Home
Who We Are
Project Overview
Building Instructions
Hardware Testing & Results
The Flight
Results: Panoramas
Other Results
Download Data
Acknowledgments and Links
In the News
10g Shock Test Purpose and Overview
The 10g shock test consisted of a generic computer mock-up of the GEOCAM aluminum casing using SolidWorks. The components accounted for in the shock test included only the camera and the crossbar which attached the camera to the aluminum casing.
The camera was the main component tested in the simulation because it was the heaviest component used in flight, and was connected using bolts to the outside of the casing. The camera was the component likely to cause the most strain on the aluminum casing. The smaller components, such as the servo motors and the power board were not tested in the shock test because of their locations on the box. The servo motors were placed either on the camera casing or on the lid of the aluminum box. The power board was also placed on the lid of the aluminum box, and was bolted to ensure safety.
Stress Test: Experimental Setup
The drawing was then imported into MSC NASTRAN to test the stress on the system when force was applied in multiple directions. Stress was analyzed in the x, y, and z axis, with the xyz-coordinates aligning with the sides of the cube.
A 10g force was placed in the y directional axis because the y-axis was the direction that GEOCAM would experience the most force. Similarly, a 5g force was placed in the x and z axis and analysis was done.
Results and Conclusions
The stress test included a simple structure tested using MSC NASTRAN including the aluminum casing as well as the crossbar with the camera attached. The results of the test were positive and showed that even with the force of the components attached, the amount of strain on the casing was not great enough to cause any components to break away from GEOCAM and produce hazardous projectiles.
The largest amount of stress observed during the test were much lower than the deemed “safe” amount of stress needed to ensure the safety of GEOCAM. A second test was designed to measure the actual force placed in GEOCAM and its components in a fall, but was not needed because of the success of the simulated results.