You are on page 1of 63



In spaceflight, a launchvehicle or carrier rocket is a rocket used to carry

a payload from the Earth's surface into outer space. A launch system includes
the launch vehicle, the launch pad and other infrastructure. Usually the
payload is an artificial satellite placed into orbit, but some spaceflights are sub-
orbital while others enable spacecraft to escapeEarth orbit entirely. A launch
vehicle which carries its payload on a suborbital trajectory is often called
a sounding rocket. Launch vehicles, particularly orbital launch vehicles, have
at least two stages, but sometimes up to 4 are employed.

A reusable launch system (or reusable launch vehicle, RLV) is a launch

system which is capable of launching a launch vehicle into space more than
once. This contrasts with expendable launch systems, where each launch
vehicle is launched once and then discarded. The term reusable launch
vehicle may refer to several different levels of reuse. Some vehicle concepts
are fully reusable (that is, the vehicle launches and landswithout jettisoning
any stages). Others have one stage that is reusable in combination with other
stages that are expendable. The table and text below describe different levels
of launch vehicle reusability, from most reusable to least reusable.

Table 1(a):Types of RLV

Full reusability implies that the vehicle launches, carries a payload to
orbit, and returns to Earth with the vehicle (or vehicle stages) intact and
without the assistance of any expendable stages. Single-stage-to-orbit (SSTO)
vehicle concepts fall into this category, as do the two-stage-to-orbit (TSTO)
concepts in which both the orbital vehicle and a booster vehicle fly back to
Earth for reuse (many such designs were originally proposed for the Space
Shuttle, and several others are currently under study)

Vehicles in this category have one fully-reusable component, and

another stage or stages that are partially reusable. The United States Space
Shuttles are good examples of this type of vehicle, as the orbiters are reusable,
and components of the boost stages are recovered for refurbishment and reuse.

These types of vehicles have one stage (either the booster or orbiter) that
is reused and other stages that are expendable. The Pegasus launch system, for
example, relies on a reusable atmospheric aircraft to carry an expendable
rocket launch vehicle to altitude.

Components of at least one stage of these mostly expendable vehicles

are recovered for future use. An historical example of this concept is the
Advanced Launch System (ALS) examined in 1980s and 1990s space launch
studies. The proposed ALS designs would recover only the avionics and
propulsion packages from vehicles since these key pieces were the most

Component used at any stages of these mostly expendable vehicles are

not recovered. Hence the parts or the components of these vehicles have no
reusability partially or fully. Todays expendable launch vehicles such as Atlas,
Delta, and Proton have no reusable components.


In the early 1950s popular science fiction often depicted space launch
vehicles as either single-stage reusable rocket ships which could launch and
land vertically (SSTO VTVL), or single-stage reusable rocket planes which
could launch and land horizontally (SSTO HTHL).

However advances in materials and engine technology have rendered this

concept potentially feasible. Before VTVL SSTO designs came the partially
reusable multi-stage NEXUS launcher by KrafftEhricke. The pioneer in the
field of VTVL SSTO, Philip Bono, worked at Douglas. Bono proposed several
launch vehicles including: ROOST, ROMBUS, Ithacus, Pegasus and SASSTO.

Other launch system configuration designs are possible such as horizontal

launch with vertical landing (HTVL) and vertical launch with horizontal
landing (VTHL). One of the few HTVL vehicles is the 1960s concept
spacecraft Hyperion SSTO, designed by Philip Bono. X-20 Dyna-Soar is an
early example of a VTHL design, while the HL-20 and X-34 are examples
from the 1990s. As of February 2010, the VTHL X-37 has completed initial
development and flown an initial classified orbital mission of over seven
months duration. Currently proposed VTHL manned space planes include the
Dream Chaser and Prometheus, both circa 2010 concept space planes proposed
to NASA under the CCDev program.

The late 1960s saw the start of the Space Shuttle design process. From an
initial multitude of ideas a two-stage reusable VTHL design was pushed
forward. That eventually ended up as a reusable orbiter with an expendable
drop tank and reusable solid rocket boosters to reduce design expenses.

Eventually the Shuttle was found to be expensive to maintain, even more
expensive than an expendable launch system would have been. The
cancellation of a Shuttle-Centaur rocket after the loss of Challenger also
caused a hiatus that would make it necessary for the United States military to
scramble back towards expendables to launch their payloads. Many
commercial satellite customers had switched to expendables even before that,
due to unresponsiveness to customer concerns by the Shuttle launch system.

In mid-1990, further British research and major reengineering to avoid

deficiencies of the HOTOL design led to the far more promising Skylon
design, with much greater payload. From the commercial side, large satellite
constellations such as Iridium satellite constellation were proposed which also
had low cost space access demands.

The end of that decade saw the implosion of the satellite constellation market
with the bankruptcy of Iridium. In turn the nascent private launch industry
collapsed. The fall of the Soviet Union eventually had political ripples which
led to a scaling down of ballistic missile defense, including the demise of the
"Brilliant Pebbles" program.

The 21st century saw rising costs and teething problems lead to the
cancellation of both X-33 and X-34. Then the Space Shuttle Columbia
disaster and another grounding of the fleet. The Shuttle design was now over
20 years old and in need of replacement. Meanwhile the military EELV
program churned out a new generation of better expendables.

1.2India in the Field of RLV

In India, the launch vehicles development programme began in the

early 1970s. The first experimental Satellite Launch Vehicle (SLV-3) was
developed in 1980. An Augmented version of this, ASLV, was launched

successfully in 1992. India has made tremendous strides in launch vehicle
technology to achieve self-reliance in satellite launch vehicle programme with
the operationalisation of Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV) and
Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV).

1.2.1 The Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)

The Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle, usually known

by its abbreviation PSLV is the first operational
launch vehicle of ISRO. PSLV is capable of
launching 1600 kg satellites in 620 km sun-
synchronous polar orbit and 1050 kg satellite in
geo-synchronous transfer orbit. In the standard
configuration, it measures 44.4 m tall, with a lift
off weight of 295 tonnes. PSLV has four stages
using solid and liquid propulsion systems alternately. Fig 1(a): PSLV
The first stage is one of the largest solid propellant boosters in the world and
carries 139 tonnes of propellant. A cluster of six strap-ons attached to the first
stage motor, four of which are ignited on the ground and two are air-lit.The
reliability rate of PSLV has been superb. There had been 22 continuously
successful flights of PSLV, till February 2013 . With its variant configurations,
PSLV has proved its multi-payload, multi-mission capability in a single launch
and its geosynchronous launch capability.
Table 1(b): Parameters of PSLV

Typical Parameters of PSLV

Lift-off weight 295tonne
1600 kg in to 620 km Polar Orbit
Pay Load
1060 kg in to Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit (GTO)
Height 44 metre
1.2.2 Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle(GSLV)-Mark I&II

Geosynchronous Satellite Launch
Vehicle(GSLV)-Mark I&II ,is capable of placing
INSATII class of satellites (2000 2,500 kg) into
Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit (GTO). GSLV is a
three stage vehicle GSLV is 49 m tall, with 414 t lift
off weight. It has a maximum diameter of 3.4 m at the
payload fairing. First stage comprises S125 solid
booster with four liquid (L40) strap-ons. Second
stage (GS2) is liquid engine and the third stage (GS3)
is a cryo stage. The vehicle develops a lift off thrust
of 6573 kN. The first flight of GSLV took place from Fig 1(b): GSLV - II

SHAR on April 18, 2001 by launching 1540 kg GSAT-1. It was followed by six
more launches Typical Parameters of GSLV

Table 1(c):Parameters of GSLV

Typical Parameters of GSLV

Lift-off weight 414 tonne
Pay Load 2 2.5 tonnes in to Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit
Height 49 metre

1.2.3 The GSLV-III or Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle Mark


The GSLV-III or Geosynchronous Satellite
Launch Vehicle Mark III , is a launch vehicle
currently under development by the Indian Space
Research Organization. GSLV Mk III is conceived
and designed to make ISRO fully self reliant in
launching heavier communication satellites of
INSAT-4 class, which weigh 4500 to 5000 kg. Fig 1(c): GSLV - III
It would also enhance the capability of the country to be a competitive
player in the multimillion dollar commercial launch market. The vehicle
envisages multi-mission launch capability for GTO, LEO, Polar and
intermediate circular orbits.

GSLV-Mk III is designed to be a three stage vehicle, with 42.4 m tall with a
lift off weight of 630 tonnes. First stage comprises two identical S200 Large
Solid Booster (LSB) with 200 tonne solid propellant, that are strapped on to
the second stage, the L110 re-startable liquid stage. The third stage is the C25
LOX/LH2 cryo stage. The large payload fairing measures 5 m in diameter and
can accommodate a payload volume of 100 cu m. Realization of GSLV Mk-III
will help ISRO to put heavier satellites into orbit.


AVATAR( Aerobic Vehicle for Hypersonic Aerospace Transportation) was a

concept development effort for a single-stagereusable spaceplane capable
of horizontal takeoff and landing, by India's Defense Research and
Development Organization along with Indian Space Research
Organization and other research institutions. The mission concept was for
cheapermilitary and civilian satellite spacelaunches.

1.3.1 Concept

The idea was to develop a hyperplane vehicle that can take off from
conventional airfields, collect air in the atmosphere on the way up, liquefy it,
separate oxygen and store it on board for subsequent flight beyond the
atmosphere.AVATAR is proposed to weigh only 25 tonnes in which 60 per cent
of mass will be liquid hydrogen fuel. The oxygen required by the vehicle for
combustion is collected from the atmosphere, thus reducing the need to carry
oxygen during launch. AVATAR is said to be capable of entering into a 100-km
orbit in a single stage and launching satellites weighing up to one tonne

AVATAR would take off horizontally like a conventional airplane from a

conventional airstrip using turbo-ramjet engines that burn air and hydrogen.
Once at a cruising altitude, the vehicle would use scramjet propulsion to
accelerate from Mach 4 to Mach 8. During this cruising phase, an on-board
system would collect air from the atmosphere, from which liquid oxygen
would be separated and stored. The liquid oxygen collected then would be
used in the final flight phase when the rocket engine burns the collected liquid
oxygen and the carried hydrogen to attain orbit. The vehicle would be
designed to permit at least a hundred re-entries into the atmosphere. DRDO
planned to build and fly a scaled-down version of AVATAR, weighing 3 tonnes
(6,600 lb) at takeoff. The project is headed by Vikram Sarabhai Space
Centre in Thiruvananthapuram. The mini AVATAR is to be built by
a Hyderabad-based private company called CIM Technologies, project
completion data is still not finalized. The prototype will be launched using the
PSLV and will demonstrate all technologies used in AVATAR including
oxygen collection

Avatar is primarily intended as a reusable missile launcher, one which can

launch missiles, land back and be loaded again for more missions. The vehicle
will be designed to permit at least a hundred re-entries into the atmosphere.
The vehicle could also act as a satellite launcher at a hundredth of the present

cost of launching satellites. A miniature Avatar, which is also being conceived,
would be hardly bigger than a MiG-25 or an F-16.


An actuator is a type of motor for moving or controlling a mechanism or

system. It is operated by a source of energy, usually in the form of an electric
current, hydraulic fluid pressure orpneumatic pressure, and converts that
energy into some kind of motion. An actuator is the mechanism by which a
control system acts upon an environment. The control system can be simple (a
fixed mechanical or electronic system), software-based (e.g. a printer driver,
robot control system), or a human or other agent.In engineering, actuators are
frequently used as mechanisms to introduce motion, or to clamp an object so
as to prevent motion. In electronic engineering, actuators are a subdivision
oftransducers. They are devices which transform an input signal (mainly an
electrical signal) into motion. Electrical motors, pneumatic actuators, hydraulic
pistons, relays, comb drives,piezoelectric actuators, thermal bimorphs, digital
micromirror devices and electroactive polymers are some examples of such
actuators. An actuator is that creates motion in a straight line, in contrast to the
circular motion of a conventional electric motor. Linear actuators are used in
machine tools and industrial machinery, in computer peripherals such as disk
drives and printers, in valves and dampers, and in many other places where
linear motion is required. Hydraulic or pneumatic cylinders inherently produce
linear motion. Many other mechanisms are used to generate linear motion from
a rotating motor.


1.5.1Mechanical actuators

Mechanical linear actuators typically operate by
conversion of rotary motion into linear motion.
Conversion is commonly made via a few simple types
of mechanism:


Wheel and axle

Cam Fig 1(d) : Mechanical Actuator

Some mechanical linear actuators only pull, such as hoists, chain drive and belt
drives. Others only push (such as a cam actuator). Pneumatic and hydraulic
cylinders or lead screws can be designed to generate force in both directions.

Mechanical actuators typically convert rotary motion of a control knob or

handle into linear displacement via screws and/or gears to which the knob or
handle is attached. A jackscrew or car jack is a familiar mechanical actuator.
Another family of actuators is based on the segmented spindle. Rotation of the
jack handle is converted mechanically into the linear motion of the jack head.
Mechanical actuators are also frequently used in the field of lasers and optics
to manipulate the position of linear stages, rotary stages, mirror
mounts, goniometry and other positioning instruments. For accurate and
repeatable positioning, index marks may be used on control knobs. Some
actuators include an encoder and digital position readout. These are similar to
the adjustment knobs used on micrometers except their purpose is position
adjustment rather than position measurement.

1.5.2 Hydraulic actuators

Hydraulic actuators or hydraulic cylinders typically
involve a hollow cylinder having a piston inserted in
it. An unbalanced pressure applied to the piston
generates force that can move an external object.
Since liquids are nearly incompressible, a hydraulic
cylinder can provide controlled precise linear
displacement of the piston. A familiar example of a
Fig 1(e): Hydraulic Actuator
manually operated hydraulic actuator is ahydraulic car jack.

1.5.3 Pneumatic actuators

Pneumatic actuators, or pneumatic cylinders, are similar to hydraulic actuators

except they use compressed gas to generate force instead of a liquid. They
work similarly to a piston in which air is pumped inside a chamber and pushed
out of the other side of the chamber. One of the reasons pneumatic linear
actuators are preferred to other types is the fact that the power source is simply
an air compressor. Because air is the input source, pneumatic actuators are able
to be used in many places of mechanical activity. The downside is, most air
compressors are large, bulky, and loud. They are hard to transport to other
areas once installed. Pneumatic linear actuators are likely to leak and this
makes them less efficient than mechanical linear actuators.

1.5.4 Piezoelectric actuators

The piezoelectric effect is a property of certain materials in which

application of a voltage to the material causes it to expand. Very high voltages
correspond to only tiny expansions. As a result, piezoelectric actuators can
achieve extremely fine positioning resolution, but also have a very short range
of motion. In addition, piezoelectric materials exhibit hysteresis which makes
it difficult to control their expansion in a repeatable manner.


Electro-mechanical actuators are similar to mechanical actuators except

that the control knob or handle is replaced with an electric motor. Rotary
motion of the motor is converted to linear displacement. There are many
designs of modern linear actuators and every company that manufactures them
tends to have a proprietary method. The following is a generalized description
of a very simple electro-mechanical linear actuator.

1.6.1Simplified design

Typically, an electric motor is mechanically connected to rotate a lead

screw. A lead screw has a continuous helical thread machined on its
circumference running along the length (similar to the thread on a bolt).
Threaded onto the lead screw is a lead nut or ball nut with corresponding
helical threads. The nut is prevented from rotating with the lead screw
(typically the nut interlocks with a non-rotating part of the actuator body).
Therefore, when the lead screw is rotated, the nut will be driven along the
threads. The direction of motion of the nut depends on the direction of rotation
of the lead screw. By connecting linkages to the nut, the motion can be
converted to usable linear displacement. Most current actuators are built for
high speed, high force, or a compromise between the two. There are many
types of motors that can be used in a liner actuator system. These include dc
brush, dc brushless, stepper, or in some cases, even induction motors. It all
depends on the application requirements and the loads the actuator is designed
to move. In this case, accuracy and high movement resolution aren't needed,
but high force and speed are. There are many variations in the
electromechanical linear actuator system. It is critical to understand the design
requirements and application constraints to know which one would be best.
1.6.2 Standard vs. Compact construction

A linear actuator using standard motors will commonly have the motor
as a separate cylinder attached to the side of the actuator, either parallel with
the actuator or perpendicular to the actuator. The motor may be attached to the
end of the actuator.

Compact linear actuators use specially designed motors that try to fit the motor
and actuator into the smallest possible shape.

The inner diameter of the motor shaft can be enlarged, so that the drive
shaft can be hollow. The drive screw and nut can therefore occupy the
center of the motor, with no need for additional gearing between the motor
and the drive screw.

Similarly the motor can be made to have a very small outside diameter,
but instead the pole faces are stretched lengthwise so the motor can still
have very high torque while fitting in a small diameter space.

Fig 1(f): Electro-Mechanical Actuator


As an RLV moves through the atmosphere, the forces acting on it

determine its motion. These forces can be divided into body forces and
aerodynamic forces. Aerodynamic forces include the lift (L) and drag (D) due
to pressure variations on the vehicles surface. Body forces include the force
due to the Earths gravity, or weight (W), and the thrust (T) produced by the
vehicles engines. These forces result from the surface of the RLV. The
components of the resulting force can be broken into lift and drag. Lift is the
component of the pressure force that acts perpendicular to the relative wind
direction and drag acts parallel to the relative wind velocity. These two force
components, which are derived from a force distribution, act on the vehicle
from the center of pressure (CP). For convention, both lift and drag can be
described with the lift coefficient (CL) and drag coefficient (CD).

1.7.1 Body Forces

The weight of the vehicle changes linearly as the mass of the vehicle
decreases during flight due to propellant mass flow. The relationship between
weight and mass is given by
W=mg (i)
Wherem is the total mass of the vehicle at any instant and g is the
acceleration due to the Earths gravity. Regardless of the vehicles orientation,
gravity always acts downward towards the Earths center through the vehicles
center of gravity (CG). During the ascent of a launch vehicle, momentum is
lost due to gravity. This effect is called gravity losses and is related to the
amount of time it takes for a vehicle to reach orbit. The following relationship
defines gravity losses as where is the change in altitude from launch to orbit,
ht is the time to orbit and V is the vertical velocity. Thrust is used to
accelerate a vehicle from rest at the Earths surface to orbital velocity in space.
Both rocket and air breathing vehicles produce thrust by accelerating
propellant out the back of the engine. In the case of rockets, the propellant is
initially at rest with respect to the vehicle. The thrust produced is the sum of

the momentum changes of the propellant by the engine and the pressure losses
due to atmospheric back-pressure.


Regardless of size, mass or shape, has a point inside called the center of
mass (CM). The CM is the exact spot where all of the mass of that object is
perfectly balanced. You can easily find the CM of an object such as a ruler by
balancing the object on your finger. If the material used to make the ruler is of
uniform thickness and density, the CM should be at the halfway point between
one end of the stick and the other. If the ruler was made of wood and a heavy
nail was driven into one of its ends, the CM would no longer be in the middle.
The balance point would then be nearer the end with the nail. The CM is
important in rocket flight because it is around this point that an unstable rocket
tumbles. As a matter of fact, any object in flight tends to tumble. Throw a
stick, and it tumbles end over end. Throw a ball, and it spins in flight. The act
of spinning or tumbling is a way of becoming stabilized in flight.

1.7.3 MASS

Mass is another important factor affecting the performance of a rocket.

The mass of a rocket can make the difference between a successful flight and
just wallowing around on the launch pad. As a basic principle of rocket flight,
it can be said that for a rocket to leave the ground, the engine must produce a
thrust that is greater than the total mass of the vehicle. It is obvious that a
rocket with a lot of unnecessary mass will not be as efficient as one that is
trimmed to just the bare essentials.
For an ideal rocket, the total mass of the vehicle should be distributed
following this general formula: of the total mass, 91 percent should be

propellants; 3 percent should be tanks, engines, fins, etc.; and 6 percent can be
the payload.
Payloads may be satellites, astronauts, or spacecraft that will travel to other
planets or moons. In determining the effectiveness of a rocket design,
rocketeers speak in terms of mass fraction (MF). The mass of the propellants
of the rocket divided by the total mass of the rocket gives MF.


Basic rocket propulsion equations are based on Newton Law of Motion
For constant propellant exhaust velocity veat thruster nozzle outlet, and with
thrust force F collinear to ve, gives The Basic Equation for Force of Thrust

From the Law of Conservation of Momentum follows:
vm= mve[Ns]
This is the change of momentum of spacecraft. This implies the change of
momentum of the expelled propellant.

The Basic Equation For Force And Thrust

Basic Rocket Equation



Orbital mechanics, also called flight mechanics, is the study of the motions of
artificial satellites and space vehicles moving under the influence of forces
such as gravity, atmospheric drag, thrust, etc. Orbital mechanics is a modern
offshoot of celestial mechanics which is the study of the motions of natural
celestial bodies such as the moon and planets. The root of orbital mechanics
can be traced back to the 17th century when mathematician Isaac Newton
(1642-1727) put forward his laws of motion and formulated his law of
universal gravitation. The engineering applications of orbital mechanics
include ascent trajectories, reentry and landing, rendezvous computations, and
lunar and interplanetary trajectories.

1.8.1 Orbital Elements

To mathematically describe an orbit one must define six quantities,

called orbital elements. They are Semi-Major Axis (a), Eccentricity(e),
Inclination(i), Argument of Periapsis ( ), Time of Periapsis Passage (T) ,
Longitude of Ascending Node, .

An orbiting satellite follows an oval shaped

path known as an ellipse with the body being
orbited, called the primary, located at one of
two points called foci. An ellipse is defined to
be a curve with the following property: for
Fig 1(g): Major& Minor Axis
each point on an ellipse, the sum of its

from two fixed points, called foci, is constant (see Figure 5a). The longest and
shortest lines that can be drawn through the center of an ellipse are called the
major axis and minor axis, respectively. The semi-major axis is one-half of the
major axis and represents a satellite's mean distance from its
primary. Eccentricity is the distance between the foci divided by the length of
the major axis and is a number between zero and one. An eccentricity of zero
indicates a circle.

Inclination is the angular distance between a satellite's orbital plane and the
equator of its primary (or the ecliptic plane in the case of heliocentric, or sun
centered, orbits). An inclination of zero degrees indicates an orbit about the
primary's equator in the same direction as the primary's rotation, a direction
calledprograde (or direct). An inclination of 90 degrees indicates a polar orbit.
An inclination of 180 degrees indicates a retrograde equatorial orbit.
A retrogradeorbit is one in which a satellite moves in a direction opposite to
the rotation of its primary.

Periapsis is the point in an orbit closest to the primary. The opposite of

periapsis, the farthest point in an orbit, is called apoapsis. Periapsis and
apoapsis are usually modified to apply to the body being orbited, such as
perihelion and aphelion for the Sun, perigee and apogee for Earth, perijove and
apojove for Jupiter, perilune and apolune for the Moon, etc. The argument of
periapsis is the angular distance between the ascending node and the point of
periapsis (see Figure 4.3). The time of periapsis passage is the time in which a
satellite moves through its point of periapsis.

Nodes are the points where an orbit crosses a plane, such as a satellite crossing
the Earth's equatorial plane. If the satellite crosses the plane going from south
to north, the node is the ascending node; if moving from north to south, it is
the descending node. The longitude of the ascending node is the node's

celestial longitude. Celestial longitude is analogous to longitude on Earth and
is measured in degrees counter-clockwise from zero with zero longitude being
in the direction of the vernal equinox.Geosynchronous orbits (GEO) are
circular orbits around the Earth having a period of 24 hours. A geosynchronous
orbit with an inclination of zero degrees is called a geostationary orbit. A
spacecraft in a geostationary orbit appears to hang motionless above one
position on the Earth's equator. For this reason, they are ideal for some types of
communication and meteorological satellites. A spacecraft in an inclined
geosynchronous orbit will appear to follow a regular figure-8 pattern in the sky
once every orbit. To attain geosynchronous orbit, a

Space craft is first launched into an elliptical orbit with an apogee of 35,786
Fig 1(h): Geosynchronous Orbit
km (22,236 miles) called a geosynchronous transfer orbit (GTO). The orbit is
then circularized by firing the spacecraft's engine at apogee.

Polar orbits (PO) are orbits with an inclination of 90 degrees. Polar orbits are
useful for satellites that carry out mapping and/or surveillance operations
because as the planet rotates the spacecraft has access to virtually every point
on the planet's surface.

Sun synchronous orbits (SSO) are walking orbits whose orbital plane
processes with the same period as the planet's solar orbit period. In such an
orbit, a satellite crosses periapsis at about the same local time every orbit. This

is useful if a satellite is carrying instruments which depend on a certain angle
of solar illumination on the planet's surface.

Molniya orbits are highly eccentric Earth orbits with periods of approximately
12 hours (2 revolutions per day). The orbital inclination is chosen so the rate of
change of perigee is zero, thus both apogee and perigee can be maintained over
fixed latitudes. This condition occurs at inclinations of 63.4 degrees and 116.6

1.8.2 Launch of a Space Vehicle

The launch of a satellite or space

vehicle consists of a period of powered flight
during which the vehicle is lifted above the
Earth's atmosphere and accelerated to orbital
velocity by a rocket, or launch vehicle.
Fig 1(i): Space Vehicle Orbit

Powered flight concludes at burnout of

the rocket's last stage at which time the vehicle begins its free flight. During
free flight the space vehicle is assumed to be subjected only to the
gravitational pull of the Earth. If the vehicle moves far from the Earth, its
trajectory may be affected by the gravitational influence of the sun, moon, or
another planet.

A space vehicle's orbit may be determined from the position and the velocity
of the vehicle at the beginning of its free flight. A vehicle's position and
velocity can be described by the variables r, v, and , where r is the vehicle's
distance from the center of the Earth, v is its velocity, and is the angle
between the position and the velocity vectors, called the zenith angle (see
Figure). If we let r1, v1, and 1 be the initial (launch) values of r, v, and , then

we may consider these as given quantities. If we let point P2 represent the
perigee, then equation becomes


Substituting equation, we can obtain an equation for the perigee radius Rp.


Multiplying through by -Rp2/ (r12v12) and rearranging, we get



Benjamin Srloff, USN (2006)[1] studied and compared of the variety of the
performance of rocket and air breathing, single stage-to-orbit, re-usable launch
vehicles. Fuel consideration which includes bio-propellant and tri-propellant
combination of hydrogen and hydrocarbon fuels. Methodology used to design
and manufacture of Re-usable launch vehicle.

Sippel and Klevanski (2001), [2] focused on study of two RLV in particular.
It describes one RLV in detail with the application of a heavy lift launches.
Further topics discussed on aerodynamic shape, preliminary mechanical layout
and wing results are presented including simulations and
optimizations for ascent and reentry.

Michael and James (2003) [3] give the basics of astrodynaimics. It focuses on
the laws governing space mechanics and orbits .it mention the different
environment that a space vehicle is subjected to. It also gives some details
about propulsion systems and power control.

Martin J.L Turner [4] focuses mainly on rocket propulsion systems. Liquid
and solid propellants are explained in details. The different types of propulsion
are discussed. Different types of rocket propulsion engine are also discussed.

Martin and Josef (2001) [5] proposes a new and different approach for return
to the launch site of non-SSTO reusable space transportation vehicles. The
performance gain by the advanced capturing method shows a possible increase
in delivered payload. The paper presents a detailed description of the proposed
method, giving data of numerical simulations.
Wallace and Olds , A.C (1992) [6] dramatic design and analysis time savings
of Reusable Military Launch System under WPAFB. This incorporates
parametric geometry, aerodynamics, ass properties, aero heating, and rocket
propulsion and trajectory analysis. Several analysis done for optimal vehicle
design which include load factor, engine type, staging mach number, fuel
selection, number of engines, allowable wing loading.

Stevenson et. Al (1990) [7] integrated modeling environment for conceptual

and preliminary design and synthesis of air breathing, hypersonic vehicles.
Several analyses used to determine the initial vehicle design to get the better
performance. Techniques for the simulation of the trajectory for the RLV.

Wiley and James, (1995) [8] focuses on space mission, in particular the cost
and risk involved. It contains more practical details, such as physical and
engineering data, empherical formulae and design algorithms. It also contains
contribution of the last decade by many engineers and managers

Singresu Rao, (2012) [9] presents the techniques and applications of

optimization. Recently developed methods of optimization such as genetic
algorithms, simulated annealing and fuzzy optimization are also discussed.
The various approximation techniques to speed up the convergence of practical
mechanical and structural optimization problems are also outlined

Beer and Russell, (2012) [10] presents the principles of kinematics and
dynamics. The basic concepts of force, momentum, impulse, acceleration,
work and energy are introduced and applied to particles and concepts
of linear and angular momentum and also the laws of motion are discussed in


The final mechanism for the design was selected by a process that included
analysing several designs and eliminating them on several parameters. Some
of the parameters considered were weight, cost, ease of manufacture,
availability etc. some of the designs that were considered during the selection
process are shown here.


Fig 3(a): Mechanism 1

This mechanism is a combination of mechanical components controlled by

electrical drives. Servomotors were used to control the movement of the arms,
and a piston acted as the actuator. The efficiency of the mechanism was much
higher than that of the previous ones.

Inference: Though the efficiency was found to be high the probability of

mechanism failure is higher considering the increased number of components
being used. Also the weight of the servomotors used added to the existing
weight of the piston and the mechanism weight was increased considerably.
The mechanism was rejected.


Similar to a Whitworth mechanism, this mechanism has four links operated by

a single piston in a cylinder. Construction of the mechanism is simple. One
cylinder piston is employed for the operation of the mechanism. The piston on
being pushed upward would lift the mechanism.

Fig 3(b): Mechanism 2

Similar to a Whitworth mechanism, this mechanism has four links operated by

a single piston in a cylinder. Construction of the mechanism is simple. One
cylinder piston is employed for the operation of the mechanism.The piston on
being pushed upward would lift the mechanism.

Inference: The placement of the piston in a horizontal direction meant that the
amount of force to be applied was increased. Also the number of links in the
mechanism is high which meant increased weight. The mechanism was


This mechanism included only three links and was also considerably
lighter than the previous mechanism. The piston was placed at an angle and
this also meant that lesser force only needed to be applied.

Fig 3(c): Mechanism 3

Inference: The unequal arm lengths made the placement of the payload
difficult. The payload could not be correctly positioned and all angles could
not be obtained. The mechanism was rejected

3.4 Mechanism 4

Fig 3(d): Mechanism 4

This mechanism is similar to the mechanism 3 the only difference is here all
the links have same length while in the above mechanism the length of the
links are different.

Interference: Equal arm length made the placement of the payload. The
payload can be correctly positioned and all angles are obtained. Construction
of the mechanism is simple and single actuator is employed. Hence the
mechanism was selected.


Stage 1- mechanism at compressed stage

Fig 4(a): Mechanism at compressed stage

Stage 2- mechanism at raised stage


Fig 4(b): Mechanism at raised stage

4.3 FORCE Fig
4(c): Geometric Dimension of Mechanism

For the purpose of actuator selection the force that the actuator needs to apply
has to be calculated. These calculations are performed by two methods.

4.3.1 Principal of Virtual Work

Fig 4(d): Force diagram of observe that the actions at A & E
do no work. Denoting by y the elevation of
the platform above the base and by s the
length of DG of the cylinder and position
assembly, we write

u = o;

-W y + FDHs = 0 (i)

The vertical displacement y of the platform is expressed in terms of the

angular displacement of EDG as follows:

Y=EC sin

= asin

y = acos . ..(ii)

To express s similarly in terms of , fist need to note that by the law of


S2 = a2 + m2 2 a m cos

Differentiating the above equation, we get;

2 s s = -2 a m (-sin)

s = ((a m sin ) / s) (iii)

Substituting equation (ii) and (iii) into equation (i), we get,

-W 2 a cos + FDH ((a m sin ) / s) = 0

FDH = 2 W (s/m ) cot


1. Weight (W)


=1000 * 9.81

= 9810 N

W = 9.81 KN

2. Length of the actuator from its base position to the connected position on
the link (s)

S2 = a2 + l22 2 a l2cos

= 1.22 + 3.16 2 2*1.2* 3.16* cos42

s = 2.406 m

3. Force exerted by the actuator on the link ( FDH)

FDH = 2 W (s/ l2) cot

=(2* 9810* 2.406*cot42)/ 3.16

FDH = 16592 N





void main()

float Fdh,W,s,a,l2,m,d,theeta,cottheeta;


printf("\Enter the value of a:");


printf("\Enter the value of l2:");


printf("\Enter the value of m:");


printf("\Enter the value of degree:");








printf("Value of s=%f\nValue of W=%f\nValueofFdh=%f",s,W,Fdh);




The mechanism considered of the platform and of the linkage. Its free body
Fig an
diagram includes 4(e)input
: Free body
force FDHdiagram of mechanism
exerted by the cylinder, the weight W is
equal and opposite to output force & reactions at A and E that we assumes to
be directed as shown. Since more than three unknown are involved, this
diagram will not be used. The mechanism is dismembered and free body
diagram is drawn for each of its components parts.

Free Body Platform ABC


Fig 4(f) : Free body platform of ABC

Taking vertical forces only since
there is no horizontal forces acting on the platform ABC

B+C W = 0

B+C = W

B+C = 9810 ..(i)

Taking moment at point B

C*l1 W*l3 = 0

C = (W* l3) / l1

C = 9558.46 N ..(ii)

Substituting the value of C in equation (i), we can find the value of B

B= W-C

B = 251.539 N..(iii)

Free body diagram of Roller B

Fig 4 (g) : Free body diagram of Roller B

FBC = B cot

FBC = 279.36 N .(iv)

Free Body member CDE

Fig 4(h): Free Body member CDE

Taking moment at point E

FDG*cos ( 90) * a B*2*a*cos -FBC *2*a*sin =0

FDG*a*sin 2*a*B*cos - C*cot*2*a*sin = 0

FDG* sin -2*(B+C) cos = 0 (v)

We know that

FDH = 2* W *(cos/sin)

Applying first law of sines of triangles

sin/EG = sin/DG

sin = (EG/DG) sin

Using law of cosines, we have;

DG2 = a2 + l22 - 2.a.l2cos

= 1.22 + 3.142 2*1.2*3.14*cos42

DG = 2.406 m

FDH = (2*W*DG*cot) / l2

= (2*9810* 2.406* cot42) / 3.14

FDH = 16592N




void main()

float Fdh,W,a,l1,m,d,theeta,cottheeta,l3,C,Fbc,D,B,l2;


printf("\Enter the value of a:");


printf("\Enter the value of m:");


printf("\Enter the value ofl1:");


printf("\Enter the value of degree:");


printf("\Enter the value of l3:");


printf("\Enter the value of l2:");











printf("Value of c=%f\nValue of B=%f\nValue of Fbc=%f\nValueofD=

%f\nValue of W=%f\nValueofFdh=%f",C,B,Fbc,D,W,Fdh);


3.4.6 INPUT and OUTPUT


The following analysis were performed on the design,

Finite Element Analysis using SolidWorks.

Computational Fluid dynamics using SolidWorks.
Computational Fluid dynamics using Fluent Gambit.



The software used for this analysis was SolidWorks 2011. SolidWorks is
a 3D mechanical CAD (computer-aided design) program that runs
on Microsoft Windows and is being developed by DassaultSystmsSolidWorks
Corp. SolidWorksis a Parasolid-based solid modeler, and utilizes a parametric
feature-based approach to create models and assemblies. Parameters refer to

constraints whose values determine the shape or geometry of the model or

assembly. Parameters can be either numeric parameters, such as line lengths or
circle diameters, or geometric parameters, such as tangent, parallel, concentric,
horizontal or vertical, etc. Numeric parameters can be associated with each
other through the use of relations, which allows them to capture design intent.
Design intent is how the creator of the part wants it to respond to changes and

Design 1

Fig 5(a): SolidWorks Analysis of Design 1

Table 5(a) : Design Parameters of Design 1
Force applied 10,000 N
Material Ti6 Al V4
diameter of pipes 0.16 (outer diameter)
0.10 (inner diameter)
thickness of base 0.05

Total weight- 1500 Kg
Force to be applied
Factor of safety- 8.3
F= m X g
= mass of satellite X acceleration due to gravity
= 1000 Kg X 9.81N

= 9810 N 10,000 N

Design 2

The total weight of design 1 was found to be too high and also a factor of
safety of 8.3 was not required. Therefore the structure was redesigned using
different material and analysis was carried out.

Fig 5(b): SolidWorks Analysis of Design 2

Table 5(b) : Design Parameters of Design 2

Force applied 6000 N
Material Ti6 Al V4
diameter of pipes 0.125 (outer diameter)
0.10 (inner diameter)
thickness of base 0.02

Force to be applied
Total weight- 920 Kg
F= m X g
Factor of safety- 3.8
= mass of satellite X acceleration due to gravity
= 1000 Kg X 9.81N

= 9810 N 10,000 N


As shown above two designs were taken up and analyzed. For the analysis the
entire payload was assumed to be 1000 Kg, including the satellite and the
rockets. Design 1 showed better factor of safety than the first but was rejected.
The main reason is the usage of more material. This made the weight of the
design very much higher. 1500 Kg of the first design was reduced to 920 Kg in
the second design. This was possible with the reduction in metal and also the
diameter of the pipes. The factor of safety of the second design was reduced
3.8 but the design was more feasible because a factor of safety of 3.8 was
sufficient for the safety of the design. Design 2 was finally selected as the best


Design 1

Fig 5(c): CFD of Design 1 using SolidWorks

Table 5(c) :CFD Design Parameters of Design 1

velocity 7000 m/s

Surface area 24.65 mm2

density 1.225 Kg/m3

Table 5(d) : CFD RESULT Of DESIGN 1

Averaged Minimum Maximum
Goal Name Unit Value Value Value
GG Max Mach Number [ ] 2.20969418 2.2085947 2.21053311
1 1
GG Max Turbulent 0.0037315
Viscosity 1 [Pa*s] 0.00374265 1 0.00375100
GG X - Component of 1x 10 4.3295949
Normal Force 1 [N] 4.33147715 6 4.33453705
GG Y - Component of 1x 10
Normal Force 1 [N] -1.1266394 -1.1590324 -1.09931262
GG Z - Component of 1x 10
Normal Force 1 [N] -3.198E-05 -0.0021949 0.00174779

Iterations: 13441
Analysis interval: 845

Due to the high drag force obtained from the first design alterations were made
to the first design and analysis was carried out again

Design 2

Fig 5(d) :CFD of Design 2 using SolidWorks

Table 5(e) :CFD Design Parameters of Design 2

velocity 7000 m/s
Surface area 34.11 mm2
density 1.225 Kg/m3
L = wings span length

b = wings span breadth

S = wing span area

M = Mach number
a = velocity of sound
Wing span (L) = 10 m
v = free stream velocity
b = 2.2 m
q = dynamic pressure
S = l x b = 22 m

At 6096 m, taking M =2; CL = coefficient of lift

a = 316.032 m/s
L = lift force

CD = coefficient of drag
v = 632.064 m/s
D = drag force
q v 2
= 2

= 2 *0.654 * 632.062

= 1.3 x 105 N/m2 = 1.3 bar

CL = q s

= 1.310522

= 0.076
CL b2
CD = eAR AR = s

= 10.22 = 0.00835

q SC D
D= = 0.00835 * 22* 1.3*105

D= 2.388 *104 N


Averaged Minimum Maximum

Goal Name Unit Value Value Value
GG Min Mach Number 2 [ ] 0 0 0
GG Min Turbulent 2.96276E- 2.74097E-
Viscosity 1 [Pa*s] 07 07 3.0011E-07
GG X - Component of 1x 10 2.30384444 2.04155775
Normal Force 1 [N] 6 2 2.56613114
GG Y - Component of 1x 10 -0.69007382 -0.72106272 -0.66956407

Normal Force 1 [N]
GG Z - Component of 1x 104
Normal Force 1 [N] -0.05697255 -0.06799603 -0.04748165

Iterations: 9386
Analysis interval: 865


Drag force = 2.566 x 104 N (from software)

= 2.388 X104 N (from calculations)

Coefficient of lift = 0.076

Coefficient of drag = 0.00835

As shown above two designs were taken up and analyzed. For the analysis the
basic parameters were assumed. The RLV was assumed to be travelling at a
speed of 7000 m/s with a Mach number of 2. The main aim was to determine
the coefficient of lift and coefficient of drag and also the drag force. Once the
results were obtained by software they were also manually calculated and
compared. First the analysis for design 1 was carried out. After the analysis
was completed the forces along the axis was obtained. The value along the X
axis direction was obtained as 4.33x 104, this was taken up as the drag force.
Using formulas and equations the coefficient of lift and drag and the drag force
were calculated manually. The drag force obtained through the software and
manually were found to match with slight variations. Also the design 2 was
found to be a better design due to the reduced drag.


5.3.1 FLUENT

FLUENT is a suite of programs that model systems in computational fluid

dynamics (CFD). This includes flows in two-and three-dimensional
geometries, and under a variety of conditions: compressible and
incompressible; inviscid, laminar and turbulent; Newtonian and non-
Newtonian. The analysis can be steady-state or transient.The FLUENT
package consists of several programs: "FLUENT", the solver; "prePDF", a
preprocessor for modeling combustion; "GAMBIT", a preprocessor for
modeling geometries and generating meshes; "TGrid", creating volume
meshes from boundary meshes; several filters to import meshes from other
CAD packages.

5.3.2 GAMBIT

GAMBIT is a software package designed to help analysts and designers build

and mesh models for computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and other scientific
applications. The GAMBIT GUI makes the basic steps of building, meshing,
and assigning zone types to a model simple and intuitive, yet it is versatile
enough to accommodate a wide range of modeling applications. Before any
numerical solution can be computed, the physical domain must be filled with a
computational grid. The two major categories of grid construction are
structured grids and unstructured grids. Structured grids are easier to handle
computationally because their connectivity information is stored block to

block. Unstructured grids are more difficult to handle computationally because
their connectivity is stored for each node. Unstructured grids, however, tend to
be easier to construct and do not waste memory in far field cell resolution.
Unstructured solvers often result in simpler computer codes too, which means
they are easier to maintain and modify.


1. The solid body of the Launch vehicle was created using SolidWorks
software using the basic options available. The completed part was
saved and converted as an IGS file.
2. This file was then imported to gambit and then the design was modified
to work in gambit.
3. The body was then placed in an indefinite cube. This cube was taken as
the boundary and the body along with the boundary surface was split.
4. Then meshing process was carried out. This is a process in which the
body is split into many number of small portions.
5. After the meshing was completed the boundary conditions were applied.
a. Inlet pressure
b. Outlet pressure
c. Wall symmetry
6. This model was then imported to Fluent for the flow analysis.
7. Then the models, material properties and boundaries were specified and
iteration was started.
8. The number of iterations was given as 1000 and the flow simulation was

Number of Iterations -1000

Air velocity -7000 m/s along X axis.

Flow condition -turbulent flow (k-epsilon)

Material applied - titanium


Fig 5(e): Meshing of solid Model of RLV


Fig 5(f):Simulation Contours for Different parameters


Max pressure (Pmax)= 4.62*104 N/m2

50 density ()=1.225kg/m3
velocity (v)=700m/s
Drift coefficient

Cd = 2 X Pd/(v2)
= 2 X (4.62 X 104) /(1.225 X 7002)
Cd = 0.1539

density ()=1.225kg/m3
Lift coefficient velocity (v)=700m/s

Cl= 2 X Fl/(Av2) Area(A) = 34.08e^10-6m2

= 2 X (0.047) / (34.08 X 10-6 X 1.225 X 7002)

Cl =0.05


From SolidWorks From Fluent Gambit

Coefficient of Drag 0.00835 0.1539
Coefficient of Lift 0.076 0.05

Computational fluid dynamics for both design were carried out using both
softwares. The results obtained through both softwares were compared. There
was slight variation in the values of coefficient of drag but the values of
coefficient of lift were found to match almost perfectly. The coefficient of lift
and drag for an RLV is in the range of 0.005 0.01 and 0.001 0.5
respectively, and the values were also found to be within the specified range.
Design 2 was found to be a better design considering the lesser amount of drag
force generated.


Optimization is the act of obtaining the best result under given circumstances.
In design,construction, and maintenance of any engineering system, engineers
have to take manytechnological and managerial decisions at several stages.
The ultimate goal of all suchdecisions is either to minimize the effort required
or to maximize the desired benefit.Since the effort required or the benefit
desired in any practical situation can be expressedas a function of certain
decision variables, optimization can be defined as the processof finding the
conditions that give the maximum or minimum value of a function.Modern
Methods of Optimization. The modern optimization methods, also some-times
called nontraditional optimization methods, have emerged as powerful and
popular methods for solving complex engineering optimization problems in
recent years. These methods include genetic algorithms, simulated annealing,
particle swarm optimization, ant colony optimization, neural network-based
optimization, and fuzzy optimization. The genetic algorithms are computerized
search and optimization algorithmsbased on the mechanics of natural genetics
and natural selection.


An optimization or a mathematical programming problem can be stated as

follows.Some optimization problems do not involve any constraints and
can be stated as,

This minimizes f (X)

subject to the constraints

gj (X) 0, j = 1, 2, . . . ,m

lj (X) = 0, j = 1, 2, . . . , p

Where X is an n-dimensional vector called the design vector , f (X) is termed

the objective function , and gj (X) and lj (X) are known as inequality and
equality constraints,respectively. The number of variables n and the number of
constraints m and/or pneed not be related in any way.
Some optimization problems do not involve any constraints andcan be stated

Find X = which maximizes f (X)

Figure 1.4 shows a hypothetical two-dimensional design space where the
infeasibleregion is indicated by hatched lines. A design point that lies on one or
more than oneconstraint surface is called a bound point, and the associated
constraint is called anactive constraint. Design points that do not lie on any
constraint surface are known asfree points. Depending on whether a particular
design point belongs to the acceptableor unacceptable region, it can be
identified as one of the following four types:
1. Free and acceptable point
2. Free and unacceptable point
3. Bound and acceptable point
4. Bound and unacceptable point
All four types of points are shown in the following figure.

Fig 6(a): Constraint surface in 2-D design space


A criterion has to be chosen for comparing the different alternative acceptable

designs and forselecting the best one. The criterion with respect to which the

design is optimized,when expressed as a function of the design variables, is
known as the criterion or meritor objective function . The choice of objective
function is governed by the nature ofproblem. The objective function for
minimization is generally taken as weight in aircraftand aerospace structural
design problems. In civil engineering structural designs, theobjective is usually
taken as the minimization of cost. The maximization of mechanicalefficiency
is the obvious choice of an objective in mechanical engineering systemsdesign.
Thus the choice of the objective function appears to be straightforward in
mostdesign problems.


Design a uniform column of tubular section to carry a compressive load

P = 6000kgf for minimum cost. The column is made up of a material that has a
yield stress (y) of 928 Kgf/cm2, modulus of elasticity (E) of 1.068 x 10 6
Kgf / cm2 and density () of 0.004428 Kgf / cm3. The length of column is 200
cm. The stress induced in the column should be less than the buckling stress as
well as the yield stress. The mean diameter of the column is restricted to lie
between 2 to 14 cm, and column with thicknesses outside the range 0.2 to 0.8
cm are not available in the market. The cost of the column includes material
and construction costs and can be taken as 5W+2d, where W is the weight in
kilograms force and d is the mean diameter of the column in centimeters.

The design variables are the mean diameter (d) and tube thickness (t) :

X = x1 = d
( )()
x2 t ..(i)

The objective functions to be minimized is given by

f ( x )=5 W +2 d

5 ldt +2 d

f (x)
= 13.9 x1x2 +2d .(ii)

The behavior constraints can be expressed as

stress induced yield stress

stress induced bucking stress

The induced stress is given by

P 6000
Induced stress (i) = dt = x 1 x 2 .(iii)

The buckling stress of a pin-connected column is given by

Eulerbuckingload EI 1
= 2
Buckling stress (b) = crosssectionalarea l dt (iv)

Where I = second moment of area of the cross-section of the column

= 64 (d04 di4 )

2 2
= 64 (d0 + di ) (d0+ di) (d0 di)

= 64 [(d+t)2 +(d-t)2 ]. [ (d+t)+(d-t) ]. [(d+t)

- (d-t)]

= 8 dt (d2 +t2 )

= 8 x1 x2( x12+ x22) .(v)

Thus the behavior constraints can be restated as

928 0
g1(X) = x1 x2 .(vi)

6000 2 ( 1.068106 ) (x 21 + x 22)

g2(X) = 0 (vii)
x1 x2 8200 2

The side constraints are given by

2 d 14

0.2 t 0.8

This can be expressed in standard form as

g3 ( x )=x 1 +2.0 0 (viii)

g4 ( x )=x1 14.0 0 (ix)

g5 ( x )=x 20.2 0 (x)

g6 ( x ) =x2 0.8 0 (xi)

Since there are only two design variables the problem can be solved
graphically. First the constraint surfaces are to be plotted in a two dimensional
design space where the two axes represent the two design variables x1 and x2.

To plot the first constraint , we have

g1(X) = x 1 x 2 928 0

x1x2 2.058

that is, Thus the curve x1x2 = 0.103 represents the constraint surface g 1(X) = 0.
This curve can be plotted by finding several points on the curve. The points on

the curve can be formed by giving a series of values to x1 and finding the
corresponding values of x2 that satisfy the relation x1x2 = 2.058:

X1 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0

X2 1.029 0.515 0.343 0.26 0.206 0.172 0.147

Similarly, the second constraint g2(X) 0 can be expressed as x1x2 (x12 + x22)
57.98 and lying on the constraint surface g2(X) =0 can be obtained as follows

X1 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0

X2 2.64 0.864 0.266 0.113 0.0576 0.0336 0.0.0212

Next, the contours of the objective functions are to be plotted before finding
the optimum point. For this, we plot the curves given by

f(X) = 13.9 x1 x2 + 2 x1 = c = constant

for a series of values of c. By giving the different values to c, the contours of f

can be plotted with the help of the following points:

For 13.9 x1 x2 + 2 x1 = 50.0:

X2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8

X1 14.74 10.46 8.10 6.61 5.59 4.84 4.26 3.81

For 13.9 x1 x2 + 2 x1 = 40.0:

X2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8

X1 11.7 8.36 6.48 5.29 4.46 3.86 3.41 3.04

For 13.9 x1 x2 + 2 x1 = 47.8 ( passing through the corer point C) :

X2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8

X1 14.1 10 7.75 6.32 5.34 4.62 4.08 3.64

For 13.9 x1 x2 + 2 x1 = 40.07 (passing through the corner point B):

X2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
X1 11.8 8.38 6.5 5.3 4.48 3.90 3.42 3.05

For 13.9 x1 x2 + 2 x1 = 20.0:

X2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8

X1 5.89 4.18 3.24 2.71 2.23 1.93 1.70 1.52

These contours are shown in figure and it can be seen that the objective
function cannot be reduced below a value of 40.07 (corresponding to point B)
without violating some of the constraints. Thus the optimum solution is given
by point B with d* = x1* = 5.3 cm and t* = x2*= 0.4 cm with fmin = 40.07.

Fig 6(b): Graphical Optimization of the design


Launch vehicles are an integral part of space research. A lot of money and
effort is being spent to make their use as much as reusable as possible. The
main aim of our design has been to make the production of these RLVs more
cost efficient. We hope to achieve this either by use of different material or in
the simplicity of the design. A complete literature survey on all topics related
to this particular field was completed before the design phase was started.
Many mechanisms were considered and eliminated on several parameters such
as ease of construction, simplicity, cost etc. and finally the current design was
finalized. To support of design all possible analysis have been carried out to
make the design foolproof and reliable. The high factor of safety shows the
reliability of the model. Aerodynamics has also been considered as the CFD
analysis have been carried out and drag has been minimized considerably by
modifying the design. Special attention has also been given to actuator and
material selection. These selections have supported by relevant calculations to
determine the force required to lift the entire mechanism. The design has also
been optimized as possible and we hope it will be advantages economically
and mechanically.

1. A comparative analysis of single stage to orbit rocket and air-
breathing vehicles, THESIS Benjamin Srloff, BS; Ensign, USN (2006)
2. [2]
Progress in the Design of a Reusable Launch Vehicle Stage Martin
Sippel, Josef Klevanski, Holger Burckhardt Space Launcher Systems
Analysis (SART), DLR, Cologne, Germany
3. [3]
Space Vehicle Design, Second Edition, Michael D. Griffin, Oak
Hill, Virginia, James R. French, Las Cruces, New Mexico EDUCATION
4. [4]
Rocket and spacecraft propulsion (principles, practices and new
developments) Martin J.L Turner.
5. [5]
Innovative Method for Return to the Launch Site of Reusable
Winged Stages Martin Sippel, Josef Klevanski, Jens Kauffmann
Space Launcher Systems Analysis (SART), DLR, Cologne, Germany
6. [6] A study of arts: a dual-fuel reusable launch vehicle with launch
assist,Jon Wallace ,John Olds ,A.C. Charania, Space Works
Engineering, Inc. (SEI)
7. [7]
Collaborative Design Environment for Space Launch Vehicle Design
and Optimization, Mark D. Stevenson, Alicia R. Hartong, Jeffrey V.
Zweber, Amarshi A. Bhungalia, Ramana V. Grandhi
8. [8] Space Mission Analysis and Design, Wiley J. Larsson and James R.
Wertz, 1995
9. [9] Engineering Optimization, SingresuRao
10. [10]
Vector mechanics for engineers, Ferdinand Beer and Russell
11. Reusable military launch systems (RMLS), Gregory E. Moster
12. NASA, An Operational Assessment of Concepts and
Technologies for Highly Reusable Space Transportation Executive
Summary NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, November, 1998.
13. Irving H. Shames Engineering mechanics, statics and dynamics.
14. John D. Anderson Jr Introduction to Flight.
15. Hanno Essen Space mechanics, 1998 October (rev Dec 98).
16. Materials Development for Future Reusable Launch Vehicles
Dr. M R Suresh Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre, ISRO,
17. Structures and materials technologies for extreme
environmentsApplied to reusable launch vehicles, Stephen J. Scotti,
Christopher Clay, Marc Rezin.