ESA Document - Emits - ESA
ESA Document - Emits - ESA ESA Document - Emits - ESA
s Cd, Cl 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 4.4.2.3.1 Heat flux compilation Angle of Attack Figure 4-81: Aerodynamic coefficients vs Angle of Attack for Mach 7 CD CL L/D 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-20(A) February 2004 page 340 of 422 An aerothermodynamic computation was performed looking at two extreme cases with the following parameters: Initial velocity: 3369 m/s Entry angle: -4.9 d and -25 d L/D: 0.3 The computations have been made using the MarsGramm 2001 atmospheric model. Figure 4-82 and Figure 4-83 show the collective heat fluxes and the heat loads for the two cases: Figure 4-82: Total Heat flux versus time L/D
s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-20(A) February 2004 page 341 of 422 The shallowest trajectory (-4.9d) has low acceleration and heat flux (around 50kW/m 2 instead of 100kW/m 2 ). However, this trajectory is worst for the TPS sizing and IBD design in terms of heat load (Figure 4-83). Heat load for an entry angle of -4.9d is about 7.5 MJ/m 2 whereas the maximal heat load for the steeper trajectory is about 3.5 MJ/m 2 . Figure 4-83: Heat load versus time Nevertheless, for this high heat load, the shallowest entry has been selected. Mach number requirement for the parachute is Mach 2. The corresponding altitude for the shallowest entry is about 14 km which fulfils the requirement. 4.4.2.3.2 Mass budgets Mass evaluation of the IBD is extrapolated from the main IBD of the Exomars mass. For a 25 m diameter and 60 d half cone angle IBD shape, the mass is about 500 kg. This mass takes into account only the IBD material, and the system for deployment. 4.4.3 Structures 4.4.3.1 Requirements and design drivers For the design of the landing legs on Martian surface the following set of general requirements were taken into account: • Compatibility with the vehicle launcher Energia induced mechanical loads. • Maximum of 6 m-leg footprint, due to compatibility with Energia fairing. All module structures shall provide the mechanical support to ensure mission success.
- Page 289 and 290: s Insulation structure (external) F
- Page 291 and 292: s cryocooler heat lift [W] cryocool
- Page 293 and 294: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 295 and 296: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 297 and 298: s • a duty cycle value (duration
- Page 299 and 300: s Figure 4-48: MAV Power Inputs HMM
- Page 301 and 302: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 303 and 304: s 4.3.5.4.2 Power storage HMM Asses
- Page 305 and 306: s Figure 4-52: Regenerative Fuel Ce
- Page 307 and 308: s Figure 4-54: Solar irradiance on
- Page 309 and 310: s 450.00 400.00 350.00 300.00 250.0
- Page 311 and 312: s 4.3.6.1 Budgets HMM Assessment St
- Page 313 and 314: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 315 and 316: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 317 and 318: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 319 and 320: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 321 and 322: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 323 and 324: s Surface Surface Container MAV Con
- Page 325 and 326: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 327 and 328: s 4.3.9.3 Baseline design 4.3.9.3.1
- Page 329 and 330: s Bio-Lock Masses: Core Samples No.
- Page 331 and 332: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 333 and 334: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 335 and 336: s Figure 4-72: Entry Velocity (L) a
- Page 337 and 338: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 339: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 343 and 344: s 2 3.9 233 923.1 347 923 12.3 352
- Page 345 and 346: s Figure 4-85: Communications MEV/M
- Page 347 and 348: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 349 and 350: s 4.4.5.3.2 GNC equipment HMM Asses
- Page 351 and 352: s 4.4.5.4 Control laws generation H
- Page 353 and 354: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 355 and 356: s Finally, the Figure 4-97 shown th
- Page 357 and 358: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 359 and 360: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 361 and 362: s velocity (m/sec) altitude (km) 50
- Page 363 and 364: s 4.5 Mars Ascent Vehicle 4.5.1 Tra
- Page 365 and 366: s Term Value Unit Radius of equator
- Page 367 and 368: s 4.5.2.1 Requirements and design d
- Page 369 and 370: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 371 and 372: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 373 and 374: s Inclination (deg) 47.5 47 46.5 46
- Page 375 and 376: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 377 and 378: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 379 and 380: s 4.5.3 Structures HMM Assessment S
- Page 381 and 382: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 383 and 384: s 4.5.5 Thermal HMM Assessment Stud
- Page 385 and 386: s 4.5.5.3 Baseline thermal design H
- Page 387 and 388: s HMM Assessment Study Report: CDF-
- Page 389 and 390: s Crew Ingress/Egress Hatch: HMM As
s<br />
HMM<br />
Assessment Study<br />
Report: CDF-20(A)<br />
February 2004<br />
page 341 of 422<br />
The shallowest trajectory (-4.9d) has low acceleration and heat flux (around 50kW/m 2 instead of<br />
100kW/m 2 ). However, this trajectory is worst for the TPS sizing and IBD design in terms of heat<br />
load (Figure 4-83). Heat load for an entry angle of -4.9d is about 7.5 MJ/m 2 whereas the<br />
maximal heat load for the steeper trajectory is about 3.5 MJ/m 2 .<br />
Figure 4-83: Heat load versus time<br />
Nevertheless, for this high heat load, the shallowest entry has been selected.<br />
Mach number requirement for the parachute is Mach 2. The corresponding altitude for the<br />
shallowest entry is about 14 km which fulfils the requirement.<br />
4.4.2.3.2 Mass budgets<br />
Mass evaluation of the IBD is extrapolated from the main IBD of the Exomars mass. For a 25 m<br />
diameter and 60 d half cone angle IBD shape, the mass is about 500 kg.<br />
This mass takes into account only the IBD material, and the system for deployment.<br />
4.4.3 Structures<br />
4.4.3.1 Requirements and design drivers<br />
For the design of the landing legs on Martian surface the following set of general requirements<br />
were taken into account:<br />
• Compatibility with the vehicle launcher Energia induced mechanical loads.<br />
• Maximum of 6 m-leg footprint, due to compatibility with Energia fairing.<br />
All module structures shall provide the mechanical support to ensure mission success.