Mars Magnus Aerobot Preliminary Design

SpaceOps 2010 Conference Delivering on the Dream Hosted by NASA Mars AIAA 2010-2184
25 - 30 April 2010, Huntsville, Alabama
Mars Magnus Aerobot Preliminary Design
S. Ravindran1 and S.E. Hobbs2

Space Research Centre, School of Engineering, Cranfield University, Cranfield, Bedford MK43 0AL, UK
J. Jennings3
Space Research Centre, School of Engineering, Cranfield University, Cranfield, Bedford MK43 0AL, UK
The development of aerobots for operation in the Martian atmosphere has been of interest for several years,
this paper looks at the design and viability of a new aerial robot concept “The Magnus Lift Aerobot”. Using
the Magnus Lift principal to provide lift for an airship has been demonstrated, and found to be viable for
terrestrial applications; however the design of such a craft to operate in the rarefied atmosphere of Mars
obviously introduces several new design challenges. In the following study, various platform configuration
options for the Magnus aerobot are considered. In each case the theoretical static lift and Magnus lift forces
Downloaded by 64.231.156.191 on March 23, 2022 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2010-2184
are calculated for variable values of total mass, total sphere diameter, aerobot drag and the motor power
requirements. An example aerobot case study is as follows; a 70 kg craft, requiring a total motor power of
1.3 kW, and capable of operating up to 2 km above the Martian mean surface level would require a 22 m
diameter 12.5 micron thick Mylar sphere, pressurised with hydrogen to produce 40.3 N of static lift for
payload. Rotating the sphere at an angular velocity of 0.5 rad/s would then produce another 195.8 N of
Magnus lift. Another design option is to use a small diameter sphere with a higher rotational velocity and
exclusively rely on Magnus lift. Such a craft would require a continuous power supply, undoubtedly
requiring more energy than the solar panels could supply resulting in a flight profile of short duration
airborne periods with frequent landings for battery charging. A 10 m diameter aerobot could produce a net
lift of 14.9 N in this way, ideal for a light weight science payload.
Nomenclature
A = cross sectional area of the Magnus aerobot (m2)
am = average speed of sound on Mars atmosphere (m/s)
C dv = volumetric drag co-efficient
CL = co-efficient of lift
cp = co-efficient of propeller
ct = co-efficient of thrust
D = drag (N)
dp = diameter of the propeller (m)
Fb = propeller void percentage
FML = Magnus lift force (N)
FSL = static lift force (N)
gm = Mars gravitational acceleration (3.73 m/s2)
h = altitude (m)
J = propeller advance tip speed ratio
mballoon = mass of the balloon (kg) (for general calculation)
mpropulsion = mass of the propulsion unit (kg) (for general calculation)
mmagnus = mass of the magnus structure (kg) (for general calculation)
1
PhD Researcher, School of Engineering, Cranfield University/ravindran.sundararajah@cranfield.ac.uk
2
Director, Cranfield Space research Centre, SOE, Cranfield University/s.e.hobbs@cranfield.ac.uk
3
Post Graduate, ASE, School of Engineering, Cranfield University/jonathanjennings@hotmail.com
1
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Copyright © 2010 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc. All rights reserved.
M = Mach number
M aerobot = mass of the aerobot (kg)
Mb = mass of the battery (kg)
M em = the electric motor mass in (kg)
Mg = the gear box mass in (kg)
M hyd = mass of hydrogen in the Magnus sphere (kg)
M mc = the motor controller mass in (kg)
M pc = mass of the power conditioning system in (kg)
M prop = propeller mass (kg)
Ms = mass of the structure (kg)
M sa = the solar array mass (kg)
MWatm = molecular weight of the atmosphere (g/mol)

MWlg = molecular weight of the lifting gas (g/mol)
nb = number of blades
P = power (W)
r = radius of sphere (m)
S = area (m2)
Sa = the specific mass of the solar array in kilograms per meter square (kg/m2)
Tthr = thrust (N)
t = time (s)
te = Magnus sphere envelope material thickness (m)
v = travelling speed of the aerobot (m/s)
Va = volume of the Magnus sphere in (m3)
V prop = volume of the propeller (m3)
U = mean fluid velocity (m/s) (Reynolds number formula)
ηv = viscosity (Pa.s or Ns/m2)
η dt = total efficiency of the drive train is 0.794
η em = electric motor efficiency is 0.90
ηg = gearbox efficiency is 0.90
η mc = control electronics efficiency is 0.98
ηp = propeller efficiency
ρ = density (kg/m3)
ρe = density of the Magnus sphere envelope material (kg/m3)
ρ hyd = density of hydrogen at Mars (kg/m3)
ρ prop = propeller material density (kg/m3)
ρm = Mars atmospheric density; which is 0.0136 kg/m3, when temperature is 227 K @ 1 km height
ω = angular velocity of sphere 2πn , where n is revolution per second
2
I. Introduction
The development of aerial vehicles intended to operate in the Martian atmosphere has been of interest to various
science groups around the world for over thirty years. Conceptual designs have been suggested which utilize
powered aircraft, aerostats, solar powered balloons and a variety of other devices intended to carry remote sensing
instruments. This type of mission is especially challenging because of the severe mass limitations placed on a
buoyant vehicle in a rarefied atmosphere. The aerobot takes advantage of recent developments in the design and
utilisation of ultra light materials which should permit the reliable use of long duration Lighter than Air Vehicle on
Mars. One of the important studies by NASA proposing hydrogen/helium planetary balloons constructed of thin
materials1. This paper proposes a development of such a lighter than air vehicle, harnessing the static lift and
aerodynamic effect known as Magnus lift.
Figure 1. Magnus Aerobot Hovering above Valles Marineris (Mars background picture courtesy NASA)
II. General overview of Mars Magnus effect airship
A super pressure spherical balloon rotated about its horizontal axis passing through its centre of mass and moving
through a fluid will create Magnus lift or Robbins effect. The magnitude of Magnus force is proportional to the
diameter of the sphere, speed of travel, the rate of spin, density of fluid and the nature of the fluid flow. 3, 4 The
concept here is to augment the lift available from buoyancy with some Magnus effect lift by rotating the balloon
envelope. Basic information for the Magnus effect is given by Hoerner.5, 6
For a simple airship consisting of a balloon (volume Va) with a propulsion system to give some horizontal motion
the lift is given by
L = ( ρVa − mballoon − m propulsion ) g m (1)
The Magnus effect provides extra dynamic lift at the cost of additional mass.
1 2
L = ( ρVa − mballoon − m propulsion − mmagnus ) g m + ρv SC L (2)
2
3
The Magnus lift is useful if it exceeds the weight of the additional mass i.e.
1 ρv 2 SC L
mmagnus < (3)
2 gm
Note that mmagnus includes the mass of the Magnus rotation motors, the extra power sources for those motors, and the
extra propulsion required to overcome the additional drag. Taking approximate values, this constraint can be used to
size the design requirement.
These values give maximum mass (in kg) as a function of balloon radius (r in m) as
mmagnus < 0.127r 2 (4)
Table 1 Comparison of Magnus aerobot with other Mars mobility systems

Mobility Duration Range km Comments
Orbiter > 1 year ~ 10

8 • Wide coverage at high altitude.
• No in-situ data
Rover 1–3 ~ 101 • Excellent in-situ data

months • But localized
Glider < 1 hour ~ 10 2 • Short duration

• Simple descent
Plane 1 – 2 hours ~ 10 3 • Short duration

• Powered flight
• Very high speed
Montgolfiere 1–2 • Requires sunlight for buoyancy (6 months sunlight

Balloon months at at Mars poles)
Mars poles ~ 10 4 • Can soft land small payloads day or night
• Controllable altitude
10 hrs at • Internal pressure = external pressure, thus low
low latitude material stress.
• Three successful small scale deployments (8 m,
10m and 15 m diameter), thus high success likely
for larger balloons.
Magnus 1–2 ~ 10
3
− 10 4 • Uses static lift from buoyancy and Magnus lift by
Aerobot with months rotating the Magnus sphere. If required it could
Super pressure maintain different altitude for short duration.
Magnus Navigation of the aerobot is possible but
Sphere(9) complicated.
• Flies at constant altitude at any latitude.
• Use of Hydrogen limits leakage.
• Requires strong material for superpressure, but high
buoyancy hence smaller diameter.
• Successful deployments on Earth thus
success likely for larger Magnus Airship.
4
The parameters are used in the above calculation are gm = 3.7 m/s, ρ = 0.01 kg/m3, v = 0.5 to 5 m/s, v2 = 3 m2/s2, CL
= 5. An example for a balloon of diameter 22 m, the extra mass to implement the Magnus effect lift augmentation
should be no more than 15 kg. This assumes steady state operation. It is possible that in some circumstances the
system could be operated temporarily to give greater performance. The duration of super pressure balloon with ultra
light durable7 material could be used to achieve maximum payload capacity.
It is very well understood from the previous studies carried out by NASA8 that Mars atmosphere is extremely thin
and flying on Martian atmosphere with a lighter than air vehicle requires ultra light material with huge volume of
envelope containing hydrogen/helium. The immediate possibility could be a balloon with static lift; however simple
spherical balloon could also be used to produce Magnus lift. The Magnus lift is directly proportional to the cube of
the spherical envelope radius. This relation is well served for Martian lighter than air vehicle which requires huge
spherical envelope to produce static lift. By rotating the spherical super-pressure balloon, Magnus lift will be
produced which can augment the static lift produced by the hydrogen/helium. Motors will be required to drive this
rotation, powered from solar panels mounted on the balloon sack itself and by on board batteries. It could be inferred
from the Figs. 5 and 6 that the Magnus lift produced by such airship is significant. A comparison of Mars mobility
systems are listed in Table 1, which clearly shows Magnus Aerobot’s advantages.
Employing this novel concept of static lift combined with Magnus lift could increase the feasibility of developing an
aerobot capable of operating within the Martian atmosphere capable of hovering at various locations to undertake
scientific studies on ground using simple devices such as penetrators to analyse the Martian soil, hence facilitating
the exploration of the geological study of Mars. The conceptual design discussed in this paper focuses on this type
of aerobot, constructed of currently available materials using current manufacturing technologies.
III. Magnus aerobot design

The reliable operation of a balloon system on Mars is made especially challenging due to the extremely thin
atmosphere on the planet. Near the ground, the atmosphere of Mars8 has a pressure of around 600 Pa and a highly
variable temperature (280 K to 160 K). The atmosphere constitutes of mostly carbon dioxide and near the surface
the atmospheric density10 is similar to the density of Earth’s atmosphere at an altitude of 30 km. Since the
atmospheric density is very low, a Martian airship would have to be very large, the buoyancy of one cubic meter of
gas is only a few grams weight1 and therefore the fabric would have to be ultra light, typically less than 20 g/m2
including all attachments.
A major characteristic of the Martian atmosphere is its very low thermal inertia. Any design must overcome the
large variations in the radiation field with respect to local Martian day and night, wind speed, atmospheric dust load,
altitude and season. Mars’s atmospheric density also varies between the daytime and nighttime, it can be envisaged
that any lighter than air vehicle operating within this Martian atmosphere will vary in altitude with respect to the
local density profile. The albedo and the thermal inertia of the surface also vary hugely from one site to another
which would introduce large variations in the aerobot’s buoyancy. Due to the thin Martian atmosphere the solar
attenuation has been assumed to be constant with a value of 0.85 over Mars’s complete altitude range, this
attenuation is mainly due to dust particles within the atmosphere, drawn from the surface to the dust storms, the
intensity of which varies throughout the Martian year.10 The incident solar energy10 available at Mars’s orbital radius
is 590 W/m2 . Wind speeds on Mars are variable with season and location, at the Viking landing sites the wind
speeds were in the range of 2 to 7 m/s near the surface level10 and it is estimated that well above the surface wind
speeds can approach 50 m/s. However because of the low density the impact on aerobots will be less severe
compared to Earth. The Mars atmospheric characteristics have been obtained from NASA (JPL) mission data.10
o
Using this data pressure, density and temperature profile graphs have been generated for a latitude of -20 from just
above the Mars surface to 10 km altitude.
ρ = 0.014694 − 0.001145h + 4.6638 x10 −5 h 2 − 9.7737 x10 −7 h 3 (5)
T = 238 .74 − 34.488h + 35.133h 2 − 15.96 h 3 + 3.7315 h 4 − .047352 h 5 + 0.030962 h 6 − 0.000817 h 7 (6)
5
Figure 2. Mars Pressure, Density and Temperature profile at varying altitude (above surface to 10 km)
The power required by the Magnus aerobot is given by the power needed to operate the payload (150 W) and
onboard systems,10 the power required to overcome the drag on the aerobot and power required to rotate the
spherical balloon and propellers.
Total Power P = Power required to overcome drag, to operate propeller + Power required to rotate the Magnus
Sphere + Payload power
Dv M s r 2ω 2
P= + + 150 (7)
η dtη p 2tη dt
Table 3 Assumed system power levels10 Table 2 Drive line component efficiencies10
Payload Subsystem Continuous Component Efficiency

Power Level
Communications 50 W Control Electronics η mc 0.98

Motor η em 0.90
Control and 50 W
Operations Gearbox ηg 0.90
Payload 50 W Drive Line Efficiency η dt 0.794
Operational efficiency of individual equipment should be taken into account while calculating the power. The
aerobot total drive train efficiency ( η dt ) is given by “Eq. (8)”
η dt = η mcη emη g (8)

η dt = total efficiency of the drive train is 0.794
A method for sizing of the propellers has been calculated from NASA papers which covers propeller sizing in
detail,10 high altitude propeller design11 and solar powered flight on Venus12; all subsequent propeller sizing
calculations are drawn from this paper.10 The propeller design depends on two main factors, the Magnus aerobot’s
flight speed and its thrust requirements. The optimum solution for this scenario is two variable pitch twin bladed
propellers. The approximation of the thrust (ct) and power (cp) coefficients of these propellers is obtained as a
6
function of the advance tip speed ratio (J), and is defined by NASA’s10 empirical “Eqs. (9), (10) and (11)” which are
used for high altitude thin atmosphere similar to Mars.
Tthr
ct = this could be written in empirical formula
ρ m nb2 d p4
ct = −0.012122 + 0.14577 J − 0.1408 J 2 + 0.05374 J 3 − 0.0068444 J 4 (9)
P
Similarly cp = could be written in empirical formula
ρ m nb3 d 5p
c p = −0.012752 + 0.094954 J − 0.053694 J 2 + 0.017534 J 3 − 0.0007872 J 4 (10)

6000
8 km
5500
7 km
5000
6 km
4500 5 km
4 km
Power Required, W
4000
3 km
3500 2 km
1 km
3000 0.5 km
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200
Magnus Airship Total Mass, kg
Figure 3. Magnus aerobot total Mass vs power required (Altitudes range from 0.5 km to 8 km). A
larger size Magnus aerobot would require greater power.
vπ
J= (11)
(a m M ) 2 − v 2
Thrust and power coefficient “Eqs. (9) and (10)” are valid for advance tip speed ratios within the range of 0.18 to
2.0 the average speed of sound on Mars a m is about 224 m/s NASA13 Calculations show that propeller efficiency is
higher14 when the propeller tip Mach number is kept at 0.7 and the advance ratio at about 0.9.
7
ct J
The propeller efficiency η p can be obtained from equation ηp = (12)
cp
The aerobot drag D is given in the “Eq. (13)”, which depends on the volumetric drag coefficient, density of the
atmosphere, speed of the aerobot and the effective cross sectional area of the aerobot.15 The volumetric drag
coefficient for Mars atmosphere for the Reynolds number regime5,16,17 of 50,000 to 110,000 is about C dv = 0.47.
The drag at different altitude were calculated and plotted against total aerobot mass in Fig. 4. It is very clear from
Fig. 4 that the drag increases in direct proportional to the mass of the aerobot.
C dv ρ m v 2 A
D= (13)
2
180
170
8 km
160 7 km
150 6 km
5 km
140
4 km
130
3 km
120 2 km
Drag, N
1 km
110
0.5 km
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200
Figure 4. Magnus aerobot total mass vs drag (Altitude range from 0.5 km to 8 km). Drag increases for
increasing altitude due the fact that the diameter of the Magnus aerobot sphere will be larger compared
to the diameter of lower altitudes aerobots.
To ascertain the aerobot’s total power requirements, its mass must be known, which depends on the total weight the
buoyancy sack must lift. The static lifting force ( FSL ) resulting from the helium/hydrogen is based on Archimedes
principle; “A body wholly or partly immersed in a fluid is buoyed up with a force equal to the weight of the fluid
displaced by the body”. This principle is given by “Eq. (14)” where gm is the gravitational force of the planet on
which the aerobot is to operate. The ratio of the molecular weights of the lifting gas (MWlg) and the atmosphere
(MWatm) is used to account for the weight of the lifting gas itself.
8
 MWlg 
FSL = ρ mVa 1 − gm (14)
 MWatm 
20.0 160
Magnus Lift
140
18.0
5 km 120
4 km
Available Magnus Lift, kg

16.0 3 km
8 km
2 km 100
1 km
0.5 km
Radius, m
14.0 80
7 km
60
6 km
12.0
40
10.0
20
8.0 0
50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200
Figure 5. Magnus aerobot total mass vs Magnus sphere radius and available Magnus lift at different
altitude.
Figure 5 shows that the aerobot’s sphere radius must increase with respect to altitude in order to support a constant
aerobot total mass. The Magnus lifting force for a sphere18 can be calculated from “Eq. (15)”. The right hand scale
on Fig. 5 shows the available Magnus lift. It can be concluded from this graph that Magnus lift is proportional to the
balloon sphere radius at any given altitude.
FML = πρ m vr 3ω (15)
Using formula from NASA’s recent document on Aerobots for Planetary Exploration10 the masses of various
equipments can be calculated. Table 4 gives the list of formula’s used for calculation of Mars Magnus airship.
From the mass calculations, graphs have been plotted for available payload masses for altitudes between 0.5 km to 8
km. Fig. 6 shows the available static lifting mass due to buoyancy and Fig. 5 shows the radius of the Magnus airship
and additional Magnus lift produced. A preliminary Magnus airship selection process could be performed using the
graphs from Fig. 2 to Fig.6 to suit the requirements.
9
Table 4 Mass calculation
Description Mass calculation
Mass of the structure M s = 1.5(4πr 2 ρ e t e ) (16)

ρ e = density of the envelope material, 910 kg/m3
t e = thickness of the envelope material, 12.5 µ
The electric motor mass Pη mc
M em = (17)
1291
The motor controller mass P
M mc = (18)
6233
The gear box mass Pη emη mc
Mg = (19)
3200
Mass of the power conditioning system P
M pc = (20)
1000
The solar array mass for thin film silicon solar array19 M sa = 0.0588PS a (21)
S a = 0.12 kg/m2
Assumed average solar power collected on Mars20 is about
17 W/m2
P
Battery mass is based on a silver zinc rechargeable battery Mb = (22)
150
Dπ 2
Diameter of the propeller dp = (23)
ct ((a m M ) 2 − v 2 )
Volume of the propeller V prop = 9.25739 x10 −5 d 3p (24)
If we know the above then the mass of the propeller could be

calculated, where number of blades nb is two, propeller material M prop = nb ρ prop (1 − Fb )V prop
density ρ prop = 1380 kg/m2 and the void percentage with in the blade (25)
Fb = 50%
Mass of the Hydrogen gas in Magnus sphere M hyd = ρ hyd Va (26)
The total aerobot mass with 10% margin

M aerobot = 1.10( M s + M em + M mc + M g + M pc + M sa + M b + M prop + M hyd ) (27)
10
90.0
Available Payload Lifting Mass (Static), kg 80.0

0.5 km
1 km
70.0
2 km
60.0
3 km
50.0
4 km
40.0 5 km
30.0 6 km
20.0
7 km
10.0
8 km
0.0
50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200
Magnus Airship Mass, kg
Figure 6. Magnus aerobot total mass vs available payload lifting mass (Static).
IV. Aerobot configuration
The role of this concept drawing in Fig. 7 is to highlight the operational functionality of the aerobot and the various
mechanisms employed. It combines the recent development in light weight composites, ultrathin balloon material,
and lighter power system to achieve optimal solution. The Magnus sphere is made out of ultrathin Mylar material
and sits in between the light weight composite undercarriage. The rotation of the sphere is achieved through two
electrical motors mounted on a yoke. The twin propellers are also made out of light weight composite. The Magnus
sphere also contains light weight flexible solar cells which produces power directly from the Sunlight and stores in
the battery. The undercarriage consists of various compartments to fit the science payload, power system and
avionics. A more detailed study would be required to select the payload, power system and avionics package from
available space application instruments to achieve the allocated mass and size provisions. Other feature worth
mentioning here is the advantage this aerobot has compared to ground based rovers; it would have the ability to
cover relatively large distances. Six scientific payload modules are located on the aerobot’s underside, which can be
lowered onto the Martian surface using a flexible robotic lowering mechanism. Using this mechanism, equipments
can be lowered onto the ground, detached and left to undertake scientific analysis for long periods and transmit data
directly when orbiting satellites are in the vicinity. The robotic mechanism can also accurately control and guide
equipment such as a rock abrasion tool and a high resolution microscope onto specific targets. A fully gimballed
dual Pan-Cam vision system is mounted on the front underside of the aerobot and is used for aerial
guidance/landing control systems and photographic imagery.
11
12
Figure 7. Magnus aerobot conceptual model.
V. Conclusion
The concept of combining the static lift produced from a lighter than air balloon and the aerodynamic lift resulting
from the Magnus effect when spinning the sphere is a novel approach to finding a solution to this challenge. This
preliminary design study concludes that an aerobot configuration as shown in Fig. 7 is one of the optimal ways to
use lighter than air vehicles for exploration of Mars. Manufacturing of large Magnus aerobot using ultra thin
material with the current technology is possible. However we should also consider using thicker material for the
envelope skin.
The main obstacle in designing a reliable, durable aerobot capable of operating in Mars’s low density atmosphere,
besides the technical hurdles involved in getting there in the first place, is to develop a method that utilises aero
dynamical principles and buoyancy theory to such an extent that a meaningful lift force capable of supporting the
aerobot and a useful science payload can be produced. However with a larger sphere constructed of extremely thin
lightweight materials several engineering problems would arise. Serious consideration would need to be given to
overcoming these issues and many more similar problems which would undoubtedly, result in some shape or form.
Through the simulation models and prototype design process these difficulties could be eliminated. The other
realistic option for an aerobot on Mars remain, a pure lighter than air hydrogen balloon for which there is already a
wealth of knowledge.
It is suggested that further work should be undertaken into developing aerobots for use in Mars’s atmosphere which
utilise the Magnus effect for altering the altitude when necessary to do scientific analysis at various Martian
altitudes. The future work should also concentrate on developing optimal design using simulated Mars environment,
deployment on Mars, structural analysis, impact test simulation and thermal analysis of the aerobot.
References
1
Sterling, J. and Fairbrother, D.A. Laboratory Analysis of Polymer Thin Films for Planetary Balloon and Gossamer
Structures. In: 45th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Material Conference and
Exhibit, St. Louis, MO, April 19-22 2004, AIAA Paper No. 2004-1655.
2
http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/atmosmrm.html, 11 Dec 06, 2006
3
Kaye, G.W.C., and Laby, T.H. Tables of physical and chemical constants. Longman, 14 edition, 1973 Kaye,
G.W.C., and Laby, T.H. Tables of physical and chemical constants. NPL, on-line edition, 2007
http://www.kayelaby.npl.co.uk, pp 39-40.
4
Michal de Podesa., Understanding the properties of matter. UCL Press, London, 1996, pp 99.
5
Hoerner, S.F., Fluid dynamic drag. Hoerner Fluid-Dynamics, NJ, USA, 1975, pp 3-8.
6
Hoerner, S.F. and Borst, H.V., Fluid dynamic lift. Hoerner Fluid-Dynamics, NJ, USA, 1975
7
Yajima, N., et.al. A New Design Concept of Natural Shape Balloon for High Pressure Durability. In: AIAA
International Balloon Technology Conference, June 28th – July 1st 1999, Norfolk, VA, AIAA Paper No. 99-3880.
8
Schofield.J.T et al. "The Mars Pathfinder Atmospheric Structure Investigation Meteorology (ASI/MET)
Experiment." Science Magazine Dec.1997: vol. 278, pp 1752-1758
9
Delaurier, J. D. et.al. (Toronto, University, Toronto, Canada) Development of the Magnus Aerospace Corporation's
rotating-sphere airship, IN: Lighter-Than-Air Systems Conference, Anaheim, CA, July 25-27, 1983, Collection of
Technical Papers (A83-38901 17-01). New York, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1983, pp
161-170.
10
Colozza, A.J., Airships for Planetary Exploration NASA/CR-2004-213345, November 2004.
13
11
Koch, L.D., Design and Performance Calculations of a Propeller for Very High Altitude Flight, NASA report
No. NASA/TM-1998-206637, Feb 1998.
12
Colozza, A., Solar Powered Flight on Venus, NASA report No. NASA/CR-2004-213052, Apr 2004, pp 18.
13
David W. H., Robert W. P., and Morris S., Conceptual Design of the Full-Scale Vehicle Design,Construction and
Test of Performance and Deployment Models, NASA Ames Research Centre, California, 27th May 1997, pp 5.
14
Young L..A., Chen R.T.N., Aiken E.W., Design Opportunities and Challenges in the Development of Vertical Lift
Planetary Aerial Vehicles In: American Helicopter Society International Vertical Lift Aircraft Design SpecialistOS
Meeting, San Francisco, CA, January 19-21, 2000, pp 13
15
Anderson, Jr. J.D. Fundamental of Aerodynamics, 3rd International edition, ISBN 0-07-237335-0, McGraw-Hill
Book Co, Singapore, 2001, chap.3, pp 264.
16
Hobbs, S.E. Mars Aircraft Performance, Cranfield University, Technote, Aug 2004, pp 59 & 60.
17
Bock K. J., and Traut G., Propulsion / Drag Interaction Configuration for Spherical Airships, Aerostation, Vol.
28, No. 3, ISSN 0741-5974, 2005.
18
Bourg, D.M. Physics for Game Developers, First Edition, Published by O’Reilly, November 2001, ISBN: 0-596-
00006-5, pp 101-117.
19
Colozza, A.J. In: Initial Feasibility Assessment of a High Altitude Long Endurance Airship, NASA/CR-2003-
212724, Dec 2003.
20
Hibbs, B.D. Mars Solar Rover Feasibility Study, March 2001, NASA report No. NASA/CR-2001-210802.
14

Mars Magnus Aerobot Preliminary Design

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mars Magnus Aerobot Preliminary Design

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SpaceOps 2010 Conference<br><b><i>Delivering on the Dream</b></i><br><i>Hosted by NASA Mars AIAA 2010-2184

25 - 30 April 2010, Huntsville, Alabama

Mars Magnus Aerobot Preliminary Design

S. Ravindran1 and S.E. Hobbs2

MWatm = molecular weight of the atmosphere (g/mol)

II. General overview of Mars Magnus effect airship

L = ( ρVa − mballoon − m propulsion ) g m (1)

mmagnus < 0.127r 2 (4)

Table 1 Comparison of Magnus aerobot with other Mars mobility systems

Mobility Duration Range km Comments

Orbiter > 1 year ~ 10

Rover 1–3 ~ 101 • Excellent in-situ data

Glider < 1 hour ~ 10 2 • Short duration

Plane 1 – 2 hours ~ 10 3 • Short duration

Montgolfiere 1–2 • Requires sunlight for buoyancy (6 months sunlight

III. Magnus aerobot design

ρ = 0.014694 − 0.001145h + 4.6638 x10 −5 h 2 − 9.7737 x10 −7 h 3 (5)

spherical balloon and propellers.

Payload Subsystem Continuous Component Efficiency

Communications 50 W Control Electronics η mc 0.98

Payload 50 W Drive Line Efficiency η dt 0.794

η dt = η mcη emη g (8)

ct = −0.012122 + 0.14577 J − 0.1408 J 2 + 0.05374 J 3 − 0.0068444 J 4 (9)

c p = −0.012752 + 0.094954 J − 0.053694 J 2 + 0.017534 J 3 − 0.0007872 J 4 (10)

Available Magnus Lift, kg

Description Mass calculation

Mass of the structure M s = 1.5(4πr 2 ρ e t e ) (16)

If we know the above then the mass of the propeller could be

Mass of the Hydrogen gas in Magnus sphere M hyd = ρ hyd Va (26)

The total aerobot mass with 10% margin

Available Payload Lifting Mass (Static), kg 80.0

IV. Aerobot configuration

You might also like