Development of a Cold Gas Propulsion System for the ... - SSL - MIT
Development of a Cold Gas Propulsion System for the ... - SSL - MIT
Development of a Cold Gas Propulsion System for the ... - SSL - MIT
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
or more thrusters were firing toge<strong>the</strong>r, at least two <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>m had to be part <strong>of</strong> a station pair, and those<br />
effects <strong>the</strong>n coupled.<br />
With <strong>the</strong> observations made in <strong>the</strong> characterization tests, a method was developed <strong>for</strong> estimating <strong>the</strong><br />
thrust produced at any given point in a hop. The basic idea was to take <strong>the</strong> maximum thrust values in<br />
Table 6-1 as nominal thrust values and <strong>the</strong>n adjust <strong>the</strong>m with a set <strong>of</strong> correction factors based on what<br />
was going on in <strong>the</strong> hop. First, <strong>the</strong> thrust loss due to gas usage was estimated, generally by means <strong>of</strong> a<br />
curvefit. (The GNC algorithms were already modeling gas usage anyway to track mass loss <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> vehicle<br />
and estimate time <strong>of</strong> flight remaining.) Then, this adjusted thrust was multiplied by a correction factor<br />
based on how many non-station-pair thrusters were firing: 0.99 <strong>for</strong> 2, 0.98 <strong>for</strong> 3, or 0.95 <strong>for</strong> 4. Finally, if<br />
a station pair <strong>of</strong> thrusters was firing, <strong>the</strong> adjusted thrust levels <strong>of</strong> those two thrusters were multiplied by<br />
a final correction factor <strong>of</strong> 0.94.<br />
The method described above produced only very rough estimates <strong>of</strong> thrust, but it was difficult to be<br />
more precise given <strong>the</strong> restricted resources <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> TALARIS project. It was hoped that this initial ef<strong>for</strong>t<br />
would be sufficient to allow <strong>for</strong> testing <strong>of</strong> some basic GNC algorithms and preliminary demonstrations <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>the</strong> capabilities <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> TALARIS CGSE. At <strong>the</strong> time <strong>of</strong> writing this <strong>the</strong>sis, improving CGSE thrust<br />
characterization is an ongoing ef<strong>for</strong>t being pursued as scheduling permits, discussed in more detail in<br />
section 7.2.<br />
6.3.4 Pulse Testing and CGSE Control Circuit Improvement<br />
Based on <strong>the</strong> results <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> single-stream tests (section 5.3), <strong>the</strong> controls engineers <strong>for</strong> <strong>the</strong> TALARIS<br />
project had proposed a 5 Hz control cycle <strong>for</strong> <strong>the</strong> CGSE. This meant that PWM would be per<strong>for</strong>med on a<br />
200 ms period, with pulses <strong>of</strong> thrust ranging in width from 40 to 160 ms, except <strong>for</strong> certain flight modes<br />
in which continuous thruster firing was enabled. The start time <strong>of</strong> a pulse could coincide with <strong>the</strong> start <strong>of</strong><br />
a period, or it could be delayed to position <strong>the</strong> pulse later in <strong>the</strong> period, but <strong>the</strong>re would always be a<br />
minimum <strong>of</strong>f time <strong>of</strong> 40 ms between pulses from an individual thruster. Be<strong>for</strong>e this control scheme was<br />
used in flight, though, tests were per<strong>for</strong>med on <strong>the</strong> static test stand to verify that <strong>the</strong> full CGSE flight<br />
system was capable <strong>of</strong> implementing it successfully. These tests involved commanded pulse widths<br />
ranging from 40 to 160 ms in 20 ms increments, each repeated <strong>for</strong> 10 PWM cycles <strong>for</strong> each individual<br />
thruster.<br />
As <strong>the</strong> pulse tests began, it became clear that most <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> CGSE thrusters were not able to per<strong>for</strong>m <strong>the</strong> 5<br />
Hz control cycle as desired. All <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> measured pulse widths were longer than commanded, and several<br />
99