ENAE 483/788D
Principles of Space Systems Design
Fall, 2002

---

Team Project 2

The most recent modifications to the requirements document are in red text - last modified 021113

1) The mission is to design a Crew Rotation and Return Vehicle: a spacecraft which can be launched on an existing expendable launch vehicle to carry crew and/or limited cargo to the International Space Station, to stay on-orbit there for an extended period of time, and to return them safely to Earth.

2) The Level I requirements are:

1) CRRV shall be capable of launching on a US expendable launch vehicle currently planned for operational capability by 2005. (Here are links to the Delta IV [PDF; 9.4 MB] and Atlas V [PDF; 1.3 MB] payload guides. Note that each vehicle has several variants.)

2) CRRV shall carry a crew complement of 7 people wearing shuttle-standard launch and entry suits on launch and deorbit/entry/landing. Mass allocation for the crew shall be 150 kg each.

3) CRRV shall as a minimum be capable of carrying 450 kg of high priority cargo in addition to the crew requirements of 2.2. The cargo may be assumed to be divided into five equal packages of 90 kg and 0.25 m³ each. Provision shall be made for transfering cargo and crew internally to/from ISS.

4) CRRV shall be equipped to dock/berth to ISS using existing docking mechanisms and access points.

5) CRRV shall provide a means for intact abort in the event of a launch vehicle catastrophic failure at any point in the launch process.

6) CRRV shall be capable of remaining on-orbit for a minimum of 180 days. ISS services may be used in place of on-board services to meet this requirement.

7) CRRV shall be capable of remaining on-orbit with a full crew complement for the nominal mission length plus a 72 hour reserve operating margin.

8) CRRV shall be capable of performing the entire return flight (from ISS separation through landing) under autonomous control.

9) CRRV will be capable of voice and data communications to ISS and ground sites throughout the mission segments.

10) CRRV will be capable of performing all flight navigation and guidance functions without input from ground control.

11) CRRV shall be designed for a 99.9% chance of crew survival, and a 99% chance of mission completion without crew injury or vehicle loss.

12) CRRV shall be designed to facilitate return from ISS with one or more injured and/or incapacitated crew.

3) Each group should prepare two PowerPoint presentations. One will be the presentation you make in class, which has an absolute unbreakable time limit of 15 minutes including questions and answers. The other presentation is the comprehensive documentation of all of your design activities, and will be a considerable augmentation of your summary presentation.

4) The two PowerPoint presentations must be submitted in electronic form on the AJCOnline web site by the close of the day on Tuesday, December 3rd. The presentations should be logical, well-thought-out technical reviews of the system you designed, and should adhere to the guidelines presented in the "Engineering Graphics" class.

5) To help you in your analysis and report preparation, the following areas will be assessed and graded in your project. Each topic will be graded 0-10 (except as noted), and the maximum total grade for this project is 150 points.

• Mission Design and Analysis ­ Does the CRRV mission design adequately satisfy the intent of the program requirements? Does it represent an appropriate blend of capability and complexity? Is the analysis well-presented and correctly done?
• Systems Configuration ­ Does the design represent an appropriate and effective concept for completing the design mission? Is it well suited for planned mission operations? Is the design extensible to other potential missions? Are there any unresolved outstanding design issues?
• Mass Estimation ­ Does the mass estimate reflect an appropriate level of design in depth? Is there an appropriate level of mass margin?
• Cost Estimation ­ Are there detailed cost estimates? Program-level cost analyses, including learning effects and cost discounting/rate of return analyses?
• Safety Considerations ­ Can this system be operated at the NASA required safety level of 99.9% crew survival? Has the design team considered contingency operating modes to assure crew survival following a vehicle failure at any point in the mission?
• Interface Accommodations ­ Are details presented on CRRV interface to the launch vehicle and ISS? Is the landing scenario well thought-out and clearly presented?
• Power/Propulsion/Thermal Design ­ Have these systems been designed to an appropriate level of detail? Is there an analysis of propulsion system requirements, such as pressurizing gases and/or attitude control fuel? Is there an estimation of power requirements, and provision for meeting those requirements?
• Structural Design ­ Is the structural design and analysis performed at an appropriate level of detail? Has the design team prioritized their analysis on those vehicle components which most need detailed design analysis? (e.g., those systems that are not well-estimated by "traditional" mass estimating relations...)
• Crew Systems ­ Do the vehicle design and mission operations concepts accommodate the capabilities and limitations of humans, particularly when dealing with injured or incapacitated crew? Can crew ingress/egress be readily accomplished for all mission phases?
• Avionics Systems ­ Has the design team developed the requirements for the avionics systems? Are the avionics systems designed to an appropriate level?
• Style on Summary Presentation ­ Does the presentation meet the concerns expressed in the "Engineering Graphics" lecture notes? Is there a unifying graphical vision to the viewgraph package? Are the presentation pages at an appropriate and consistent level of information density? Do they work well within the context of the oral presentation?
• Style on Comprehensive Presentation ­ Does the presentation meet the concerns expressed in the "Engineering Graphics" lecture notes? Is there a unifying graphical vision to the viewgraph package? Are the presentation pages at an appropriate and consistent level of information density?
• Style of Oral Presentations (20 points) ­ Are the presenters relaxed but focused? Is the presentation clear and concise? Does the presentation team respond well to questions?
• Bonus Points ­ Has the team gone "above and beyond" in some way to make their final product stand out in a professional manner? Have they imparted some "special touch" to the project beyond the expectations of the instructor? Have they demonstrated an exceptional level of dedication and enthusiasm for this project?

A final note - this is a highly open-ended project, and even a team of superheroes isn't going to be able to do everything I've listed here. I fully understand that it would be unreasonable to expect everything here to get done. Nobody is going to get 150 points on this team project! One of the critical lessons here, though, is how to make intelligent choices, and how to prioritize your efforts to get the best product in a limited amount of time. Believe me, this is a critical skill that you will use time and again throughout your professional career!!!