lunar Lander, University of Texas at Austin, 25 November, 1991. [4] Artemis: Common Lunar Lander, NASA Johnson Space Center, 10 March, 1992. [5] Wiley J. Larson and James R. Wertz, Space Mission Analysis and Design, Microcosm, Inc., Torrance, California, 1993. [6] Trevor C. Sorensen, Global Lunar Mapping by the Clementine Spacecraft, AAS/AIAA Spaceflight Mechanics Meeting, Albuquerque, NM, 13-16 February, 1995. [7] Proceedings of the Workshop on the Concept of a Common Lunar Lander, NASA Johnson Space Center, 1-2 July, 1991. [8] Alan Binder and Warren Holdenbach, Artemis Payload Planners Handbook, NASA Johnson Space Center, 30 September, 1991. [9] Oasis Lunar Systems, Lunar Polar Coring Lander ,final report, UT Austin, 1990. [10] Steve Bailey, A Lunar Lander/Rover Deployed Optical Interferometry Experiment, Code SL Quarterly Review, 15 August, 1994. [11] Brandt, Steven Scott, Search for Lunar Water Ice in Cometary Impact Craters, Thesis: The University of Texas at Austin, August, 1993. [12] Johnson, Mark E., Mars Balloon and Surface Penetrator Design Study, Thesis: The University of Texas at Austin, May, 1990. [13] McDonnell Douglas Commercial Delta, Inc. , Commercial Delta II Payload Planners Guide. December 1989. [14] Texas A&M University, Update 03/27/95, http://www.utexas.edu/depts/tsgc. [15] Wertz, J.R., and W.J. Larson (eds), Space Mission Analysis and Design, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 1991. [16] TSGC Spring Design Review. Pickle Research Center. Austin, TX. May 5, 1995. 7 APPENDICES APPENDIX A SAE TEAM MEMBERS AND CONTACT POINTS Team MemberE-mail addressPhone NumberJoe Enzmingerjre@io.com(512) 418-1124Brett Pickinpickin@orion.ae.utexas.edu(512) 322-9894Gini Reelginireel@mail.utexas.edu(512) 832-6345Michael Jacksonmikej@happy.cc.utexas.edu(512) 930-5515Paul Milnemilne@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu(512) 443-4729Brett Jacobsonb.jacobson@mail.utexas.edu(512) 502-9903Allison Floydcypress@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu(512) 346-7713 APPENDIX B NASTRAN MODEL OF LANDER FRAME Pseudo-Static Analysis ID STATICS,TEST SOL 101 TIME 100 CEND ECHO=NONE STRESS(VONMISES)=ALL $FORCE=ALL $SPCF=ALL LOAD=600 SPC=102 TITLE=DESIGN I SUBTITLE=LUNAR LANDER BEGIN BULK $ DEFINE GRID POINTS GRID 1 0. 0. 0. GRID 2 36. 15. 0. GRID 3 15. 36. 0. GRID 4 -15. 36. 0. GRID 5 -36. 15. 0. GRID 6 -36. -15. 0. GRID 7 -15. -36. 0. GRID 8 15. -36. 0. GRID 9 36. -15. 0. GRID 10 0. 0. 24. GRID 11 36. 15. 24. GRID 12 26. 26. 24. GRID 13 15. 36. 24. GRID 14 -15. 36. 24. GRID 15 -26. 26. 24. GRID 16 -36. 15. 24. GRID 17 -36. -15. 24. GRID 18 -26. -26. 24. GRID 19 -15. -36. 24. GRID 20 15. -36. 24. GRID 21 26. -26. 24. GRID 22 36. -15. 24. GRID 23 0. 0. 48. GRID 24 36. 15. 48. GRID 25 15. 36. 48. GRID 26 -15. 36. 48. GRID 27 -36. 15. 48. GRID 28 -36. -15. 48. GRID 29 -15. -36. 48. GRID 30 15. -36. 48. GRID 31 36. -15. 48. $ OCTAGON RINGS $ BOTTOM CBAR 101 50 2 3 5 CBAR 102 50 3 4 6 CBAR 103 50 4 5 7 CBAR 104 50 5 6 8 CBAR 105 50 6 7 9 CBAR 106 50 7 8 2 CBAR 107 50 8 9 3 CBAR 108 50 9 2 4 $ MIDDLE CBAR 109 60 11 12 16 CBAR 110 60 12 13 16 CBAR 111 60 13 14 17 CBAR 112 60 14 15 19 CBAR 113 60 15 16 19 CBAR 114 60 16 17 20 CBAR 115 60 17 18 22 CBAR 116 60 18 19 22 CBAR 117 60 19 20 11 CBAR 118 60 20 21 13 CBAR 119 60 21 22 13 CBAR 120 60 22 11 14 $ TOP CBAR 121 70 24 25 27 CBAR 122 70 25 26 28 CBAR 123 70 26 27 29 CBAR 124 70 27 28 30 CBAR 125 70 28 29 31 CBAR 126 70 29 30 24 CBAR 127 70 30 31 25 CBAR 128 70 31 24 26 $ HORIZONTAL SUPPORTS $ BOTTOM CBAR 201 80 1 2 3 CBAR 202 80 1 3 4 CBAR 203 80 1 4 5 CBAR 204 80 1 5 6 CBAR 205 80 1 6 7 CBAR 206 80 1 7 8 CBAR 207 80 1 8 9 CBAR 208 80 1 9 2 $ MIDDLE CBAR 209 90 12 15 21 CBAR 210 90 15 18 12 CBAR 211 90 18 21 15 CBAR 212 90 21 12 18 $ TOP CBAR 213 100 24 27 31 CBAR 214 100 31 28 24 $ VERTICAL ELEMENTS $ BOTTOM CBAR 301 110 2 11 3 CBAR 302 110 3 13 4 CBAR 303 110 4 14 5 CBAR 304 110 5 16 6 CBAR 305 110 6 17 7 CBAR 306 110 7 19 8 CBAR 307 110 8 20 9 CBAR 308 110 9 22 2 $ TOP CBAR 309 120 11 24 13 CBAR 310 120 13 25 14 CBAR 311 120 14 26 16 CBAR 312 120 16 27 17 CBAR 313 120 17 28 18 CBAR 314 120 19 29 20 CBAR 315 120 20 30 21 CBAR 316 120 22 31 11 $ DIAGONAL ELEMENTS $ BOTTOM CBAR 401 130 2 13 3 CBAR 402 130 3 14 4 CBAR 403 130 4 16 5 CBAR 404 130 5 17 6 CBAR 405 130 6 19 7 CBAR 406 130 7 20 8 CBAR 407 130 8 22 9 CBAR 408 130 9 11 2 $ TOP CBAR 409 140 13 24 11 CBAR 410 140 14 25 13 CBAR 411 140 16 26 14 CBAR 412 140 17 27 16 CBAR 413 140 19 28 17 CBAR 414 140 20 29 19 CBAR 415 140 22 30 20 CBAR 416 140 11 31 22 $ ELEMENT PROPERTIES $ PBAR PID MID AREA I1 I2 I12 J PBAR 50 31 0.38043 0.38043 0.1787 1. 0. 0. 1. -1. 0. 0. -1. PBAR 60 31 0.38043 0.38043 0.1787 1. 0. 0. 1. -1. 0. 0. -1. PBAR 70 31 0.38043 0.38043 0.1787 1. 0. 0. 1. -1. 0. 0. -1. PBAR 80 31 0.38043 0.38043 0.1787 1. 0. 0. 1. -1. 0. 0. -1. PBAR 90 31 0.38043 0.38043 0.1787 1. 0. 0. 1. -1. 0. 0. -1. PBAR 100 31 0.38043 0.38043 0.1787 1. 0. 0. 1. -1. 0. 0. -1. PBAR 110 31 0.38043 0.38043 0.1787 1. 0. 0. 1. -1. 0. 0. -1. PBAR 120 31 0.38043 0.38043 0.1787 1. 0. 0. 1. -1. 0. 0. -1. PBAR 130 31 0.38043 0.38043 0.1787 1. 0. 0. 1. -1. 0. 0. -1. PBAR 140 31 0.38043 0.38043 0.1787 1. 0. 0. 1. -1. 0. 0. -1. MAT1 31 1.05E+07 0.33 0.0978 $ SINGLE POINT CONSTRAINT FOR NODES 1 THROUGH 9 SPC1 102 123456 1 THRU 9 $ LOADS DUE TO THE PAYLOAD UNDER MAXIMUM LAUNCH ACCELERATION $ LOADS DUE TO ORBITER PLOAD1 600 121 FZ FR 0. -21.860 1. -21.860 PLOAD1 600 122 FZ FR 0. -21.860 1. -21.860 PLOAD1 600 123 FZ FR 0. -21.860 1. -21.860 PLOAD1 600 124 FZ FR 0. -21.860 1. -21.860 PLOAD1 600 125 FZ FR 0. -21.860 1. -21.860 PLOAD1 600 126 FZ FR 0. -21.860 1. -21.860 PLOAD1 600 127 FZ FR 0. -21.860 1. -21.860 PLOAD1 600 128 FZ FR 0. -21.860 1. -21.860 $ LOAD DUE TO PROPULSION SYSTEM AND PAYLOAD ON BOT. RADIAL ELEMENTS PLOAD1 600 201 FZ FR 0. -14.432 1. -14.432 PLOAD1 600 202 FZ FR 0. -14.432 1. -14.432 PLOAD1 600 203 FZ FR 0. -14.432 1. -14.432 PLOAD1 600 204 FZ FR 0. -14.432 1. -14.432 PLOAD1 600 205 FZ FR 0. -14.432 1. -14.432 PLOAD1 600 206 FZ FR 0. -14.432 1. -14.432 PLOAD1 600 207 FZ FR 0. -14.432 1. -14.432 PLOAD1 600 208 FZ FR 0. -14.432 1. -14.432 $ LOAD DUE TO ROCKETDYNE ENGINE ON BOT. OCTAGON RINGS PLOAD1 600 101 FZ FR 0. -11.790 1. -11.790 PLOAD1 600 102 FZ FR 0. -11.790 1. -11.790 PLOAD1 600 103 FZ FR 0. -11.790 1. -11.790 PLOAD1 600 104 FZ FR 0. -11.790 1. -11.790 PLOAD1 600 105 FZ FR 0. -11.790 1. -11.790 PLOAD1 600 106 FZ FR 0. -11.790 1. -11.790 PLOAD1 600 107 FZ FR 0. -11.790 1. -11.790 PLOAD1 600 108 FZ FR 0. -11.790 1. -11.790 $ LOAD DUE TO O2 PLANT ON MIDDLE SUPPORTS PLOAD1 600 209 FZ FR 0. -1.8483 1. -1.8483 PLOAD1 600 210 FZ FR 0. -1.8483 1. -1.8483 PLOAD1 600 211 FZ FR 0. -1.8483 1. -1.8483 PLOAD1 600 212 FZ FR 0. -1.8483 1. -1.8483 $ LOAD DUE TO SOLAR DISH AND ROTATING DISK ON TOP SUPPORTS PLOAD1 600 213 FZ FR 0. -7.5062 1. -7.5062 PLOAD1 600 214 FZ FR 0. -7.5062 1. -7.5062 $ LOAD DUE TO COMM. ARRAY ON BOTTOM OCTAGON PLOAD1 600 106 FZ FR 0.5 -125.69 0.5 -125.69 $ LOAD DUE TO SOLAR ARRAY ON MIDDLE OCTAGON PLOAD1 600 120 FZ FR 0. -53.416 0. -53.416 PLOAD1 600 120 FZ FR 1. -53.416 1. -53.416 PLOAD1 600 114 FZ FR 0. -53.416 0. -53.416 PLOAD1 600 114 FZ FR 1. -53.416 1. -53.416 $ LOAD DUE TO WIRING ARRAY ON BOTTOM OCTAGON PLOAD1 600 106 FZ FR 0.5 -305.95 0.5 -305.95 PLOAD1 600 106 FZ FR 0.5 -305.95 0.5 -305.95 PLOAD1 600 106 FZ FR 0.5 -305.95 0.5 -305.95 ENDDATA Normal Modes Analysis SOL 103 $ NORMAL MODES ANALYSIS TIME 100 CEND $ TITLE = DESIGN 1 LUNAR LANDER SUBTITLE = NORMAL MODES $ SPC=102 $ DISPLACEMENT = ALL $ $ SELECT EIGR ENTRY METHOD = 10 $ BEGIN BULK $ $ EIGR SID METHOD F1 F2 NE ND $+EIG NORM G C EIGR 10 SINV 0. 1000. $ $ ALUMINUM PROPERTIES $ E = 1.05E7 PSI, NU = 0.33, RHO = 0.0978 LB/IN^3 (WEIGHT DENSITY) MAT1 31 1.05E+07 0.33 0.0978 $ $ CONVERT WEIGHT TO MASS: MASS = (1/G) * WEIGHT $ G = 32.2 FT/SEC^2 --> WTMASS = 1/G = 0.0311 PARAM WTMASS 0.0311 $ $ ELEMENT PROPERTIES $ PBAR PID MID AREA I1 I2 I12 J PBAR 50 31 0.38043 0.1787 0.1787 0. 0.3574 PBAR 60 31 0.38043 0.1787 0.1787 0. 0.3574 PBAR 70 31 0.38043 0.1787 0.1787 0. 0.3574 PBAR 80 31 0.38043 0.1787 0.1787 0. 0.3574 PBAR 90 31 0.38043 0.1787 0.1787 0. 0.3574 PBAR 100 31 0.38043 0.1787 0.1787 0. 0.3574 PBAR 110 31 0.38043 0.1787 0.1787 0. 0.3574 PBAR 120 31 0.38043 0.1787 0.1787 0. 0.3574 PBAR 130 31 0.38043 0.1787 0.1787 0. 0.3574 PBAR 140 31 0.38043 0.1787 0.1787 0. 0.3574 $ DEFINE ELEMENTS $ OCTAGON RINGS $ BOTTOM CBAR 101 50 2 3 5 CBAR 102 50 3 4 6 CBAR 103 50 4 5 7 CBAR 104 50 5 6 8 CBAR 105 50 6 7 9 CBAR 106 50 7 8 2 CBAR 107 50 8 9 3 CBAR 108 50 9 2 4 $ MIDDLE CBAR 109 60 11 12 16 CBAR 110 60 12 13 16 CBAR 111 60 13 14 17 CBAR 112 60 14 15 19 CBAR 113 60 15 16 19 CBAR 114 60 16 17 20 CBAR 115 60 17 18 22 CBAR 116 60 18 19 22 CBAR 117 60 19 20 11 CBAR 118 60 20 21 13 CBAR 119 60 21 22 13 CBAR 120 60 22 11 14 $ TOP CBAR 121 70 24 25 27 CBAR 122 70 25 26 28 CBAR 123 70 26 27 29 CBAR 124 70 27 28 30 CBAR 125 70 28 29 31 CBAR 126 70 29 30 24 CBAR 127 70 30 31 25 CBAR 128 70 31 24 26 $ HORIZONTAL SUPPORTS $ BOTTOM CBAR 201 80 1 2 3 CBAR 202 80 1 3 4 CBAR 203 80 1 4 5 CBAR 204 80 1 5 6 CBAR 205 80 1 6 7 CBAR 206 80 1 7 8 CBAR 207 80 1 8 9 CBAR 208 80 1 9 2 $ MIDDLE CBAR 209 90 12 15 21 CBAR 210 90 15 18 12 CBAR 211 90 18 21 15 CBAR 212 90 21 12 18 $ TOP CBAR 213 100 24 27 31 CBAR 214 100 31 28 24 $ VERTICAL ELEMENTS $ BOTTOM CBAR 301 110 2 11 3 CBAR 302 110 3 13 4 CBAR 303 110 4 14 5 CBAR 304 110 5 16 6 CBAR 305 110 6 17 7 CBAR 306 110 7 19 8 CBAR 307 110 8 20 9 CBAR 308 110 9 22 2 $ TOP CBAR 309 120 11 24 13 CBAR 310 120 13 25 14 CBAR 311 120 14 26 16 CBAR 312 120 16 27 17 CBAR 313 120 17 28 18 CBAR 314 120 19 29 20 CBAR 315 120 20 30 21 CBAR 316 120 22 31 11 $ DIAGONAL ELEMENTS $ BOTTOM CBAR 401 130 2 13 3 CBAR 402 130 3 14 4 CBAR 403 130 4 16 5 CBAR 404 130 5 17 6 CBAR 405 130 6 19 7 CBAR 406 130 7 20 8 CBAR 407 130 8 22 9 CBAR 408 130 9 11 2 $ TOP CBAR 409 140 13 24 11 CBAR 410 140 14 25 13 CBAR 411 140 16 26 14 CBAR 412 140 17 27 16 CBAR 413 140 19 28 17 CBAR 414 140 20 29 19 CBAR 415 140 22 30 20 CBAR 416 140 11 31 22 $ DEFINE GRID POINTS GRID 1 0. 0. 0. GRID 2 36. 15. 0. GRID 3 15. 36. 0. GRID 4 -15. 36. 0. GRID 5 -36. 15. 0. GRID 6 -36. -15. 0. GRID 7 -15. -36. 0. GRID 8 15. -36. 0. GRID 9 36. -15. 0. GRID 10 0. 0. 24. GRID 11 36. 15. 24. GRID 12 26. 26. 24. GRID 13 15. 36. 24. GRID 14 -15. 36. 24. GRID 15 -26. 26. 24. GRID 16 -36. 15. 24. GRID 17 -36. -15. 24. GRID 18 -26. -26. 24. GRID 19 -15. -36. 24. GRID 20 15. -36. 24. GRID 21 26. -26. 24. GRID 22 36. -15. 24. GRID 23 0. 0. 48. GRID 24 36. 15. 48. GRID 25 15. 36. 48. GRID 26 -15. 36. 48. GRID 27 -36. 15. 48. GRID 28 -36. -15. 48. GRID 29 -15. -36. 48. GRID 30 15. -36. 48. GRID 31 36. -15. 48. $ SINGLE POINT CONSTRAINT FOR NODES 1 THROUGH 9 SPC1 102 123456 1 THRU 9 ENDDATA APPENDIX C PENETRATOR ESTIMATES The masses and power requirements from Mr. Johnsons paper relative to our mission are as follows [12]. Mass (kg) Volume (cm3)PowerScheduled Power Fore SectionPower source 1.980680+320 mW+26.5W-hPower Control .340200- 48 mWComputer .250200- 43 mW-1.184 W-hSoil Acquisition .450400-8.3 W-hWater Detector .150250-2.5 W-hThermal management .300430Impact Reducers .080286 Aft SectionTransmitter.400300-33 mW-.833 W-hReceiver.480360-20 mW-.493 W-hAntenna*.500500Umbilical.700700Heat Flow.070 50-.9 mW-.022 W-hImpact reducers.060221 Structure 11.000 Totals 16.260 4577 +75 mW (reserve)  13.168W-h (reserve) * not housed in cylinder APPENDIX D Cost Analysis The following charts display the cost estimation used following the equations given in Wertz [15]. The orbiter, lander, and penetrator costs are portrayed, and a sum total of 148 million FY95$ is given. All weight values are given in Kilograms. The cost factor refers to the development heritage of the design, whether the component is basically an existing design (0.1) of if it is a completely new design (1.0). orbitercostparamsubsystemparameterfactorvalueRDT&E costfirst unit costattitude control determinationdry weight0.5216755.1518094078.36326 reaction controldry weight0.5161691.51043.73378comm antennaweight62442.081507681.968119communicationsweight0.4101838.3547731790command & dataweight11501809software1000 lines code40136500thermalweight1205644.506361602.79265structureweight1437619.463019991.409206mechanismsweight0000powerweight025.5power0.1170566.68921192075.2915140207.7466813072.558553280.3052in FY92$K58928017.6in FY95$ landercostsubsystemparameterfactorvalueRDT&E costfirst unit costattitude control determinationdry weight0.553490.9243682330.33674 reaction controldry weight000-364comm antennaweight1.21109.851448276.120754communicationsweight0.4132208.9692672327command & dataweight11501809software1000 lines code40136500thermalweight1104541.486869384.147889structureweight1709508.4388651360.85602mechanismsweight50Oxygen prod143678.611017211.756839robotic arm1256121.238167696.882337propulsionweight0.111.303927.20594powerweight384power0.15502109.280816406.3745346418.8008119365.68165784.4818in FY92$K72757636.9in FY95$penetratorweight1104541.486869384.1478894925.63476in FY92$k5447752.04in FY95$lander and orbiter131685654FY95$w/ penetrators(3)148028911FY95$ The computers for the lander and the orbiter are going to be purchased off the shelf, so cost modeling implementing the learning curve was used to determine the costs of two computers. rd&tfirst unitLProduction costcomputersweight1549402128.2076151.7000011808.97767 The launch segment costs will approximately be these calculated amounts. LAUNCH SEGMENTparameterfactorvalueRDT&E costfirst unit costpropulsionweight0.151.2608705.542999FY92$K9628330.557FY95$ The total costs of launcher, orbiter, and lander, with or without the penetrators are as follows: Lander/orb/launch141313985FY95$with penetr157657241.2FY95$ Appendix E SOLAR ARRAY DESIGN PROCESSPsa is the power the solar array must provide during day light to power the spacecraft for the entire orbit. The Power is estimated at the maximum, assuming the lander lands on the moon during the eclipse period.The work below determines the solar array specifications(Using Silicon)Psa=( (Pe*Te/Xe) + (Pd*Td/Xd) ) /TdLANDERORBITERDaylight powerPd325Pd160Eclipse powerPe30Pe160Alt0Alt50PeriodT672T1.8833333Eclipse t(hr)Te336Te0.9416667Day time(hr)Td336Td0.9416667Xe0.6Xe0.6Xd0.8Xd0.8Psa456.25Psa466.66667The array area is calculated using the Power of each cell, the inherent array degradation, the lifetime degradation,and the angle of incidence to the Sun. The individual cell power assumes a solar flux of 1358W/m2and a Silicon cell efficiency of 14%.Po=flux*efficiencyThe beginning of life power assumes a angle of incidence where cos (q) = 1.Pbol=Po*Id*cos(q)The lifetime of the mission is short, so a maximum lifetime of 1 year is used.Ld=(1-deg/yr)^lifePeol=Pbol*LdAREA=Psa/PeolLANDERORBITERPower out(SC)Po190.12(W/m2)Po190.12Inher. Degred.Id0.77Id0.77cos(angle)cA1cA1B O L powerPbol146.3924(W/m2)Pbol146.3924Life DegredationLd0.9625Ld0.9625E O L powerPeol140.9027(W/m2)Peol140.90269Array area3.23805(m2)3.3119785(m2)If Gallinium were used instead of Silicon:LanderOrbiterPo244Peo244Pbol187.88Pbol187.88ld0.9725ld0.9725Peoll182.7133Peol182.7133array area2.497081(m2)2.5540925(m2) Find the battery capacity in W-hr and A-hrNickel Cadmium batteries are usedn is the trans. efficiency between battery and load. We assume a high efficiencyThe DOD for the lander is higher than the orbiter since the batteries may only have to recharge onceCr=Pe*TeW-hrDOD*N*nA-hr=Cr/VdLanderOrbiterVoltage busVd28Vd28#batteriesN2N3trans eff.n0.9n0.9depth of dischargeDOD0.8DOD0.3Cr=7000W-hrCr=186.00823W-hrCr=250A-hrCr=6.6431511A-hr The approximate battery masses are calculated using the relationshipsdefined in Wertz[15]. Dividing Cr by 35 for NiCd and dividing Cr by 45 for NiH2NiCdLANDERORBITERCr in W-hr7000186.00823Mass2005.3145209 NiH2Mass155.55564.1335162  The following is the chart of power estimates and the changes made between the WorldM proposal and the Spring 1995 project. OrbitertypeUSWorldB ==batteriesWattsWattsS ==solarCommBS25*We didn't redesign yetcompBS25GNCBs8490*thermalBS*2525*otherBS13Battery Sum159Solar sum159Total Sum159128+continual159LandertypeUsWorldWattsWattsCommBS25CompBS*25GNC(one time)B4540thermalBS*2525pumpGNCB0O2 prod^S*250252Battery sum120Solar sum325Initial Total370317Continual total325They budgeted 500W for the O2 productionAlso, their system included pump, condenser, tubing, sensorcondenser ( 89W)sensor(86W)tubing(77W)pump(solar)25Wsensor(86W) APPENDIX F MASS ANALYSIS Determination of fuel mass is related to the masses of the subsystems and the density of the fuel. For the Rockedyne main engine chosen, the fuel necessaryis MMH and N2O4.SUBSYSTEM MASSESLANDERmass (kg)ORBITERmass(kg)GNC5GNC37comm14.2comm16comp15comp15thermal10thermal20structure50structure45o230thrusters11.3thrusters2solar9solar9battery167battery7main engine51.26TOTAL362.76TOTAL151The density of the fuel was determined using the ratio of the fuels and the volumesgiven in the WorldM proposal.Ratio of MMH to N2O4(from World M proposal)1.0126(ratio)given the world M radii for each tank sizeVol per tanktotal volume(3)0.042507180.12752155m3N2O40.043756150.13126844m3MMHVOLUME0.25878999m3TOTALmass245gdensity946.713592kg/m3=0.94671359g/cm3OUR total fuel massmass775kg(620kg with 25%increase)volume0.8186214m3By using the ratio of fuels, the total volume of fuel and oxidizer need was calculated.Total VolumeMMH vol0.41187321m3=411873.21cm3N2O4 Vol0.40674818m3=406748.183cm3Volume per tank(3 equal tanks of each)MMH vol137291.07cm3N2O4 vol135582.728cm32 spherical tanks in the launch systemradius (MMH)32.0025482cm=1.04008282ftradius(N2O4)31.8692556cm=1.03575081ft 4 spherical tanks in the landerUse same tank dimensions as for the orbiter on the landerradius (MMH)32.0025482cm=1.04008282ftradius(N2O4)31.8692556cm=1.03575081ftIteration used to determine tank size:MMH(cm)(ft)(in)Max radius38.4615385=1.2515radius32.03=1.0409812.4917height63.9502869=2.0783824.9406119N2O4radius32.04=1.041312.4956cylinder length-0.6793444=-0.0221-0.2649443height63.4006556=2.0605224.7262557 APPENDIX G COMPUTER SIZING ESTIMATE  EMBED Excel.Sheet.5   PAGE iv  PAGE 67 |HH(EG(HHOd'`<|HH(EG(HHOd'`< |HH(EG(HHOd'`<:^E5t'#% S&WordMicrosoft Word&Word   2 @@$Use Word 6.0c or later to 2 @$view Macintosh picture.    {,` @@ {,`  0I:9"? #%%DSIDICT:_cv userdict /_cv known not {userdict /_cv 20 dict put}if _cv begin /bdf{bind def}bind def /isDeviceColor {/currentcolorspace where{pop currentcolorspace 0 get dup /DeviceGray eq exch dup /DeviceRGB eq exch /DeviceCMYK eq or or}{T}ifelse}bdf /setcmykcolor where{/setcmykcolor get /cvcmyk exch def}{/cvcmyk{1 sub 4 1 roll 3{3 index add neg dup 0 lt{pop 0}if 3 1 roll}repeat setrgbcolor pop}bdf }ifelse /stg{isDeviceColor {cf ca /cs load setscreen setgray}{pop}ifelse}bdf /strgb{isDeviceColor {cf ca /cs load setscreen setrgbcolor}{pop pop pop}ifelse}bdf /stcmyk{isDeviceColor {cf ca /cs load setscreen cvcmyk}{pop pop pop pop}ifelse}bdf /min1{dup 0 eq{pop 1}if}bdf currentscreen/cs exch def/ca exch def/cf exch def end DDDDDD wwww##K0.45 0.45 0.45 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #d0drw2jn_@u_(uDDDDDDs##K0.45 0.45 0.45 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #17S ##Q0.2667 0.2667 0.2667 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #8##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d0drw2nu_u_(u}##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #18S##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #8##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d0drw2`j_u_(u}##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #18S##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #8 UUUU##:0.5 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d`drw2 _u_Hu}_ˈu_hu_Hu_u_ˈu ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # SPC SPC "2, UUUU##:0.5 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #q22,22, SPC SPC # ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # UUUU #h!!!2, ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #ddrw2 _u_u})_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # SPC SPC # ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #" ###### # # ## # # # ## ######################## ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #ddrw2 _Hu_Hu})_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu_Hu ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # SPC SPC # ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #"r######## # ## ### ######################### UUUU##:0.5 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d`drw2 _u_u}_Hu_(u_u_u_Hu ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # SPC SPC "2{ UUUU##:0.5 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #q2I2{2I2{ SPC SPC # ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # #h!!I!2{ ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #ddrw2 _u_u})_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # SPC SPC # ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #"\###### # # ## # # # ## ######################## ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #ddrw2 _u_u})_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u_u ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # SPC SPC # ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #"rn######## # ## ### ###########################:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d0drw2_(u_(u}##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #1b n ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #8##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d0drw2!_(u_(u}##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #1b ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #8ff lƪl##dddrw2"_(ux_uffk} Z "x_u_u##an;Z ##F1 0.8 0.4 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #hZ lƪl##dddrw2"_Hux_uffk  Z "x_u_hu##an[Z ##F1 0.8 0.4 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #hZ lƪl##dddrw2"_(u_uffkm Z #x_u_u##anwZ ##F1 0.8 0.4 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #hZ lƪl##dddrw2"_hu_(uffk  Z #x_u_u##anrZ ##F1 0.8 0.4 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #hZ lƪl##dddrw2"_Hux_(uffk  Z "x_u_uhZ##an;hZ ##F1 0.8 0.4 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #hZ lƪl##dddrw2"_hux_uffk  Z "x_u_uhZ##an^hZ ##F1 0.8 0.4 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #hZ lƪl##dddrw2"_Hu_(uffk  Z #x_u_uhZ##anwhZ ##F1 0.8 0.4 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #hZ lƪl##dddrw2"_(u_uffk  Z #x_u_huhZ##anrhZ ##F1 0.8 0.4 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #hZff lƪl##ddrw2 !_(u_(uffffk . 1!_(u _(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u _(u!_(u ##F1 0.8 0.4 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # SPC SPC " lƪl##qn~zzzvvvvrrrrrrrnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnrrrrrrrvvvvzzz~ SPC SPC # ##F1 0.8 0.4 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # lƪl ################################################ lƪl##ddrw2 !_(u_(uffffk . 1!_(u _(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u_(u _(u!_(u ##F1 0.8 0.4 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # SPC SPC # lƪl##qn~zzzvvvvrrrrrrrnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnrrrrrrrvvvvzzz~ SPC SPC # ##F1 0.8 0.4 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # ################################################ UUUU##:0.5 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d0drw2!(_(u_u}##:0.5 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #1  ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #8##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d0drw23x`}x`]}##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #1##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #8UUUUUU """"##Q0.8333 0.8333 0.8333 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #ddrw2 'v`}`}UUUUUUb `v}'`v}'`v}`v}`v}'`v}'`}`}`v} ##Q0.3333 0.3333 0.3333 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # SPC SPC "2 """"##Q0.8333 0.8333 0.8333 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #q.222222 SPC SPC # ##Q0.3333 0.3333 0.3333 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # """" !#!2#!!!2!2 """"##Q0.8333 0.8333 0.8333 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #d`drw2 '`}`}UUUUUUb`}'`}'`}`}`} ##Q0.3333 0.3333 0.3333 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # SPC SPC "2 """"##Q0.8333 0.8333 0.8333 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #q2222 SPC SPC # ##Q0.3333 0.3333 0.3333 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # !!!2!2 """"##Q0.8333 0.8333 0.8333 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #d`drw2 ' `}`}UUUUUUb+`}'`}'` }` }`} ##Q0.3333 0.3333 0.3333 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # SPC SPC "2 """"##Q0.8333 0.8333 0.8333 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #q2424242 SPC SPC # ##Q0.3333 0.3333 0.3333 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # !!4!24!2 ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d`drw2`}`}}`}`} Z ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # ,~b ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #dPdrw2 Y`}`}}gAY`}`}` } ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # SPC SPC # ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # `b!,. ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d`drw2[ `=ɸ`}} [`}`= Z ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # &` ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #dPdrw2 Yi`}`}}gY`}`i}`} ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # SPC SPC # ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # `*!, ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d`drw2iv`}`}}vi`}`} Z ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # , ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d`drw2Yw`=ɸ`}}wY`=`} Z ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # X"##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d0drw2Px`x`}##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #1B ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #8 lƪl##dddrw24pTvF_PPk} Z 3oUvPP##aZ ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #hZ lƪl##dddrw28pSvF_PPk} Z 7oTwPf?P##aZ ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #hZ lƪl##dddrw2=pTvf?PFPk} Z <oTwPP##aZ ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #hZ lƪl##dddrw2DpSv&_PPk} Z CoTwPf?P##aZ ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #hZ lƪl##dddrw2Spsv_PPk} Z SotvPFPZ##aZ ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #hZ lƪl##dddrw2Tpov&_PPk} Z SopwPF?PZ##aZ ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #hZ lƪl##dddrw2Spjv?PPk} Z SokwFP&PZ##aZ ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #hZ lƪl##dddrw2Tpcv&_PPk} Z SodwPf?PZ##aZ ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #hZ lƪl##d`drw2TpTu_PPk}TpTu_PP Z ## ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #"N##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d0drw2Snp_(u_(u}##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #1N6##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #8##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d0drw2nv_(u_(u}##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #16##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #8 ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d`drw2Qb_(u_(u}Qb_(u_(u Z ##F0.6 0 0.5 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #"FD ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d`drw2Qb_(u_(u}Qb_(u_(u Z ##F0.6 0 0.5 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #"FkD lƪl##dXdrw2 YY_(u_(uk gY_(uY_(uY_(uY_(u ##D1 0.8 0 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # SPC SPC "f lƪl##qfffffff SPC SPC # ##D1 0.8 0 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # lƪl #!f# lƪl##d0drw2Qb_(u_(ukn##1Fo ##D1 0.8 0 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #8##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d0drw2!_(u_(u}##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #1n##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #8 UUUU##:0.5 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d`drw2 cv(c(}c(c(c(cv(c( ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # SPC SPC "2 UUUU##:0.5 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #q2e222e2 SPC SPC # ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # UUUU #h!e!!2 ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #ddrw2 cV(cV(})cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV( ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # SPC SPC # ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #"###### # # ## # # # ## ######################## ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #ddrw2 c(c(})c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c( ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # SPC SPC # ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #"r######## # ## ### ######################### UUUU##:0.5 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d`drw2  c(cV(}c(cv(c V(c(c( ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # SPC SPC "2 UUUU##:0.5 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #q2^+22+^2 SPC SPC # ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # #f!+!^!2 ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #ddrw2 c(c(})c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c( ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # SPC SPC # ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #"q###### # # ## # # # ## ######################## ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #ddrw2 cV(cV(})cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV(cV( ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # SPC SPC # ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #"r######## # ## ### ######################### UUUU##:0.5 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d`drw2 c(cv(}c˶(c(cv(c(c˶( ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # SPC SPC "2- UUUU##:0.5 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #q22-22- SPC SPC # ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # #g!!!2- ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #ddrw2 c(c(})c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c(c( ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # SPC SPC # ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #"###### # # ## # # # ## ######################## ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #ddrw2 cv(cv(})cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv( ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # SPC SPC # ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #"r ######## # ## ### ###########################:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d0drw2Jwcv(wcV(}##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #1` +##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #8UUUUUU """"##Q0.8333 0.8333 0.8333 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #ddrw2 'cv(cv(UUUUUUb cv('cv('cv(cv(cv('cv('cv(cv(cv( ##Q0.3333 0.3333 0.3333 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # SPC SPC "24 """"##Q0.8333 0.8333 0.8333 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #q.42244424244224 SPC SPC # ##Q0.3333 0.3333 0.3333 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # """" !4#!24#!4!!2!24 """"##Q0.8333 0.8333 0.8333 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #d`drw2 'cv(cv(UUUUUUbcv('cv('cv(cv(cv( ##Q0.3333 0.3333 0.3333 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # SPC SPC "2 """"##Q0.8333 0.8333 0.8333 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #q2222 SPC SPC # ##Q0.3333 0.3333 0.3333 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # !!!2!2 """"##Q0.8333 0.8333 0.8333 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #d`drw2 '$cv(cv(UUUUUUb+cv('cv('c$v(c$v(cv( ##Q0.3333 0.3333 0.3333 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # SPC SPC "2 """"##Q0.8333 0.8333 0.8333 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #q2222 SPC SPC # ##Q0.3333 0.3333 0.3333 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # !!!2!2 ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d`drw21cv(cv(}1cv(cv( Z ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # , ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #dPdrw2 Y1cv(cv(}gAYcv(c1v(c$v( ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # SPC SPC # ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # `2!, ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d`drw2[$c6(cv(}$[cv(c6( Z ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # `- ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #dPdrw2 Ycv(cv(}gYcv(cv(cv( ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # SPC SPC # ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # `!, ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d`drw2cv(cv(}cv(cv( Z ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # ,. ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d`drw2Yc6(cv(}Yc6(cv( Z ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # )X~##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d0drw2gwc(wc(}##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #1i##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #8##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d0drw2 cv(cv(}##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #1bL|##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #8ff lƪl##dddrw2!cv(wcV(ffk} Z !wc(c(##aj2Z ##F1 0.8 0.4 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #hZ lƪl##dddrw2!c(wc6(ffk  Z !wc(c(##ajZ ##F1 0.8 0.4 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #hZ lƪl##dddrw2!cv(cV(ffk  Z "wc(c(##ajZ ##F1 0.8 0.4 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #hZ lƪl##dddrw2!c(cv(ffk      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:NC=>?@ABMjEFGHIJKLkOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghi8nopqrstuvwxyz{|}~  Z "wc6(c(##ajZ ##F1 0.8 0.4 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #hZ lƪl##dddrw2! c(wcv(ffk  Z ! wc(c(hZ##aj4hZ ##F1 0.8 0.4 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #hZ lƪl##dddrw2!c(wcV(ffk  Z !wc6(c(hZ##ajhZ ##F1 0.8 0.4 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #hZ lƪl##dddrw2!c(cv(ffk  Z "wc(c(hZ##ajhZ ##F1 0.8 0.4 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #hZ lƪl##dddrw2!cv(c6(ffk  Z "wc(c(hZ##ajhZ ##F1 0.8 0.4 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #hZff lƪl##ddrw2  cv(cv(ffffk . 1 cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv( cv( ##F1 0.8 0.4 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # SPC SPC "d lƪl##qjddd~dzdvdvdvdrdrdrdrdndndndndndndndjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdndndndndndndndrdrdrdrdvdvdvdzd~dd SPC SPC # ##F1 0.8 0.4 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # lƪl ################################################ lƪl##ddrw2  cv(cv(ffffk. 1 cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv(cv( cv( ##F1 0.8 0.4 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # SPC SPC # lƪl##qjddd~dzdvdvdvdrdrdrdrdndndndndndndndjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdjdndndndndndndndrdrdrdrdvdvdvdzd~dd SPC SPC # ##F1 0.8 0.4 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # ##################################################:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d0drw2 cv(cv(}##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #1nh##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #8 UUUU##:0.5 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d0drw2 'cv(cf(}##:0.5 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #1hd ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #8 lƪl##dXdrw2 Y$Y1cv(cv(k}gWYc$v(Yc1v(Yc1v(Yc$v( ##D1 0.8 0 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # SPC SPC "f lƪl##qffffff SPC SPC # ##D1 0.8 0 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # #4## lƪl##d0drw2Q(b9cv(cv(kn##1F ##D1 0.8 0 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #8 ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #dXdrw2 YYcv(cv(}gYcv(Ycv(Ycv(Ycv( ##D1 0.8 0 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # SPC SPC # ##D1 0.8 0 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #"f4##4 lƪl##d0drw2Qxbcv(cv(kn##1F( ##D1 0.8 0 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #8DDDDDD wwww##K0.45 0.45 0.45 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #d`drw2 3@cv(cv(DDDDDDsA3cv(3cv(@cv(@cv(3cv( ##Q0.2667 0.2667 0.2667 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # SPC SPC "H wwww##K0.45 0.45 0.45 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #qH|H||HH SPC SPC # ##Q0.2667 0.2667 0.2667 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # wwww #4#4## wwww##K0.45 0.45 0.45 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #d0drw2btcv(cv(DDDDDDs##K0.45 0.45 0.45 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #1 ##Q0.2667 0.2667 0.2667 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #8 ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d`drw2 hhcv(cv(DDDDDD}vhcv(hcv(hcv(hcv(hcv( ##Q0.2667 0.2667 0.2667 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # SPC SPC # ##Q0.2667 0.2667 0.2667 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #"!#! ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d`drw2 nncv(cv(DDDDDD}|ncv(ncv(ncv(ncv(ncv( ##Q0.2667 0.2667 0.2667 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse # SPC SPC # ##Q0.2667 0.2667 0.2667 userdict /_cv known{_cv begin strgb end}{pop pop pop}ifelse #"!#!##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d0drw2_jcv(cv(}##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #1~##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #8 wwww##:0.25 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d0drw2ntcv(cv(}##:0.25 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #1 ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #8 ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d`drw2qqcv(cV(}qqcv(cV( Z ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #" UUUU##:0.5 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d0drw2"LU~U}##:0.5 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #Q1V ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #X ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d`drw2Mx] }]Mx  Z ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #"o ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #dPdrw2 ;e^@@}J^@;@eH@ ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # SPC SPC # ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # u!v ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d`drw2;etr@@}tr;e@@ Z ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #  UUUU##:0.5 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d0drw2"U/UUUUU}##:0.5 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #QV ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #X ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d`drw2M]}]M Z ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #"o? ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #dPdrw2 ;^@@}J ^@;@H@݀ ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # SPC SPC # ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # uV!r ##:1 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse #d`drw2; t@@}t ;@@ Z ##:0 userdict /_cv known {_cv begin stg end}{pop}ifelse # "V UUUU##:0.5 userdict /_cv kn