This group is for AstroWhale Mission 1!

The plan is to launch AstroWhale Mission 1 from Jamestown, NY.

Mission Simulations


3 replies, 2 voices Last updated by Profile photo of Conor McGibboney Conor McGibboney 2 years, 1 month ago
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
  • #884
    Profile photo of Conor McGibboney
    Conor McGibboney

    This topic is where we discuss mission simulations for AstroWhale Mission 1.

    Profile photo of Conor McGibboney
    Conor McGibboney

    The following images are of a the flight path and landing area(heat map).

    Sample simulation based on the recommended configurations:
    – Launch date for simulation: 1/4/17 5:00 am
    – TA-1500 gram balloon
    – Helium-pure
    – Rocketman 3 feet parachute
    – Payload weight of 1.05 kg as recommended for TA-1500 gram balloon
    – Nozzle lift 2.33 kg
    – Train equivalent sphere diameter: 0.1 m
    – Launch site: Jamestown NY ( 42.10693, -79.2488)
    – Weather: Online forecast.
    – 10 simulations.

    Profile photo of Binaya Bajgain
    Binaya Bajgain

    I have a query regarding the simulation. I have been trying using astra-planner and also with habhub, and they conflict with the results. Although, they differ in the input categories, I tried to stay as consistent I could and the results vary by some margin.
    The one with astra-planner always seem to land within the 2 to 3 hour drive but the ones i am doing with habhub, payload lands atleast 5 hour drive away from the origin.

    Profile photo of Conor McGibboney
    Conor McGibboney

    First I found technical data on the TA 1500 model weather balloon.

    Note that the

    Nozzle Lift = 2.44 kg

    Payload = 1.05 kg

    Rate of Ascent = 5.3 m/s

    Now the descent rate chart for the 3 ft Rocketman Parachute did not have values for weight the parachute is carrying. So I used this descent rate calculator.

    Descent Rate = 5.69 m/s (Assuming a 35km burst altitude)

    Both of the model predictions are off for me as well, but they seem a little closer. What I tried to do what make sure the data used for both was related in some way. So I am thinking that the error is due to the abstractions used in the simulations.

    Check my numbers.

    Lets keep experimenting with technical data, hand calculations, and different simulation methods and see if we can fine tune this.

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.