Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

CAD drawing of the rocket module with the location of the temperature sensor marked.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Acceleration of REXUS-18 [17].

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Table 1.

Characteristic phases of flight.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 3.

Temperature measured during flight [17].

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 2.

Nomenclature used in this work.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 4.

Physical model of rocket module.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Finite element model with visible sizes of elements (number of element divisions per line equal to 1).

These were the biggest elements considered and were subsequently used in the optimization procedure.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

Finite element model with visible sizes of elements (number of element divisions per line equal to 8).

These were the smallest elements considered and were used only to analyse element size influence on the solution.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

Finite element model with visible sizes of elements (number of element divisions per line equal to 8), magnified to show smallest elements.

More »

Fig 7 Expand

Table 3.

Chosen material properties of Al7075 [24].

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 8.

Results of simulations of heat flow subject to constant heat flux.

More »

Fig 8 Expand

Table 4.

Comparison of optimization results for test with various moving window lengths.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Fig 9.

Influence of the finite element size (described by number of element divisions per line NDIV) on average temperature error ΔT and computation time.

More »

Fig 9 Expand

Table 5.

Comparison of calculations for various finite element sizes.

More »

Table 5 Expand

Fig 10.

Temperature distribution.

More »

Fig 10 Expand

Fig 11.

Heat flux distribution.

More »

Fig 11 Expand

Fig 12.

Determining the reaction time of the studied system.

More »

Fig 12 Expand

Fig 13.

Moving window optimization flowchart.

More »

Fig 13 Expand

Fig 14.

Moving window optimization Left: Visualization of three consecutive positions (i = 8—upper, i = 9—middle, i = 10—bottom) of moving window for n = 16, k = 3. Right (corresponding to left): linear interpolation of heat flux q values is visible. Points indicate time spans s.

More »

Fig 14 Expand

Fig 15.

Comparison of test optimization results for with various moving window lengths k.

More »

Fig 15 Expand

Fig 16.

Comparison of test optimization results with various division of heat flux q into time spans s.

All calculations were performed with window length k = 4.

More »

Fig 16 Expand

Fig 17.

Calculated heat flux q and temperature T against variables measured during flight: Temperature Y (used for IHTP), pressure, altitude.

Vertical lines indicate characteristic phases of flight, see Table 1 for details.

More »

Fig 17 Expand

Fig 18.

Schematic view of the planned experiment to measure heat flux on sounding rocket skin.

Note that insulation was not shown here.

More »

Fig 18 Expand