RAPPORT

RÉALISATION
EL HABAR 2.0

BLIDA ROCKETRY TEAM

Université Blida 1 Saad-Dahleb

Institut d’aéronautique et des
études spatiales
Contents
1 Team History 4

2 Team Structure 4

3 Project Management 5

4 Team Composition 5

5 Organizational Hierarchy 7

6 Team Organization Strategies 8

6.1 Task Allocation and Progress Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6.2 Communication and Coordination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

7 Training Sessions 9
7.1 Conflict Management Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7.2 Public Speaking Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

8 Financial Plan 10
8.1 Sponsors And Partners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

9 Budgetary Plan: 11

10 Budget 12
10.1 Marketing Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
10.1.1 Situation Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
10.1.2 Objective Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
10.2 Project Risk Management Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

11 ”Knowledge Transfer” (lessons learned + transfer) 14

12 Conclusion 15

13 Introduction 16

14 Preliminary Conception 16
14.1 Problem Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
14.2 Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
14.3 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
14.4 Motor Caractersitics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

15 CAD Modeling 17
15.1 Problem Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
15.2 Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
15.3 fins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
15.4 Motor Compartment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
15.5 Motor Tube . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
15.6 Parachute bulkhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

16 Calculations and simulations 23

16.1 calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
16.1.1 problematic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
16.1.2 procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
16.1.3 calculation of fuselage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
16.2 Forces applied to the propelled phase rocket . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

1
 16.3 Bending of the fins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

17 Static Simulation 26
17.1 Centering rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
17.2 Motor Block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
17.3 Parachute bulkhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

18 Avionics System 29
18.1 Hardware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
18.2 Software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
18.3 Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
18.3.1 Real time system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
18.3.2 Kalman Filter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
18.4 Global diagram of avionics system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
18.5 Recovery System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
18.6 Parachute Calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

19 Manufacturing 40
19.1 Fins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
19.2 Motor Compartment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

20 Hybrid rocket engine analysis 46

20.1 Advantages of Hybrid Rocket Engines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
20.1.1 In Comparison to Solid Rocket Engines: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
20.1.2 In Comparison to Liquid Rocket Engines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
20.1.3 In Terms of Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
20.2 Fuels in a Hybrid Rocket Engine: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
20.3 Properties of PMMA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
20.4 Considerations on the theory and design of fuel grains for hybrid rockets: . . . . . . 47
20.5 Important Design Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
20.6 Fraction volumetric loading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
20.7 Oxidizers in a Hybrid Rocket Engine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
20.8 Oxidizer Tank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
20.9 Average Mass Flow Rate of Oxidizer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
20.10Experimental Setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
20.11Combustion Chamber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
20.11.1 Fuel Grain Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
20.11.2 Injector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
20.11.3 The Igniter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
20.11.4 Power Supply System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
20.11.5 The Nozzle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
20.12Nozzle Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
20.12.1 Throat Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
20.12.2 Length-over-Diameter Ratio of the Grain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
20.12.3 Initial Calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
20.12.4 Performance Calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
20.12.5 Nozzle design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
20.12.6 Experimental designs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
20.13Engine and nozzle fabrication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
20.13.1 Machining . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
20.14Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
20.14.1 First test on PMMA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
20.15Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

21 Payload 59

2
List of Figures
1 Team hirarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2 Side view in open rocket . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3 Thrust curve of the Cesaroni Technology Inc, M6400 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
4 CAD model of LD-Haack nose cone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5 CAD model of the bottom finss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
6 CAD model of the top finss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
7 User interface of nTopology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
8 Section cut of the fins implicit body in nTopology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
9 Section cut of the fins meshed body in nTopology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
10 CAD subassembly of the motor compartment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
11 Motor compartment assembly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
12 Preparation of stone wool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
13 2D schematic drawing of the parachute attachment point . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
14 FEA simulation of a centering ring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
15 FEA simulation of a motor block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
16 FEA simulation of the parachute bulkhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
17 FEA simulation of the parachute hook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
18 Flowchart of avionics development stages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
19 Recovery Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
20 Main Parachute Opening . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
21 Force diagram of a free falling object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
22 Preparing molds for casting procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
23 Preparing molds for casting procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
24 Results of the thickness test depending on the number of layers . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
25 Laying the glass fiber sheets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
26 Place the part in the vacuum bag . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
27 Assembly of the two layers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
28 Machining the cone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
29 Sanding the tubes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
30 Sanding the cone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
31 3D printing the main fins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
32 3D printed secondary fins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
33 Water jet cutting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
34 Oxidizer tank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
35 CAD model of the experimental setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
36 2D drawing of the nozzle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
37 The ratio area as a function of Mach number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
38 Image of the Machining process of the oxygen injector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
39 Image of the Machining process of the nozzle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
40 Image of the assembled rocket and test bench . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
41 Thrust as a function of time for test n°1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
42 Thrust as a function of time for test n°2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
43 Thrust as a function of time for test n°3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
44 The U.S. Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT) cubesat bus assembly . . . . . . 59
45 Screenshot from ntop and AFIT case study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
46 Screenshot from ntop and AFIT case study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
47 Shell body import in ntop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
48 Gyroid volume body import in ntop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
49 Final part in ntop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
50 Final part export in ntop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

3
1 Team History
The ”ROCKETRY BLIDA TEAM” was established in 2017 by ambitious students from the Insti-
tute of Aeronautics and Space Studies at the Saad Dahleb University in Blida. Since its inception,
the team’s sole and primary objective has been to harness their skills and modest expertise to design
and test high-powered rockets of various types.

The team has also participated in the three previous editions of the Algerian rocket competition.
The first participation was in 2017 with a small team of 7 people, where the project allowed the team
to delve deeply into teamwork and acquire theoretical and technical knowledge in various fields. The
second participation was in 2018 with a team of 15 people, this time multidisciplinary and more
committed, as the team had already realized the importance of the project’s multidisciplinary nature.

In the two years of competition, the team secured the third-place position twice, receiving the
”Best Rocket Design” award. Teamwork is effective only when the skills involved are complementary.
Therefore, in this third edition of the competition, the ”ROCKETRY BLIDA Team” will present
with the same determination and ambition, conveyed through a new team formation working hand
in hand to realize a winning rocket project.

2 Team Structure
The ROCKETRY BLIDA team is organized according to ISO-9001, consisting of 15 dedicated
students, ranging from third-year students to graduate students. The team created an organizational
structure to manage its large and diverse set of knowledge and skills, and to facilitate the progression
of individuals and teams. This structure is flexible to take into account aspects of the design and
testing process identified as areas for improvement. Here is the organizational structure of the team.

Figure 1: Team hirarchy

4
 Each sub-group is led by a representative where each of these leaders has been selected based on
their past experience, technical skills, interest and leadership qualities. We are confident that the
chosen leaders have the technical know-how, dedication and experience necessary to lead the team
to design a successful and innovative system.

3 Project Management
Recruitment The management of this project requires a reconstruction of the team that meets the
imperatives of design and implementation in terms of training and skills, task allocation, availability,
budget management, and more.

To achieve this, the team launched a recruitment drive through social media accounts, using a
registration form, inviting interested and committed students from Saad Dahleb University Blida,
across various specialties, to become part of the new ROCKETRY BLIDA 2023 team.

The recruitment process occurred in two phases:

ˆ In the first phase, the call for recruitment was open to all students of Saad Dahleb University
Blida without exception.
ˆ In the second phase, the recruitment call was exclusively directed towards students of the
Institute of Aeronautics and Space Studies, aiming to ensure the continuity and sustainability
of the team

4 Team Composition
To support the technical efforts on the project, the team is composed of students from the de-
partments of the Institute of Aeronautics and Space Studies and electrical engineering. All team
members apply their knowledge to achieve a common goal.

5
 Furthermore, the team has made an effort to recruit students from various academic levels, rang-
ing from first-year students to graduate students. This year, three positions in the team have been
specifically reserved for students who have just entered the university, particularly first-year Aero-
nautics students. The aim is to ensure the continuity and sustainability of the team while also
enhancing our educational outreach.

6
5 Organizational Hierarchy
The team is led by a project manager, namely our supervisor, who oversees two main divisions:
Administrative Management and Technical Management.

The Administrative Management team is a vital group responsible for the financial security of
the team, as well as communication and marketing of ideas, achievements, and goals to individuals
both within and outside the organization. Our team operates much like a startup or research
enterprise. This team works closely with the core technical management of the team.

The Administrative Management division includes :

ˆ Communication and Marketing Team : Responsible for coordinating internal communi-

cation among sub-team members and external communication, particularly with sponsors and
partners. They handle the team’s marketing mission (media appearances and management of
various social media accounts) and project commercialization. Selected coordinators for any
of the sub-teams must demonstrate strong management skills, professionalism, and personal
motivation.
ˆ Management Team : Their role is to define short and long-term overall objectives, enhance
the efficiency of each sub-team, and implement methods to increase team transparency regard-
ing progress. They also serve as security managers and are responsible for financial sectors,
including accounts and budgets, meeting organization, and meeting minutes.
ˆ Logistics Team : Responsible for logistical management, team travel for tests, equipment
lists, supplier research, and overseeing material delivery, among other responsibilities.

The Technical Management constitutes the core of the ROCKETRY BLIDA team. Each sub-
team has a leader and a specified number of members to accomplish their goals and responsibilities.

ˆ Design and Simulation Team: Responsible for simulation, launcher design, all internal vehicle
components, and engine design.

7
 ˆ Structure Team: Tasked with creating trajectory models and designing the aerodynamic sur-
faces of the rocket (nose, tail cone, fins). Their role involves designing, analyzing, manu-
facturing, and testing all structural components of the rocket system, including rocket and
component fabrication (tubes, pods, fins, bulkheads) as well as designing and maintaining the
launch trailer.
ˆ Avionics and Payload Team: Responsible for designing, programming, and building the bay
and payload for the rocket’s electronics, as well as developing any other necessary electrical
systems for testing and launch.
ˆ Propulsion Team: Responsible for researching, designing, testing, and analyzing a hybrid
propulsion system for use in a flight-ready engine.

6 Team Organization Strategies

The key axes of ROCKETRY BLIDA’s multi-faceted management strategy are communication,
accountability, and technical skills.

6.1 Task Allocation and Progress Analysis

We have distributed tasks based on each member’s capabilities and specialties. A job description
has been provided for each team member so that they are aware of their primary and secondary
tasks during the project implementation.

Once the project manager sets the long-term objectives, each sub-team leader defines their specific
goals to align with the project manager’s objectives and work in harmony with the overarching goals
of the entire team.

Furthermore, the administrative director utilizes a program called Microsoft Project, which consol-
idates all distinct calendars and provides features for determining dependencies, timelines, identifying
critical paths, managing the budget, analyzing workloads, and allocating resources to tasks.

Meetings are scheduled 1 to 3 times per week, and a feedback and progress analysis session is
scheduled every Wednesday. During this session, the entire team gathers for a roundtable discussion
to address the progress percentage, task status, coordination, and the team’s overall mindset. The
purpose is to analyze difficulties and obstacles and establish strategies for solutions.

6.2 Communication and Coordination

The team has employed various forms of digital, oral, and written documentation and communi-
cation.

Digital communication primarily occurs through the Slack platform, a Telegram group, and emails.
Each sub-team manages its own channel for relevant discussions and to address questions from other
members.

Each sub-team provides the entire team with a weekly update on achievements and challenges
from the previous week, short-term goals for the upcoming week, and any additional information
that may be needed by another sub-team. Updates are created each week by different members.

Sub-teams have developed various methods to ensure that all members are well-informed about
the progress of their respective sub-teams. Each team leader sends a weekly report via email to the
administrative director the day before the Thursday meeting. The project manager then defines
meeting points and overall team objectives based on the progress reported by the leaders.

8
 Written documentation includes action plans, materials, weekly reports, and meeting minutes.
Most of these types of documentation are sent via email and stored in team archives as Google
Drive links.

7 Training Sessions
To ensure and maintain a positive team spirit and effective team management, a series of training
sessions have been organized.

7.1 Conflict Management Training

A conflict management training session took place on 11/17/2023, with 90% of team members in
attendance. The objectives of this training were:
ˆ Highlighting the 7 operational rules to set the framework for avoiding potential conflicts.

ˆ Distinguishing between a conflict and a problem.

ˆ Analyzing the causes of a conflict.

ˆ Exploring possible resolutions for conflicts.

ˆ Developing conflict management attitudes.

7.2 Public Speaking Training

A public speaking training session took place on 11/20/2023, with 95% of team members in
attendance. The objectives of this training were:

ˆ Emphasizing the goals of effective public speaking.

ˆ Highlighting the importance of the first impression.

ˆ Being able to manage stress during public speaking.

ˆ Analyzing the message transmission chain between the sender and receiver.

ˆ Distinguishing between what the sender wants to say, thinks about saying, and ultimately
says.
ˆ Differentiating between what the receiver receives, understands, and applies.

ˆ Knowing how to choose and develop the 20% that the sender wants the audience to retain.

ˆ Discussing the three axes of the Art of Communication according to Aristotle.

ˆ Developing a key activity.

Given that the construction of a rocket is costly, the team had to collaborate with stakeholders
who expressed their financial and material support. While this collaboration allowed us to bring our
ideas to fruition, working with various companies and suppliers imposed constraints that we had to
adapt to. Working as a team in such an environment has been a highly educational process for our
future careers, teaching us skills that go beyond the realm of pure engineering, extending into areas
such as management, communication, and logistics.

9
8 Financial Plan
Given that the construction of a rocket is costly, the team had to collaborate with stakeholders
who expressed their financial and material support. While this collaboration allowed us to bring our
ideas to fruition, working with various companies and suppliers imposed constraints that we had to
adapt to. Working as a team in such an environment has been a highly educational process for our
future careers, teaching us skills that go beyond the realm of pure engineering, extending into areas
such as management, communication, and logistics.

8.1 Sponsors And Partners

LE JEUNE AVIATEUR is an aviation focused club from the University of Saad Dahleb Blida
which is active in the aerospace engineering sector the club now brings together more than 100
ambitious and active members who want to share their knowledge according to the slogan ”Sharing
Is Caring”

10
 CLOUD is the catering and delivery service within the University of SAAD DAHLEB BLIDA

3D Printing Royal stands out as an excellent company specializing in 3D printing, providing

services in design, 3D production, in-depth studies, and project management. A crown of innovation
in the realm of additive manufacturing.

9 Budgetary Plan:
A comprehensive budget is an essential aspect of the success of any project. The team has
formulated a budget that has been divided into categories, as presented in the figure, based on the
allocation of resources.

11
 The budget is closely monitored and updated throughout the season as the design and needs
evolve. However, having a tight budget allows the management team to understand the financial
status. Understanding the budget also enables the formulation of more informed sponsorship requests
and provides goals to set during fundraising.

The detailed breakdown of each subsystem also gives businesses the opportunity to support the
team without making strict financial decisions. When the team can approach a company with specific
needs, it provides others with the opportunity to support the team by making material donations,
which has been significantly beneficial.

The detailed budget for each subsystem is outlined below.

10 Budget
10.1 Marketing Plan
We have endeavored to promote our EL HABARAH Project using the innovation and good rep-
utation of the ROCKETRY BLIDA team to propose funding to various commercial companies and
grants throughout the semester. We also focused on various aspects of digital marketing, our visual
identity, and our social media accounts to market our project within the Blida University community
and reach the maximum number of individuals and businesses. Our marketing plan went through
three stages:

10.1.1 Situation Analysis

During the analysis of problems and obstacles, we identified various points, including:
ˆ Absence of the team on the digital platform.

12
 ˆ Despite being the official representative of the university in this competition for two years, the
team’s reputation was not sufficiently popular among Saad Dahleb Blida University students.
ˆ Lack of collaboration and exchange with various associations and organizations within the
university and the city of Blida.

ˆ No work on the visual identity of the team and the project.

ˆ Insufficient personnel capable of handling the team and project marketing task.

ˆ Lack of guidance and support in terms of knowledge from individuals capable of assisting the
team in project marketing.

ˆ Limited impact and activity of the team only at the competition level, neglecting what it can
achieve and present to the community on various scales.

10.1.2 Objective Setting

After observing the points during the problem analysis, we understood that to have a significant
impact on society, we first needed to act and have an impact on Saad Dahleb Blida University
students. Clear, concise, and specific objectives were set:
ˆ Creation of a sub-team responsible for the marketing and communication tasks of the team
and the project.
ˆ Maximization of work on the team’s digital marketing through a strong presence on the digital
platform:

– Creation of a team website.

– Creation of a Facebook page in the team’s name and reaching more than 3000 people.
– Creation of a LinkedIn account in the team’s name to facilitate professional contact with
sponsors and potential organizations.

ˆ Reach the maximum number of Saad Dahleb Blida University students.

ˆ Convince at least one marketing consultant to invest their knowledge and experience in the
team and accompany us during the project realization.
ˆ Reach and have contact with the maximum number of potential companies and organizations.

ˆ Influence the civil scene as a team working on a technical project while addressing various
aspects.

10.2 Project Risk Management Approach

The project risk management approach is generally based on a continuous and iterative process
that aims, successively, to identify and analyze the risks involved, assess and prioritize them, consider
ways to control them, monitor and control them, and finally, capitalize on the knowledge and
experience gained in this field. This process is broken down into five main steps:

ˆ Step 1: Identification and Characterization of Risks

– Prerequisite: Comprehensive listing of all potential risk events for the project.
– Analysis: Detailed examination of causes, potential impacts, and characterization of iden-
tified risks.
– Additional Considerations: Examination of possible interactions and combinations to
uncover new risks.

13
ˆ Step 2: Evaluation and Prioritization of Risks
– Utilizes quantitative analysis to estimate impacts on costs, schedules, and/or technical
specifications.
– Evaluates the probability of each identified risk and estimates the severity of their direct
and indirect consequences.
– Prioritizes risks, distinguishing acceptable from non-acceptable risks for the project.
ˆ Step 3: Treatment of Risks
– Involves defining and implementing appropriate measures to bring risks to an acceptable
level.
– Requires defining response strategies and implementing risk-specific actions to eliminate
causes, transfer or share responsibility, reduce criticality, or accept the risk while moni-
toring it.
ˆ Step 4: Monitoring and Control of Risks
– Periodically adjusts the portfolio of potential risks based on new information.
– Updates the initial list of identified risks, refines risk characteristics, re-evaluates critical-
ity, controls the application of control actions, assesses the effectiveness of actions taken,
and monitors the occurrence of feared events and their consequences.
ˆ Step 5: Capitalization and Documentation of Risks
– Involves capturing the knowledge and experiences gained.
– Establishes rigorous documentation on associated project risks.
– Formalizes specific documents (Project Risk Management Plan, Project Risk Manage-
ment File) to ensure traceability of encountered risks, actions taken, and results obtained.
– Organizes and plans the collection and storage of useful information periodically.

11 ”Knowledge Transfer” (lessons learned + transfer)

The ”Knowledge Transfer” process aims to capitalize on and transfer knowledge at the end
of a key phase or project. Meetings lasting 2-3 hours were organized every Wednesday, with
the entire team in attendance. During these sessions, each sub-team identified the following
elements:

– Purpose and impacts;

– Budget and necessary resources;
– How the team could have operated differently to be more effective and efficient;
– Review of the specifications in the project brief;
– Have we achieved what was set out?
– What went well (in relation to the objectives) and why?
– What could have been improved? Why was it a challenge or a disappointment?
– How to avoid these challenges and disappointments? Additionally, the project team that
is about to start lists the information it needs and in which areas.

At the end of each meeting, team leaders come together to share their recommendations and
questions for the transfer of both explicit knowledge and tacit knowledge (”tricks,” ”tips”) that
may not have been captured previously.

14
12 Conclusion

15
13 Introduction
The dual-stage launcher has been meticulously crafted and refined to achieve optimal performance
while minimizing construction and launch expenses. This design seamlessly aligns with the stringent
criteria set forth by both the Algerian and American competitions.

The design is set to compete in 10k feet categories, with predefined weight limitations, the launcher
boasts dimensions of 291cm in length and a 15,4cm diameter. This configuration provides ample
space for all critical subsystems, encompassing flight control, payload, and recovery systems.

Propulsion is entrusted to a single rechargeable solid fuel motor engineered by Cesasorni Tech-
nologies Inc. The ignition of the motor is under the precise control of the onboard computer.

The recovery process unfolds in two distinct sections, facilitated by the deployment of three
parachutes. At the altitude of our targeted apogee of 10k feet, the deployment of the payload and
the transition into descent starts, and after 2 seconds the first parachute deploys to mitigate the
velocity, and later on, the primary parachute unfurls at an altitude of 1500ft to further reduce the
speed to avoid a heavy impact.

14 Preliminary Conception
14.1 Problem Definition
The primary aim of this phase is to forge a preliminary design that impeccably aligns with the
outlined specifications. The mission’s triumph hinges on the fulfillment of the following pivotal
criteria:
ˆ Ascending to an altitude of 10,000 feet, held to an exacting tolerance of ±150 feet.

ˆ Safely carrying a 4 kg rectangular payload of the dimensions 10x10x30 cm.

ˆ Ensuring that the impact velocity upon ground contact remains below the threshold of 20 m/s.

The foundational concept serves as an initial framework, destined for continual refinement and
optimization throughout the entire development cycle of the rocket.

14.2 Procedure
The initial concept is derived through the utilization of the Open Rocket simulation software.
This conceptual framework incorporates several estimations accompanied by substantial margins of
error, strategically incorporated to facilitate and guide the developmental phase. These generous
margins not only streamline the development process but also serve as valuable aids in navigating
potential uncertainties.

Figure 2: Side view in open rocket

16
14.3 Results
Open Rocket allowed us to perform a full-scale simulation. The outcomes of this simulation are
outlined in the following table:
Parameter Value
Length 291 cm
Maximum diameter 15.4 cm
Total mass @ launch 25kg
Stability 1.44 Cal
Maximum velocity 345 m/s
Maximum acceleration 296 m/s²
Landing velocity 9.87 m/s
Motor Class M

14.4 Motor Caractersitics

The motor has been selected To ensure the requisite thrust for accomplishing the mission’s objec-
tives and, notably, for cost-effective launches, Below are the specifications for each of them:
Motor Cesaroni Technology Inc, M6400
Total impulse 8634 Ns
Avg. thrust 6351 N
Max thrust 7245 N
Burn time 1.36 s
Launch mass 8 kg
Empty mass 3.6 kg

Figure 3: Thrust curve of the Cesaroni Technology Inc, M6400

15 CAD Modeling
15.1 Problem Definition
To anticipate potential technical challenges in the fabrication phase, a CADQ model must be
created based on the initial OpenRocket simulation data. This model serves the dual purpose

17
of refining the initially estimated margins of error and guiding the formulation of construction
procedures.

Before embarking on the construction process, the model must address the design, placement, and
spatial requirements of the recovery and separation systems. Consequently, determining the space
to be occupied by the avionics bay and parachute capsules requires simultaneous development of
those components alongside CAD modeling. This approach ensures a comprehensive understanding
of the spatial constraints and aids in formulating an effective construction plan.

15.2 Procedure
The Von Karman design has been identified as the optimal configuration for the Mach range within
which the rocket will operate. Consequently, this design choice has been embraced, accompanied by
the following specified dimensions (Note that an extra balancing weight will be added to the tip of
the nose cone):

Component name Type Base diameter Length Material

Cone LD-Haack 15.4 cm 80 cm Woven Glass fiber

The equations employed to generate the Von Karman (LD-Haack) type cone in our SolidWorks
design are defined by the following expressions:
r
R sin(2 · θ) 2·x
Mathematical Formula: y = √ · θ− + C · sin3 (θ), θ = arccos(1 − )
π 2 L

SolidWorks Formula: (R∗sqrt(arccos(1−((2∗x)/L))−(sin(2∗arccos(1−((2∗x)/L)))/2)))/sqrt(pi)

Figure 4: CAD model of LD-Haack nose cone

Note: The blue portion of the cone is the balancing weight, it will be mentioned later, in the
manufacturing section.

18
15.3 fins
In pursuit of optimal stability and aesthetic appeal, a strategic addition has been made to the
design by incorporating two finss. The lower fins has been designed by utilizing the NACA 0002
airfoil, a choice made for its aerodynamic properties. Complementing this, the upper fins, designed
without a specific airfoil profile, serves the dual purpose of enhancing stability and contributing to an
aesthetically pleasing overall design. This thoughtful integration of finss underscores a commitment
to both functional performance and visual harmony in the overall design of the system.

The dimensions of the aforementioned finss are as follows:

Figure 5: CAD model of the bottom finss

Figure 6: CAD model of the top finss

The fins features a rectangular base inserted into each stage, which will be bonded to the internal
tube, the centering rings, and the external surface of the tube. This arrangement is designed to
ensure complete stability and adhesion to the rocket.

19
 Following the modeling of the finss in CAD, they are imported into nTopology, a cutting-edge
implicit modeling software dedicated to generating optimized geometry. This software is specifically
designed to enhance the stiffness and strength of structures while concurrently minimizing their
weight. Internal structures for the airfoil were generated using nTopology to achieve these objectives.
The figure below illustrates the user interface of nTopology, showcasing the environment where these
advanced design and optimization processes take place.

Figure 7: User interface of nTopology

The distinctive advantage offered by nTopology lies in its capability to create a notebook, enabling
the execution of repeatable actions without the need to remodel each time a change is made to the
initial geometry. This feature has proven invaluable in saving significant time during the prototyping
phase. The ability to streamline and automate processes within the software not only enhances
efficiency but also provides a flexible and dynamic platform for iterative design and optimization.

Upon importing the CAD model, the subsequent step involved its conversion into an implicit
body. Following this, the body was shelled, and Gyroid TPMS (Triply Periodic Minimal Surface)
lattice structures were introduced. Notably, the periodicity of the lattice was increased in the y
and z directions to enhance stiffness, specifically anticipating the excitations that the finss would
encounter.

The Gyroid unit cell was deliberately selected due to its quasi-isotropic properties, offering uniform
mechanical characteristics in various directions. This choice is further reinforced by the Gyroid’s
high stiffness-to-weight ratio, making it particularly suitable for applications where structural in-
tegrity is crucial. Additionally, the Gyroid lattice structure exhibits remarkable vibration-absorbing
capabilities, enhancing the overall performance and resilience of the finss in dynamic conditions.

After these operations, the geometry underwent voxelization, followed by meshing to facilitate
conversion into a .stl format. This .stl format serves as the preparatory stage for the subsequent 3D
printing of the geometry. The ensuing figures illustrate the sequential steps involved in this process,
showcasing the transformation of the designed finss into a format ready for 3D printing.

20
 Figure 8: Section cut of the fins implicit body in nTopology

Figure 9: Section cut of the fins meshed body in nTopology

The identical procedure was applied to the bottom-most finss.

15.4 Motor Compartment

This system aims to ensure the secure attachment of the motor tube throughout the entire flight
regime, mitigating vibrations and sustaining optimal engine functionality. The objective is to pre-
vent any undesired movement or instability in the motor tube during flight, safeguarding both the
structural integrity of the rocket and the consistent operation of the engine.

The assembly comprises an engine block and six centering rings, three of which incorporate sup-
ports for fins attachment. Achieving precise alignment of the rings is critical, necessitating the
installation of centering axes. To reduce weight and ensure secure fins fixation, a precision mounting
system for the finss has been specifically designed for the launcher. This system is integral to both
weight reduction and the reliable attachment of finss, contributing to the overall structural integrity
and optimal performance of the rocket.

21
 Figure 10: CAD subassembly of the motor compartment

Figure 11: Motor compartment assembly

15.5 Motor Tube

The motor tube will be a fiberglass tube with a diameter of 104mm. This tube serves as the
housing for the launcher’s engine. The manufacturing process for the motor tubes mirrors that of
the structural tubes. For safety reasons, a thermal insulator (stone wool) is installed between the
motor tube and the structural tube to manage heat dissipation effectively and ensure safe operation.

Figure 12: Preparation of stone wool

22
15.6 Parachute bulkhead
This bulkhead represents the parachute attachment point, secured with the motor block. This
support serves as the point where all the force for parachute deployment is applied, the following
figure represents the parachute attachment schematics :

Figure 13: 2D schematic drawing of the parachute attachment point

The parachute opening force is calculated using the theorem of the difference in momentum,
∆v
f = m· In this scenario, with two parachute deployments, we will use the deployment of
∆t
the second parachute as a reference since it exhibits the highest drag. and from our open rocket
simulation, we find that f = 85N

16 Calculations and simulations

16.1 calculations
16.1.1 problematic
To give more weight to the OpenRocket simulation results and tackle any issues faced in the
initial design phase, we delved into thorough simulations and calculations. The goal was not only
to showcase the insights from OpenRocket but also to come up with solutions for the challenges
encountered during the initial design process.

16.1.2 procedure
16.1.3 calculation of fuselage
The cylinder wall can withstand a maximum compressive force as defined by the following rela-
tionship:

σc ·π·(R2 −r 2 )
Pmax = s

with :

ˆ Pmax The maximum axial load applied

23
 ˆ σmax the compression limit of the fiberglass taken from the table
ˆ D the external diameter at 154mm
ˆ d the internal diameter at 148mm
ˆ s the safety coefficient set at 2

16.2 Forces applied to the propelled phase rocket

Only the main stage will fly in the supersonic regime, thus experiencing the most substantial
forces. Consequently, this study will be specifically focused on analyzing this stage. The inertial
and aerodynamic forces (supersonic flow) that resist rocket flight are determined by the following
relationships:

Finertie = m · a

with

ˆ a: rocket acceleration

Design on OpenRocket yielded the following results :

ˆ m=
ˆ a=

where :

F=

The aerodynamic force for supersonic flow is determined by the following equation:

1
Fdrag = 2 · K · p · M 2 · Cd · A

with :

ˆ K specific heat ratio

ˆ p dynamic pressure.
ˆ M Mach number
ˆ Cd drag coefficient
ˆ A reference surface

16.3 Bending of the fins

The bending load experienced by the fins originates from the aerodynamic force Fdrag . Calculating
the maximum stresses induced by bending is essential to assess the resilience of the fins. Compar-
ing these stresses with the strength of the chosen material for the fins, carbon fiber, facilitates the
verification of fin strength.

24
Max bending stresses:

Mf
σmax = IGZ /v

with :

ˆ Mf bending moment IGZ quadratic moment of inertia of the cross section v distance between
the neutral axis and the furthest fibers

Mf = F · d

ˆ F is given by:
1
F = 2 · p · V 2 · Cn · S

with :

ˆ S : Reference surface

ˆ P : air density

ˆ V : rocket speed

ˆ Cn : Lift coefficient which is given by the relation:

df ins 4·Q·( d e )2
ref
(Cnα )f ins = (1 + 2e+df ins ) · q
2f
1+ 1+( m+n )2

ˆ Q : is the number of fins

ˆ d : is the maximum diameter of the tube

ˆ e : is the height of the fin

ˆ m: is the length of the base of the fin

ˆ n : the length of the tip of the fin

ˆ p : is the length of the leading edge

ˆ f : is given by the relation

q
n−m
f= e2 + (p + 2 )

Finally the bending stress will be :

Mf
σf = I ·Y

Flexural strength of carbon fiber: 1200MPa

The bending strength of the Petg fiber: 69MPa

25
 So the fin will resist the bending stress in complete safety.

17 Static Simulation
17.1 Centering rings
While reducing weight, the weight reduction slots will also impact the strength of the section. To
maintain an acceptable safety factor, finite element analyses (FEA) have been conducted for each
centering ring:

Figure 14: FEA simulation of a centering ring

17.2 Motor Block

The engine retention system is an engine block that prevents the engine from moving forward
within the motor-carrying tube. This retention device has been specially designed to support the
weight of the engine casing with the installed motor and withstand the thrust force during the
propulsion phase.

To ensure that the system can withstand these forces, finite element analyses (FEA) have been
conducted.

Figure 15: FEA simulation of a motor block

26
17.3 Parachute bulkhead
To ensure that the support can withstand this force, finite element analyses were conducted:

Figure 16: FEA simulation of the parachute bulkhead

27
 Figure 17: FEA simulation of the parachute hook

Calculation and simulation are integral stages in the study and development process, facilitating
an initial understanding of the physical phenomena related to our project. Multiple iterations of
calculation are performed to ensure the proper behavior of our components.

28
18 Avionics System
The avionics system is purposefully designed to autonomously control the rocket throughout its
flight trajectory, guaranteeing optimal performance. Its primary responsibilities encompass the
following tasks:

ˆ Stage Separation Control: The system supports the separation of the different stages of
the rocket at the appropriate time.
ˆ Main Engine Ignition Control: It ensures that the main engine is fired at the precise
moment, thus facilitating the propulsion of the rocket.
ˆ Cone Ejection Control: It controls the cone ejection mechanism, ensuring smooth separa-
tion.
ˆ Useful Mass Recovery System Control: The system supervises the payload recovery
procedures once its mission is complete.
ˆ Control of the Main Stage Recovery System: It manages the recovery operations of the
rocket main stage.
ˆ Post-Impact Location: The avionics system facilitates the precise location of the rocket
after landing.
ˆ Flight Data Collection and Recording: The system is responsible for accurately collecting
and recording flight data, providing crucial information for post-mission analysis.

The following flowchart shows the steps to be taken to develop the embedded system:

Figure 18: Flowchart of avionics development stages

18.1 Hardware
The criteria we considered for the selection of electronic components include the following:
ˆ Thermal Conditions: We evaluated the ability of the components to perform optimally
under different thermal conditions, ensuring reliable performance in a variety of environments.

29
ˆ Type of Communication Protocols and Compatibility: We reviewed the communi-
cation protocols supported by the components, ensuring that they were compatible with the
needs of the system and allowed for seamless integration with other elements.
ˆ Availability and Cost: The availability of the components on the market as well as their
cost were determining factors in the selection process. We sought to strike a balance between
the availability of the necessary components and cost management to optimize the project
budget.

30
31
32
33
34
35
18.2 Software
The software used is :
ˆ ISIS Proteus: Design and Simulation of Electronic Circuits

ˆ Eagle: PCB Design

ˆ Arduino IDE: C++ programming of Atmel microcontrollers (Arduino)

18.3 Algorithms
18.3.1 Real time system
We use Real Time System mainly to ensure the parallelism of programs (multi-tasking), process
information and perform avionics actions instantaniously.

ˆ In the field of avionics, real-time systems play a critical role in ensuring the safety, reliability
and performance of aircraft.
ˆ Real-time systems are used to continuously monitor the performance of avionics systems, detect
anomalies, and generate alerts in the event of a potential failure.

18.3.2 Kalman Filter

The Kalman filter, known for its reliability in demanding contexts such as space missions and
TOMAHAWK missiles, has been integrated into our system to process noise data from sensors. By
acting as an advanced filter, it helps stabilize measured values, mitigate interference, and ensure
data consistency. This approach enhances the robustness of the system, improving its accuracy and
reliability under varying conditions.

36
18.4 Global diagram of avionics system

18.5 Recovery System

The main stage recovery procedure is initiated at the moment of apogee, determined automatically
by the on-board computer. The process is completely autonomous, with the on-board computer
taking over the control in an automated manner.

Figure 19: Recovery Logic

37
 At apogee, a CO2 charge is activated to trigger the separation of the cone and the deployment of
the pilot parachute. Once exposed to the air, the pilot pulls the braking parachute (drug) out of his
bag, also playing a role in opening the parachute into the open air. The drug parachute is securely
attached to the onboard computer capsule as well as to the base of the cone.

The payload and its recovery system are deployed when the cone is separated. During the descent
phase, the onboard computer determines the deployment altitude of the main parachute and triggers
a charge to eject the avionics capsule. The avionics capsule in turn pulls the main parachute from
its bag, while a pilot parachute assists in opening the main parachute into the open air.

Figure 20: Main Parachute Opening

18.6 Parachute Calculations

A parachute exploits the phenomenon of ”aerodynamic deceleration”, i.e. thanks to its shape it
generates a drag force that will eventually balance with that of the Earth’s gravity.

Figure 21: Force diagram of a free falling object

The following are the equations that govern a free falling body :
Fdrag = 1/2 · ρ · v 2 · S · Cd
P =m·g

38
 Equilibrium is reached when the following equation is verified :

Fdrag = P ⇐⇒ 1/2 · ρ · v 2 · S · Cd = m · g

Thus we can obtain the necessary surface area to achieve a desired impact velocity by rearranging
the equation as follows :
2·m·g
S=
ρ · v 2 · Cd

We chose an impact velocity less than or equal to 20m/s (we have chosen 10m/s); For the braking
parachute, an equilibrium speed of less than or equal to 20m/s is chosen.

The surface formula allowed us to size the parachutes we need and they are as follows:

Parachute Surface Number of suspensions

Main parachute 16.2 m2 10
Brake parachute 7.68 m2 8

39
19 Manufacturing
Contact molding has been chosen as a molding process, considering its versatility and the ability
to provide a completely smooth surface. It facilitates easy part extraction and requires minimal
material investment.

The process entails manually saturating reinforcements strategically placed within a mold. It
proves cost-effective and accommodates the production of parts in diverse shapes, yet it exhibits a
relatively low efficiency rate.

The structural team’s experience in this process has greatly assisted in the fabrication of the
component, resulting in significant time and cost savings, along with efficient resource utilization.

Figure 22: Preparing molds for casting procedure

Figure 23: Preparing molds for casting procedure

An experiment was conducted to ascertain the precise number of layers that yield the desired
thickness (3 mm) and to identify potential challenges during the process. The results are outlined
in the table.

40
 Figure 24: Results of the thickness test depending on the number of layers

Initially, the mold is coated with 15 layers of PVA to achieve a perfectly smooth surface. Sub-
sequently, the stratification of various layers of matrix and materials is performed. The process
involves placing the glass fabric first, followed by the perforated release fabric, and applying a layer
of matrix between each fabric. This sequence continues, concluding with the placement of the cotton
wool at the end.

Figure 25: Laying the glass fiber sheets

Then, to allow them to take the perfect shape of the mold, the entire setup is placed in a vacuum
bag.

41
 Figure 26: Place the part in the vacuum bag

After the shell is extracted, the two shells are then assembled and sanded to achieve the optimal
cone shape.

Figure 27: Assembly of the two layers

42
 The cone’s tip, crafted from machined STEEL, ensures a perfect point and a more rigid surface
to minimize deformations caused by high temperatures and shock zones in the supersonic regime.

Figure 28: Machining the cone

After that the same process was used to make the structure, with a diameter of 15.4 cm, The tubes
are manufactured by rolling seven layers of glass fabric onto a master, applying matrix between each
pair of glass fabric layers. then later both the tube and cone were sanded down for a smooth finish

Figure 29: Sanding the tubes

43
 Figure 30: Sanding the cone

19.1 Fins
The fins used for both the main and secondary fins of the rocket are 3D printed and reinforced
with carbon fiber.

Figure 31: 3D printing the main fins

44
 Figure 32: 3D printed secondary fins

19.2 Motor Compartment

The components of the engine compartment are manufactured from aluminum using water jet
cutting.

Figure 33: Water jet cutting

45
20 Hybrid rocket engine analysis
Hybrid rocket engines are increasingly acknowledged as promising propulsion systems for various
space transportation applications. Their performance rivals that of liquid or semi-cryogenic rocket
engines, exhibiting appealing characteristics by amalgamating the advantages of solid and liquid
rocket engines while mitigating associated drawbacks. Beyond performance, hybrid rocket-powered
vehicles are recognized for their enhanced safety, cost-effectiveness, and environmental friendliness,
distinguishing them from other propulsion systems. Consequently, a multitude of research programs
has been dedicated to advancing hybrid rocket engine technology, spanning applications from Earth-
suborbital flights to broader space exploration initiatives.

Despite the manifold advantages, the success of hybrid rocket engines is met with specific chal-
lenges. These include issues such as low regression rates in commonly used polymer fuels, dimin-
ished combustion efficiency, variability in mixture ratios, uncertainties in regression rate laws, and
challenges in achieving scalability. Notably, the regression rate stands out as a pivotal parameter
significantly impacting the design process and exerting a pronounced influence on overall propulsion
system performance, underscoring the intricacies involved in addressing this challenge.

20.1 Advantages of Hybrid Rocket Engines

20.1.1 In Comparison to Solid Rocket Engines:
ˆ Chemically simpler and more tolerant to processing errors.
ˆ Reduced risk of a chemical explosion.
ˆ Throttle capability and abort options.
ˆ Improved specific impulse (Isp) performance.
ˆ Limiting/restarting capability.
ˆ Reduced environmental impact.

20.1.2 In Comparison to Liquid Rocket Engines

ˆ Mechanically simpler.
ˆ Tolerant to manufacturing errors.
ˆ Reduced risk of fire.
ˆ Less prone to ignition difficulties.
ˆ Higher fuel density.

20.1.3 In Terms of Cost

ˆ Reduced development costs are anticipated.
ˆ Reduced recurring costs are expected.

20.2 Fuels in a Hybrid Rocket Engine:

In the realm of hybrid rocket engines, the selection of fuels emerges as a critical factor influencing
both performance and efficiency. Departing from conventional rocket systems that typically rely on
either solid or liquid propellants in isolation, hybrid engines introduce a distinctive paradigm by
incorporating a blend of solid and liquid or gaseous oxidizers. This unconventional configuration
offers notable advantages, including heightened safety, simplified handling procedures, and enhanced
control over thrust modulation.

46
 The specific choice of fuels within a hybrid system is guided by considerations such as combustion
efficiency, energy density, and overall safety. Researchers actively engage in the exploration of
innovative fuel combinations, seeking to augment the capabilities and environmental sustainability
of hybrid rocket engines across diverse aerospace applications. This ongoing pursuit underscores the
commitment to advancing the state-of-the-art in hybrid propulsion technologies.

Different fuel options for hybrid rocket engines offer a spectrum of properties. Here are details on
specific fuels:
ˆ Polyethylene - High-density polyethylene has a density of 960 kg/m³ and a thermal conduc-
tivity of 0.23-0.29 W/(m·K).
ˆ Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) has a density of 1380 kg/m³ and a thermal conductivity of 0.16
W/(m·K).

ˆ Polybutadiene-Butadiene-HTPB with hydroxyl termination has a density of 930 kg/m³ and a

thermal conductivity of 0.217 W/(m·K).
ˆ PARAFFIN WAX CnH2n+2 (high regression rate) is a mixture of straight-chain solid hydro-
carbons with a melting point between approximately 48 °C and 66 °C. It has a specific heat
capacity of 2.14 to 2.9 J/(kg·K) and a heat of fusion of 220 J/g. Density: 0.90 g · cm−3 .
ˆ Acrylic (poly-methyl methacrylate) has a high density of 1.18 g/cm³ and a thermal conduc-
tivity of 0.2 W/(m·K).

20.3 Properties of PMMA

PMMA, commonly known as acrylic, is a thermoplastic used for various non-propulsion appli-
cations. PMMA has the chemical composition of (C5O2H8)n, where C5O2H8 is the recurring
monomer. In this study, cylindrical fuel grains with a single central aperture are employed.

20.4 Considerations on the theory and design of fuel grains for hybrid
rockets:
ˆ A: Thrust increases gradually over time.

ˆ B: Thrust is produced fairly consistently until the fuel is depleted.

ˆ C: Thrust decreases gradually over time.

ˆ D: Thrust develops relatively consistently until the internal rod is depleted, causing a rapid
drop in thrust.

47
20.5 Important Design Parameters
The density used in the calculation of ideal thrust and overall engine performance.
1
Propellant Density: ρp =
f0 fS
+
ρ0 ρs
Where : f −→ Mass Fraction, ρ −→ Density
with : o ←→ Oxidizer, s −→ solid, p ←→ P ropellant

20.6 Fraction volumetric loading

The assessment of the solid fuel quantity in proportion to the available space within the combus-
tion chamber is crucial in determining engine performance. This evaluation is encapsulated in the
concept of volumetric loading fraction, which compares the total impulse delivered by the engine to
the maximum achievable impulse. This metric serves as an indicative measure of how efficiently the
available volume in the combustion chamber is utilized to generate propulsive force.

Vgrain It
Vf c = =
Vd Isp ρp V d
Where : I −→ Impulse With : f c −→ Loading Fraction, sp −→ Specific, t −→ Total, p −→
Propellant, d −→ Available in the Chambre

20.7 Oxidizers in a Hybrid Rocket Engine

ˆ Nitrous oxide (N2O), with a boiling point of -89.5 ‰ at 1 atm, maintained in liquid form at a
pressure of 54 bar, a molecular weight of 44.0, and a density of 1222 kg/m³ at 20 ‰.
ˆ Gaseous oxygen.

ˆ Hydrogen peroxide.

ˆ Liquid oxygen with a boiling point of -183.6 ‰ at 1 atm, a molecular weight of 32.0, and a
density of 1265 kg/m³ at 20 ‰.
ˆ Nitrogen peroxide with a boiling point of 21.2 ‰ at 1 atm, a molecular weight of 46.01, and a
density of 1903 kg/m³ at 20 ‰.

ˆ Nitric acid (HNO3).

Note: Gaseous oxygen is the easiest and safest to use.

20.8 Oxidizer Tank

We purchased prefabricated aluminum oxygen tanks.
Parameter Value
Weight 4.5 kg
Water capacity 4 kg
Tare weight 3.9 kg
Length 43.5 cm

48
 Figure 34: Oxidizer tank

20.9 Average Mass Flow Rate of Oxidizer

The regulation of the mass flow rate of oxygen from the main engine involves the utilization of a
Tescom electronic regulator, a blocked orifice, and a singular pneumatic valve. This flow is quantified
through the combined use of a venturi and a differential pressure sensor. The determined oxidizer
flow is then temporally averaged across the entirety of the test duration, resulting in a singular
average value for each test. This approach provides a consolidated and representative measure of
the oxidizer flow throughout the testing process.

20.10 Experimental Setup

Figure 35: CAD model of the experimental setup

20.11 Combustion Chamber

The combustion chamber in a hybrid rocket engine contains the fuel grain. The length of the
combustion chamber is determined by the configuration of the fuel grain. Additionally, the longer
the combustion chamber, the more stable the combustion, as the propellant has a greater chance of
mixing uniformly. The combustion chamber, the engine casing, is a crucial component for the safety
and performance of the hybrid rocket engine. The chamber length varies between 10.5 and 15 cm
with a diameter of 5 cm.

49
20.11.1 Fuel Grain Configuration
The utilization of a tubular grain design is chosen for its characteristic of maintaining constant
length during combustion when the end surfaces are isolated. This design facilitates the maintenance
of a consistent oxidizer-to-fuel ratio of 3.456. To bolster the grain’s structural integrity during the
heating phase, the fuel is formulated by blending various types of resin with aluminum or magnesium
powder.

A variety of resin-based hybrid fuels have undergone testing in a laboratory engine, designed like
conventional engines featuring a rearward-mixing chamber. However, for high-powered or amateur
rockets, the single-port geometric configuration is generally considered the most suitable choice for
a wide array of hybrid propulsion applications. This configuration offers versatility and practicality,
making it a preferred option in the realm of hybrid rocket propulsion.

20.11.2 Injector
In high-power and amateur rocket hybrid engines, where the predominant choice is the use of a
single circular port geometry, the preferred injection method is direct oxidizer injection. Specifically,
this involves injecting the oxidizer directly into the fuel grain port. Notably, the combustion be-
havior of a hybrid engine distinguishes itself from that of solid and liquid rockets due to the axially
dependent variation in the oxidizer/fuel ratio along the hybrid fuel grain.

In contrast to liquid rockets, where injectors typically introduce both fuel and oxidizer at one end
of the combustion chamber, thereby avoiding axial dependence, and solid rocket motors, which lack
an injection head, hybrid engines introduce oxidizer directly into the fuel grain port. This approach
ensures a unique axial dependence in the oxidizer/fuel ratio, reflecting a fundamental distinction in
the combustion dynamics of hybrid propulsion systems.

20.11.3 The Igniter

The pyrotechnic igniter is a slow-burning pyrotechnic device with electrical initiation.

20.11.4 Power Supply System

The power supply system includes an oxygen tank that delivers the oxidizer into the rocket
chamber. There are valves to regulate the flow and even control the pressure.

20.11.5 The Nozzle

The rocket nozzle represents the most intricate aspect of the design and concurrently holds
paramount importance, exerting a substantial 30% impact on engine thrust capability. Before the
optimization of the nozzle, meticulous consideration is given to specific temperatures and pressures
within the system, particularly for a C-D nozzle configuration.

In the design parameters for the C-D nozzle, the convergent length is set at 25 mm with an angle
of 45°, while the divergent length spans 60 mm with an angle of 12°. These specifications form the
foundation for the nozzle design, strategically chosen to enhance overall performance and contribute
significantly to the efficiency of the propulsion system.

20.12 Nozzle Design

20.12.1 Throat Area
The prospect of a severe core-burning risk becomes pertinent when the port-to-throat area ratio
reaches 1. This critical threshold is significant because it equates the flow speed through the fuel port
orifice to the speed through the throat, especially when achieving supersonic exhaust (further details

50
on throat theory to be expounded in a subsequent discussion). Consequently, design configurations
leading to a ratio conducive to significant core burning are expressly avoided.

For guidance in the design process, charts depicting erosive burning area ratio values between
the port and throat are available for certain common fuels. In instances where propellants are
used without established erosive burning ratio values, Nakka recommends maintaining a contact
area-to-throat ratio between 2.0 and 3.0. The specific ratio within this range is contingent on the
length-to-diameter ratio of the fuel grain, providing a pragmatic guideline to mitigate the risk of
erosive burning.

Ap π · D2 (1 − Vf c )
=
Ac 4 · Ac
Where : c −→ nozzle throat, p −→, port.

20.12.2 Length-over-Diameter Ratio of the Grain

The ratio of grain length to diameter plays a crucial role, signaling that as this ratio increases,
the onset of erosive burning becomes a potential concern within the fuel port. This concern arises
due to a differential in mass flow rate along the length of the port. To address this challenge, Nakka
proposes a practical solution, particularly for long or narrow-grain fuel ports.

To mitigate the effects of erosive burning in such configurations, Nakka recommends the utiliza-
tion of a tapered or stepped fuel port orifice profile along the longitudinal axis of the fuel grain. This
specific profile is designed to counteract the longitudinal mass flow rate differential by dynamically
altering the cross-sectional area as the flow progresses toward the throat. This approach effectively
minimizes the adverse effects of erosive burning, ensuring a more balanced and controlled combus-
tion process.
grainlength
graindiameter

The nozzle will have a conical profile (proven performance, ease of manufacturing).

The throat has been designed with a diameter of 8 mm based on size constraints imposed on the
nozzle by structural components.

The exit diameter of the divergent nozzle is 6 times the diameter of the throat, 2.38125 cm.

The half-angle α of the divergent throat is 12° to encourage axial flow as much as possible.

The convergent throat has a half-angle of 45°.

The convergent half-angle is not as critical as that of the divergent throat.

The nozzle is made of low-carbon cold-rolled steel AISI 1018.

The influence of throat diameter on fuel grain design becomes noteworthy, particularly when
the throat diameter is small. In such cases, a sufficiently large fuel port can be accommodated,
permitting the neglect of chamber speed. However, a pivotal threshold is reached when the cross-
sectional area ratio of the fuel orifice to the throat surface falls below 4. At this point, the effects of
chamber speed on chamber pressure can no longer be disregarded.

51
 A low ratio, indicative of a smaller cross-sectional area in the fuel orifice relative to the throat
surface, implies that gases within the fuel port will accelerate themselves. This acceleration effect
becomes a critical factor in considering the dynamics of the combustion process and necessitates a
more nuanced approach in fuel grain design to account for the changing chamber conditions.

Figure 36: 2D drawing of the nozzle

20.12.3 Initial Calculations

Specific Heat Ratio (α) = 1.179

C5H8O2 + 6O2 −→ 5O2 + 4H20

The molar mass is 32.44 g/mol
C* 1207,68591
Isp 167,994776

20.12.4 Performance Calculation

The formulas presented are those that apply to simple conical nozzles. Extracted from the third
chapter of ’Rocket Propulsion Elements’ by Sutton and Biblarz.

The exit velocity from the nozzle for both ideal and non-ideal rockets is described by the equation:
r
p   k−1
k
u2 = 2J (h1 − h2 ) + u1 = 2kRT
2
k−1
1
1 − P2
P1

Relationship between escape velocity, pressure difference, and working fluid properties.
The thrust produced by a nozzle is composed of pressure thrust and momentum thrust.
Pressure thrust is the additional thrust obtained due to the pressure difference between the nozzle
exit plane and atmospheric pressure.
The following equation for thrust illustrates the effect of changes in altitude on the thrust quantity.
A correction factor λ is multiplied by the momentum flux term to adjust the ideal parameter for
non-axial flow quantity. The half-angle variable of the nozzle is α

Fideal, corrected axial momentum = ṁu2 λ + (P2 − P3 ) A3

λ = 0, 5 (1 + cos (α))

52
 This correction factor is always less than 1 for values of α greater than 0 because any deviation
from perfectly axial flow will result in less thrust in the axial direction.
The specific impulse of the rocket engine is then:

εc∗
 
P2 P3
Isp = Ie + −
g0 P1 P1
P1 A t C
Where : C ∗ = =
ṁ CF

The other correction factors to apply when attempting to determine the precise expected thrust
are as follows:
ˆ Velocity correction factor ζv - the square root of the energy conversion efficiency.

ˆ Discharge correction factor ζd - the ratio of the actual mass flow rate to the ideal mass flow
rate.
These two correction factors combine to form the thrust correction factor:
Factual
ζT = ζv ζd =
Fideal
Using this thrust correction factor, we arrive at the expected thrust value:

Factual = ζT Fideal, corrected

Symbol Description
A1 Cross-sectional area of the fuel port, (m²)
A2 Cross-sectional area at the nozzle exit, (m²)
Ac Choke area, (m²)
M Mach number,
P* Sonic pressure, (Pa)
P1 Chamber pressure, (Pa)
P2 Pressure at the exit plane, (Pa)
P3 Atmospheric pressure, (Pa)
T Temperature, (K)
u Flow velocity, (m/s)
u1 Inlet velocity of the nozzle, (m/s)
u2 Exit velocity of the nozzle, (m/s)
J Mechanical work in equivalent heat, 4.186 (J/cal)
h Specific enthalpy
k Specific heat ratio
F Thrust, (N)
ṁ Mass flow rate, (kg/s)
ε The ratio of areas A2 /Ag
C* Characteristic velocity, (m/s)
Ct Throat coefficient of the nozzle
c Speed of sound, (m/s)
α Half-angle of the nozzle, (°)
λ Non-axial flow correction factor,
ζT Velocity correction factor,
ζv Discharge correction factor,

53
20.12.5 Nozzle design
ˆ Exit diameter = 31 mm.

ˆ Throat diameter = 8 mm.

ˆ Area ratio A2/A∗ = 3.875.

ˆ Length of the divergent nozzle = 57 mm.

ˆ Divergent nozzle angle = 12°

ˆ Length of the convergent nozzle = 25 mm.

A
Calculate the nozzle area ratio with a variable Mach number :
A∗
ˆ A = surface area of the nozzle passage section at a given location downstream.

ˆ A* = cross-sectional area of the nozzle throat.

ˆ M = Mach number of the flow at a given location downstream in the nozzle.

ˆ For this example, let’s assume k = 1.179.

The equation relating the area ratio to the Mach number is :

k+1
! 2(k−1)
A 1 1 + K−1
2 M
2

A∗ = M
1 + K−1
2

To plot the results on a graph, the area ratios for Mach numbers from 0 to 3.10 are calculated
at intervals of 0.2.

Note that for M = 0, the term 1/M is undefined (division by zero), so we will start with M =
0.1. Certainly, using a spreadsheet application like Excel makes these calculations straightforward.
Excel is used to generate the graph. The final results and the graph are presented below. Note that
both the Mach number and area ratio are dimensionless.
m A/A*
0.1 6.26551668
0.3 2.32447468
0.5 1.54939047
0.7 1.2272715
0.9 1.05670305
1.1 0.95550565
1.3 0.89209325
1.5 0.851745
1.7 0.82668505
1.9 0.81242787
2.1 0.80621189
2.3 0.80625042
2.5 0.81134211
2.7 0.82065455
2.9 0.83359746
3.1 0.8497449

54
 Figure 37: The ratio area as a function of Mach number

20.12.6 Experimental designs

A theoretical examination of the combustion characteristics of acrylic paraffin and ABS has been
initiated; however, due to resource constraints, our theoretical calculation model remains incomplete.
To achieve a comprehensive understanding, precise measurements of temperature, combustion gas
analysis, and pressure are imperative. The absence of these enhancements in the theoretical calcu-
lation model would introduce an error margin that is presently indeterminable.

Faced with these challenges, an alternative methodology has been adopted. A specific nozzle
shape, chosen based on literature and within the constraints of our machining capabilities, has been
imposed. Subsequently, recognizing the unique attributes of hybrid engines, where both combustion
gases and oxidizing gas (O2) flows coexist in the combustion chamber, we are poised to conduct
a series of tests. These tests will be executed on the engine using the test bench developed in
the previous year, with a deliberate variation in the O2 flow into the combustion chamber. The
anticipated outcome is the identification of a correlation between the O2 flow rate and the thrust
developed by the engine, providing valuable insights despite the inherent complexities in theoretical
modeling.

20.13 Engine and nozzle fabrication

After designing the various parts in SolidWorks, we proceeded to the fabrication, which began
entirely in the university’s mechanical workshop in Blida.

20.13.1 Machining
ˆ Oxygen injector

– Punching to a diameter of 8 mm.

– Facing.
– Turning.
– Boring.

ˆ Nozzle

– Facing.
– Turning.

55
 – Punching:
* With a 6 mm drill bit.
* With an 8 mm drill bit.

Figure 38: Image of the Machining process of the oxygen injector

Figure 39: Image of the Machining process of the nozzle

Once all the parts were fabricated and assembled, we proceeded to assemble the engine and the
test bench. The test bench consists of a carriage that supports the weight of the engine, a 3L oxygen
bottle, and a 20 kg force sensor connected to a PC for data collection during the tests.

Figure 40: Image of the assembled rocket and test bench

56
20.14 Results
20.14.1 First test on PMMA
We obtained the following results, which represent the thrust obtained at different oxygen flow
rates using a 50 mm long and 50 mm diameter acrylic (PMMA) grain as fuel.

Figure 41: Thrust as a function of time for test n°1

Figure 42: Thrust as a function of time for test n°2

Figure 43: Thrust as a function of time for test n°3

Test P3 is the most promising as it represents the highest thrust along with a good distribution
over time.

57
20.15 Conclusion
Working on solid rocket motors allows us to have a real appreciation for the advantages of hybrid
engines, which offer an immensely superior level of control compared to solid motors.

The experimental setup is intentionally modular, allowing us to optimize operating parameters

such as grain length, oxidizer flow rate, and other nozzle dimensions. The setup will later be
complemented with pressure and possibly temperature sensors. Once finalized, this test bench will
highlight a series of correlation relationships between various parameters influencing the performance
of hybrid engines, based on experimental results.

For now, the oxidizer of choice remains gaseous oxygen. It may be necessary to address the issue
of oxidizer deficiency in the combustion chamber by either using another gas like N2O or introducing
oxygen in solid form into the grain composition.

58
21 Payload
Our payload consists of a prototype of a cubesat inspired by the joint venture of ntopology the
suppliers of the software we are using and the US Airforce institute of technology, where they used
ntop to create incredible structures with incredible gains in mass and stiffness

Figure 44: The U.S. Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT) cubesat bus assembly

The case study provided insight into the incredible potential and power of additive manufacturing
the research led to a decrease of 50% in mass while improving the stiffness by 20% and increasing
the production speed by 33%.

Figure 45: Screenshot from ntop and AFIT case study

59
 Figure 46: Screenshot from ntop and AFIT case study

The dimensions of the cubesat we are required to make are 10cmx10cmx30cm, it was devided
into three equal parts to increase redundency and modularity of the cubesat, then the geometry was
modeled in solidworks and imported into ntop

Figure 47: Shell body import in ntop

60
 Figure 48: Gyroid volume body import in ntop

Then the geometry was shelled and infilled with a gyroid TPMS lattice structure with an equal
periodicity in all directions of a 15mm cell size, to preseve the quasi-isotropic property of the gyroid
lattice then it was meshed and exported to a 3d printing slicer software to be 3d printed.

Figure 49: Final part in ntop

61
 Figure 50: Final part export in ntop

The cubesat was mainly designed to be modular, easy to print and innovative

62