Learn about the GrabCAD Platform
Get to know GrabCAD as an open software platform for Additive Manufacturing
Visit our new homepage
Show off your skills and solve real design problems
Judge's Update: Challenge Results Announced
We are thrilled to announce the winners of this NASA design challenge! Congratulations to all the winning teams on your outstanding work.
Our judging team was thoroughly impressed by the exceptional quality and depth of submissions received. It was particularly exciting to see several teams go beyond conceptual designs to build physical prototypes that validated their approaches. We even had the pleasure of reviewing a submission that originated as a university class project—a testament to the educational value of challenges like these.
The evaluation process proved challenging given the sheer number of thorough, high-quality entries. However, the five winning submissions distinguished themselves by presenting novel solutions that comprehensively addressed the prompt while carefully considering all critical factors across the system's entire lifecycle.
This challenge has been invaluable to our team's planning process. The innovative concepts presented will directly inform future design updates to our system, and we anticipate incorporating several ideas from these outstanding submissions into our work moving forward.
Thank you to everyone who participated and contributed their creativity and expertise to this challenge.
--------
Challenge Goal:
NASA is reaching out to members of the GrabCAD community who may be familiar with or are interested in the testing of atmospheric entry vehicles.
Currently, NASA has a capability gap in the area of free-flight dynamic stability testing for reentry vehicles.
The The Stratospheric Projectile Entry Experiment on Dynamics (SPEED), a two-stage stratospheric drop test architecture, is currently under development to bridge the state-of-the-art gap that many NASA flagship missions require to reduce system risk and enable more optimized designs via margin reduction.
To do this, a two-stage vehicle will drop from a high-altitude balloon and use the first stage (an LV-Haack cone aeroshell) to accelerate the sub-scale test model to supersonic conditions. The onboard avionics will then release the test model into freestream flow at the proper altitude in Earth’s atmosphere for dynamic Mach scaling to the full-scale flight trajectory. SPEED leverages low-cost methods of manufacturing such as 3D printing and laser/water-jet cutting to enable 8 or more two-stage vehicles to be dropped in a single test, making the science-to-dollar density much higher than any current ground-test facility NASA has at its disposal.
The goal is to develop a robust ejection system that can reliably introduce the test models into supersonic flow with a tight variance on initial condition perturbation. The separation system must be capable of handling a range of initial angle-of-attacks, keep the test model secure in the first stage during take-off and descent, and eject the test model in such a way that it does not linger behind the first stage and be affected by the resulting wake.
As current ejection system designs are conceptual, complex, and untested, NASA is looking for alternative ideas that can be incorporated into the design of their next iteration of SPEED flight vehicles to increase system reliability. We are challenging the GrabCAD community to design innovative concepts for a separation mechanism that can be used to assess NASA and commercial reentry vehicle stability.
Challenge Description:
A successful outcome of this contest is a credible 3D model of a separation mechanism that is both cost-effective by utilizing easy to manufacture methods (such as 3D printing or laser/water jet cutting) and Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) parts and doesn’t rely on high-energy systems like explosives.
The separation mechanism must fit inside the current Haack-cone volume of SPEED’s first stage, utilizing only the Aft section and available Nose section internal volumes:
Haack Cone Parameters
• C = 1/3
• Length = 66.5cm
• Base Radius = 15cm
• Body Wall Thickness = 0.41cm
• Nose Radius = 2.5cm (spherical rounding of the cone tip)
• Ballast Mass Height (from Nose) = 10cm
• Nose Length (from Nose to bottom of Lap Joint) = 22.24cm
• Aft Length (from Lap Joint bottom to Base) = 29.84cm
Cylindrical Extrusion
A cylindrical extrusion on the base of the haack cone with the following parameters adds a “barrel” to the end of the first-stage:
• Length = 6.825cm
• Wall Thickness = 0.9cm
The mechanism must also be able to accept a wide range of aeroshell shapes in a modular fashion – allowing easy swapping of test models without having to custom fabricate and integrate a large number of parts. It can also be assumed that the test model base radii will not exceed 12.5 cm nor an axial length of 15 cm.
The designed mechanism can also be assumed as a “black box” to the avionics suite with the only interface between the two systems being a 28 AWG wire that will send a 5V pulse signal to the ejection mechanism, initiating the proposed ejection trigger. The connector type for this signal wire to the ejection mechanism can be requested as-needed to fit the design.
Contest submissions must include:
1. CAD models of the separation mechanism and any accompanying sub-systems
2. Include concepts for the mechanism arming and any necessary safety features
3. Consider feasible methods of construction and mechanisms. This may be provided in 2D drawings or as a 3D model.
Renderings of the system in operation will be used to help communicate the concept and potentially be used in proposed options for the upcoming iteration in the SPEED test architecture design.
Judging Factors:
1. Concept enables a reliable and stable initial state of the test model after release.
2. Concept manufacturing and construction is feasible
3. Quality and fidelity of the 3D models.
4. Cost and lead-time of system implementation
Requirements Needed for Submission:
1. Model File Formats shall be delivered in a nonproprietary format (STEP or IGES).
2. Renderings: Two separate viewing angles (.jpg or .png formats)
3. Any supplemental description documents shall be in PDF format.
4. If zipped, the file format should be .zip and not require any special software to unzip.
Available CAD models, data, or other references.
CAD Files for Download:
CAD Files
REQUIRED DELIVERABLES (CAD files, reports, images, etc.) CAD Files used in model.
ACCEPTED FILE FORMATS ● STEP, IGS or native Solidworks files are acceptable for CAD. o If applicable, use a CAD file naming convention that makes it easy to determine how each file fits into the larger assembly. ● Any image files should be .jpg or .png ● Any animations should be compatible with embedding in Microsoft PowerPoint and separate viewing in Windows Media Player ● Any accompanying reports should be in .pdf format (can be saved from Microsoft Word to a .pdf). ● If zipped, the file compression shall be compatible with Windows 10 and not require any special software to unzip.
PAGE LIMITS AND FILE SIZE LIMITS Total size of all files combined should not exceed 250 MB
ELIGIBILITY Solutions from countries listed as Type 1, 2, or 3 on the NASA Designated Countries List are Not eligible for monetary prizes. The list is frequently updated, and the latest version can be found here. This challenge is not open to NASA Personnel.
ENTERING THE COMPETITION The Challenge is open to everyone except employees and families of GrabCAD and the Sponsor. Multiple entries are welcome. Team entries are welcome. By entering the Challenge you: 1. Accept the official GrabCAD Challenges Terms & Conditions. 2. Agree to be bound by the decisions of the judges (Jury). 3. Warrant that you are eligible to participate. 4. Warrant that the submission is your original work. 5. Warrant, to the best of your knowledge, your work is not, and has not been in production or otherwise previously published or exhibited. 6. Warrant neither the work nor its use infringes the intellectual property rights (whether a patent, utility model, functional design right, aesthetic design right, trademark, copyright or any other intellectual property right) of any other person. 7. Warrant participation shall not constitute employment, assignment or offer of employment or assignment. 8. Are not entitled to any compensation or reimbursement for any costs. 9. Agree the Sponsor and GrabCAD have the right to promote all entries. If you think an entry may infringe on existing copyrighted materials, please email challenges@grabcad.com.
SUBMITTING AN ENTRY Only entries uploaded to GrabCAD through the "Submit entry" button on this Challenge page will be considered an entry. Only public entries are eligible. We encourage teams to use GrabCAD Print Pro (https://www.stratasys.com/en/software/grabcad-print-pro-trial/) for developing their entries. Entries are automatically given the tag "NASA_FreeFlightTestPlatform" when uploading to GrabCAD. Please do not edit or delete this tag. Only entries with valid tag will participate in the Challenge.
AWARDING THE WINNERS The sum of the Awards is the total gross amount of the reward. The awarded participant is solely liable for the payment of all taxes, duties, and other similar measures if imposed on the reward pursuant to the legislation of the country of his/her residence, domicile, citizenship, workplace, or any other criterion of similar nature. Only 1 award per person. Prizes may not be transferred or exchanged. All winners will be contacted by the GrabCAD staff to get their contact information and any other information needed to get the prize to them. Payment of cash awards is made through Checks mailed to the Winners. All team awards will be transferred to the member who entered the Challenge. Vouchers will be provided in the form of Stratasys Direct Manufacturing promo codes. We will release the finalists before the announcement of the winners to give the Community an opportunity to share their favorites in the comments, discuss concerns, and allow time for any testing or analysis by the Jury. The Jury will take the feedback into consideration when picking the winners. Winning designs will be chosen based on the Rules and Requirements schedule.
NTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CONSIDERATIONS Copyright Stipulations o All material (including the CAD model itself and all written documents) must be free of any copyright restrictions. • Use only models, photos, or images created during the project unless you have obtained the right from the copyright owner for unrestricted use – do not blindly copy images from internet websites. • Images on .gov websites are often (but not always) public data; check before assuming it is public material. • CAD-Only Rendering Requirement – All renderings and visual representations submitted for NASA challenges must be directly generated from CAD software or other approved design tools. The use of generative AI to create or enhance submissions is prohibited. This policy ensures that all entries are original works and prevents the inadvertent inclusion of copyrighted material that may be present in AI generated content. Participants are responsible for ensuring their submissions comply with this requirement to maintain the integrity of the challenge and respect intellectual property rights. Include documentation of any usage permissions The Government is seeking a full government purpose usage license for further development of the concept. There is potential that the winning concepts could be included in follow-on studies.
SCHEDULE Challenge entry begins July 14th at 3PM Easter Standard Time and ends on September 8th, 2025 at 3PM Eastern Standard Time. Any Changes after the date will be considered as disqualifications.
EVALUATION CRITERIA AND WEIGHTING FACTORS (what you will base your judgment on). See evaluation criteria in challenge guidelines.
$3,000
$1,800
$1,200
$750
$250
Ben Libben, NASA ARC
Cole Kazemba, NASA ARC
Justin Haskins, NASA ARC
This challenge supports the Entry Systems Modeling project which is funded by NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate.
Have an awesome idea for this competition? Want to win cool prizes? Sign-up now to upload your entries.
GrabCAD Community will undergo scheduled maintenance on Thursday, November 20th, between 9:00 AM and 1:30 PM UTC. During this time, the website will be unavailable and users will not be able to log in.
52 comments
Carlos Sebastián Di Giulio 4 months ago
Hi, are you going to upload any CAD files of the model? Thanks, Carlos.
Dario de Santiago 4 months ago
Hi, interesting challenge. I would have used an airbag inflation capsule with sodium azide to eject the model, but I think it falls into the prohibited options.
Melville 4 months ago
I am having an initial idea that the answer may be "hidden " in let it go
challenge where there are interesting entries
One of Let it Go mechanisms may be best solution
Sandro Gisler 4 months ago
Hi Carlos and Marcelo, we'll upload a basic representation of the cone shortly, thanks for asking.
Sandro Gisler 4 months ago
Hi Melville, a cold air system is acceptable as long as the initiating system to release the stored gas does not use a pyrotechnic solution. And solenoids and other actuators are definitely okay; while we didn’t write explicit weight requirements into the challenge description, the mass of an electromagnetic solution (including battery mass) is an important consideration.
Sandro Gisler 4 months ago
Hi Dario, yes, airbag inflators would likely be considered high-energy systems which would heighten handling requirements, which is not desirable.
Sandro Gisler 4 months ago
Hi Geo, sometimes inspiration comes from entirely unrelated fields, feel free to submit an entry with your idea!
Carlos Sebastián Di Giulio 4 months ago
Thanks Sandro
Carlos Sebastián Di Giulio 4 months ago
Hello Sandro, could you provide us with the dimensional details of the planned connection area between the projectile and the capsule?
Carlos Sebastián Di Giulio 4 months ago
Another question, Understanding that the lighter the better; is there a weight limit the mechanism cannot exceed?
Nathanael Maillez 4 months ago
Hi, i want to submit an entry but, tho there's a overview available, i find it unclear.
I'm not sure if we can use an onboard energy source, also what are the mass of the ejected system(will it always be the same?) and its velocity as soon as it's ejected?
Thanks
Melville 4 months ago
Greeting Sandro
Thanks very much for reading my query and reply
But I have additional query inspired by nathanael maillez
Yes What is dynamic forces approximately at 0.5 Mach for test device
IT will help us decide spring properties and 3d printing resin
Thanking you once again
Fernando Lucchesi 4 months ago
Is there any kind of CAD (2D or 3D) of the capsules supposed to be ejected?
Şafak Vural 4 months ago
hello. i already draw it with your gived dimensions. but the result is long and thin rocket body. am i true way on design? i must know it for create more usable flanges inside rocket body. thanks.
manjesh 4 months ago
Hi can any one say in simple words what is the requirement. basically understood NASA require and ejection system. but need to understand why its required and what made NASA to do this newly. how present ejection system are and how it works.
Dario de Santiago 4 months ago
Hello. According to what I read, "The designed mechanism can also be considered a "black box" for the avionics assembly, with the only interface between the two systems being a 28 AWG wire that sends a 5V pulse signal to the ejection mechanism, activating the proposed ejection trigger." In other words, there is no other power supply beyond the signal. For example, for heating during lifting? Should my black box have its own battery? Could the trigger signal be a PWM signal specific to my model in order to avoid adding an additional controller?
mister Xmin 4 months ago
Is it necessary to eject the model out of the back of the cone in the back? Because that would expose the model to the turbulence of the cone?
What will happen to the cone after the model is released?
Is there anything else dropped from the balloon than the shown cone with the model inside?
Sandro Gisler 4 months ago
Mr. Xmin,
Yes and yes (briefly, initially), and the cone will continue falling.
Nothing else is dropped at the same time.
Sandro Gisler 4 months ago
Hi all,
I wanted to make a quick comment about how we respond to questions:
We try to address all questions that are about a relevant gap in our specifications or otherwise valuable. But we want to avoid a situation where participants have to read all comments in addition to the given specs, especially once the challenge has been under way for a while.
If we don’t respond to your question, in many cases it means that a) the information is already in the specs, b) the information is general knowledge or physics, c) the detail is not relevant to the solution, or d) you can make your own assumption. In that case (e.g. what is the mass of x), make an assumption and mention that in your submission; it would not be fair for us to provide such assumptions after a while, in case some of you already made another assumption!
a_g_nuswantoro 4 months ago
can we post more than 1 solution ?
a_g_nuswantoro 4 months ago
1. What is the cone material ?
2. In the Haack cone parameters, what is the meaning of C=1/3 ?
3. Can you add a pic (CFD) of the shockwave pattern of the LV-Haack cone aeroshell during supersonic condition ?
4. What is the shape of the payload ? Is it a cone shape as usual? Or random shape depends on the mission?
5. How much is the ballast weight ?
6. Without ejection mechanism, what is the approximate weight of the ballast + cone ?
SHANKARSANA PARAMASIVAN 3 months ago
Can we use this CAD model to begin working on the ejection mechanism design, or are we required to design the Haack cone using the given parameters? If we do have to design it using the provided parameters, the instructions are not clear.
PAGAL, REDEN PARANGAN 3 months ago
Do we have an estimate for the mass of the capsule?
a_g_nuswantoro 3 months ago
Is it allowed to modify the haack cone ? (shape, Fins, etc)
a_g_nuswantoro 3 months ago
Is it allowed to have part, other than the capsule, leaves the projectile?
Deepak Kumar 3 months ago
Hello Engineers,
I’m excited to share my latest concept — AeroZed M1.
This model integrates advanced SPO & ROPZE pattern analysis with aerospace-grade design thinking. While it’s conceptual, every detail is rooted in technical logic and precision engineering.
I would truly value the feedback of this talented community to refine it further.
Your insights could help push this concept from an idea into a breakthrough
Kelean NJAMGA 3 months ago
Hi Sandro
Hope you are doing well Sir.
Please the base radius mentioned in the specifications is the radius or the diameter ? I'm confused because I found that the conceptions of others friends, they consider it as radius or in the picture that you share it seems be the radius.
Please highlight it.
I have already finished my design and I would like to submit it when I found this "mistake".
Politely,
Kelean NJAMGA 3 months ago
Corrected :
“
Hi Sandro
Hope you are doing well Sir.
Please the base radius mentioned in the specifications is the radius or the diameter ? I'm confused because I found that the conceptions of others friends, they consider it as a radius but in the picture that you share it seems be the diameter.
Please highlight it.
I have already finished my design and I would like to submit it when I found this "mistake".
Politely,
”
Donald Jacob 3 months ago
Hi Kelean,
Infer.
Many thanks.
Grayson Davis 3 months ago
Is there a mission specific reason for why the aeroshell's should remain in one piece throughout the duration of the test?
Melville 2 months ago
Hello Judges
My suggestion may seem beyond the scope of this Competition
But I will humbly make a suggestion
The Data and Other Team may benefit If
The capsule is directly launched from the rectangular casing
With fitment mechanism eliminating need of Red Rocket
Also they can be restrained initially with a parachute
and then when data stability is achieved parachute can be removed
This can save mission cost considerably and eliminate need of mechanism
Can lower cost to 10000 dollars
Also consider capsule protection from stratospheric radiation
Thanking You for consideration
Have a nice day
Carlos Sebastián Di Giulio 2 months ago
Dear Sandro:
I'm not uploading the 3D model. If it's feasible, I have it in my models.
model Indio Pampa01
Dario de Santiago 2 months ago
Good luck to everyone. My computer burned out. I uploaded what I could. I hope my idea makes sense.
Ramirez 2 months ago
Hello Challenge manager(s), did the challenge seek requirements like 1. The ejection mechanism was supposed to hold testing models of different shapes and different radii below 12.5cm ? I have seen many entries that haven't adjusted or addressed this and have had a fixed geometry to hold these 2. Most entries, seem to have surpassed way over the AFT length which is a constraint stated clearly, is this a strict constraint for the challenge ? 3. When are the results likely for the challenge ?
Dario de Santiago 2 months ago
Hello everyone,
I’ve just published a couple of simple animations to better illustrate how the sabot-drogue system Works.
I hope these visualizations make the concept clearer and help convey the interaction between the mechanical and aerodynamic aspects of the system.
Feedback and suggestions are very welcome!
Dario de Santiago 2 months ago
Dear judges, can I correct the description? Or could I be disqualified for doing so? I've made so many spelling and translation errors that it's incomprehensible.
Anthony Sabina 2 months ago
The description says “ Any Changes after the date will be considered as disqualifications.” I’m assuming this is including your submission description. I may be wrong though. I recommend you add a comment on your own submission in case you do not receive an official answer sooner.
Dario de Santiago 2 months ago
Thanks, I'll do that. I'll write clarifying comments, but I won't edit the post. Luckily, the models I uploaded are complete. The description is missing. I just hope you read the comments.
Dario de Santiago about 2 months ago
I did as recommended, I clarified in the comments.
Dario de Santiago about 2 months ago
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/395637518_Ejection_system_Sabot-drogue_for_The_Challenge_Ejection_Mechanism_Design_for_the_SPEED_Test_Architecture_for_NASA
Marcelo Valderrey about 2 months ago
Congratulations to the winners, and to the participants in general!
Adam Bialko about 2 months ago
Congratulations to all winners and participants!
Ikponmwosa Obasogie about 2 months ago
I think it will be a great idea if we could include honorable mentions with virtual downloadable certificates for other viable ideas which did not make it to the final winners list. I believe it will help us as engineers to build stronger portfolios. Even if we cannot get the final cash prize at least the recommendation(peer validation) will go a long way.
Papa Golf about 2 months ago
Congratulations to all the winners. Great job! See you at the next challenge... PG
Dario de Santiago about 2 months ago
Congratulations to the winners and other participants
Fabien Chan about 2 months ago
Big thanks to the NASA Entry Systems Modeling Project for this inspiring challenge, and to the GrabCAD platform for bringing us all together.
So many great ideas and clever designs, it’s been a blast to share the launchpad with such brilliant minds.
Now let’s keep launching ideas… and capsules. 🚀😉
Go NASA!
Khaled Akasheh about 2 months ago
Special thanks to NASA and GrabCAD for hosting this challenge, it was an exciting and rewarding experience.
I truly enjoyed the opportunity to see the creativity and innovation from all participants.
Congratulations to the winners, and best of luck to all participants in future challenges!
A special thanks as well to the NASA jury members for their time and thoughtful evaluation.
Carlos Sebastián Di Giulio about 2 months ago
Felicitaciones a los ganadores, los participantes, Grabcad y a NASA , por este gran desafío. Esperaré el próximo con ilusión.
Donald Jacob about 1 month ago
Congratulations to all the winners!
Melissa Yearta about 1 month ago
Congratulations to all our winners! Everyone is incredibly impressed by the quality of submissions and the innovative solutions presented. Thank you to everyone who participated in this challenge—your creativity and technical expertise have provided valuable insights for our NASA partner team!
Christopher Costes about 1 month ago
Congratulations to the winners, and thanks to GrabCAD and NASA for organizing such a challenging and inspiring competition.
As someone who participated, I’d like to better understand how the judging criteria were applied. The challenge description emphasized requirements like actuation via a 28 AWG electrical pulse, safety provisions, and the use of COTS components. In reviewing the results, some winning entries seemed to interpret these requirements differently, which raises important questions about how compliance, safety, manufacturability, and novelty were balanced in the scoring.
A short post‑mortem or judging summary would be incredibly valuable for the community — it would help all of us understand how to align our designs more closely with NASA’s expectations in future challenges.
Amin Rahimi 12 days ago
congratulations to the winners and thanks for this amazing competition
i am passionate about designing and manufacturing about aeronautics , but i do not how can i start my work ?
Please log in to add comments.
Log in