Transitions

• Your Guide: Dr. Rick Fleeter

• Tour Duration: < 2 weeks
• Starting Point: All tools, nothing to build
• Destination: You design it
• In Your Backpack:
– Elements: G&C, Structures, Orbits (?)…
– Class Presentations and Notes
• Expeditionary Party:
– The Class, Your Texts, The Internet
– Your Group
– Teaching Assistant(?) and me
Water / Bouyancy / Fluid Mechanics

+ Breathing, Conditioning, Stroke Mechanics

=> let’s go for a swim
Four Classes (1 and 2)
1. What is design, What is the Design Process
What are you going to design (mission statement)
Some examples of missions and mission statements
Requirements and the design process
homework: form groups, pick mission, describe

2. Learning from other missions

Guess their mission statement and requirements
Other ways to accomplish same mission
(in space or on ground)
“workshop” and homework: sketch your design
spacecraft / payload / orbit / launch / ground
top level requirements outline
Four Classes
3. 5 Minute presentation of your design:1 from ea. group
What technologies are mission critical?
What are tech obstacles in space today?

4. (All members minus 1): present design specifics

• Mission and Specific Requirements
• How to do mission with current tech
• What would change with tech innovation
Transportation: influence on mission, design, cost
Innovating around launch issues
Documentation for student projects
Your missions for Next Class:
Organize into groups / squadre
- minimum 3 people
- maximum 5 people
- seek diversity
Invent / select ~ 2 missions
describe in <250 words
prepare to talk about your favorite:
- 5 minutes or less
- voluntary
 What it’s all about
• Ultimately: Design a Space Capability
– Mission Statement
– Spacecraft / Payload
– Launch / Orbit
– Operations / User Interface
– Financing
– Identify and prove Technology Requirements
 Design Roadmap
You Are
Here
Define Solutions & Conceptual
Concept Requirements Analysis
Mission Tradeoffs Design

Attitude Thermal /
Propulsion Ground Info
Comms Determine Launch Structure
Processing Orbit
/ ∆V & Control Station Deployables

Top Level Design

Parts Mass $
Specs
Suppliers / Budgets Power ∆V
Materials
Fab
Link Bits
Iterate Subsystems
Final Performance
Detailed Design Specs & Cost
• Mission Definition: If life is a banquet...
– Black tie & prime rib for 300 at the Plaza
vs.
– Beer and hot dogs in the park

• Preliminary Design:
– Select entré, drinks, desert, type of music
=> 1st credible cost estimate possible

• Detailed Design:
– # bottles of Schlitz / Perrier & Jouet, m2 of cake, place markers,
kg of beef, invitations: color, paper...
=> may commit to fixed price

• ICD (Interface Control Document):

– Cash bar? Who supplies the flowers? (Flowers? What flowers?).
Chairs? Valet Parking...

• Management and Standards

– Waiters in tuxedos, sommelier and served hors d’ouvres vs. buffet

• Build vs. Buy

– Can you bake those cookies for less than €7/kg? (and so what!)
– What won’t get done while you’re busy at home baking?
 Power: Supply & Demand
• Supply:
– Sun: 1.34 kW/m2
– Solar panels: η =~ 20% => ~250W/m2
– 50% of electricity is heat => At ops. temps,
Radiation=300 W/m2 (courtesy Stephan &
Boltzman)

• Demand
– 1 Transponder: 200W; 1 DBS XPDR:
2000W
– On - Board Housekeeping: 100W
– Iridium / Globalstar class satellite:
500W
– Micro / nano: 100 W to 1 W
 Small v. Big approaches to Power
• Small
– Commercial NiCads
(but relatively larger fraction of total
mass)
– Fixed, Body mounted cells (small V÷A =>
volume, not W, limit) => passive thermal

• Big
– Mil Spec Batteries
– Large Deployable, articulated solar
arrays
– Large Volume / Area: => Heat
matters => heaters / heat pipes /
radiators
 POWER EFFECTS EVERYTHING
• Array & Battery Size Volume, Mass, Cost ($10k/W), Risk

• Deployables Cost & Risk, CG, Attitude control &

perturbations, managing
complexity

• Thermal Larger dissipation => large fluctuations

=>
heat pipes, louvers, structure upgrade

• High η photovoltaics High cost, tight attitude control

• Other upgrades Power regulation & distribution,

charging, demand side devices
 Power: Cost Impacts
• Solar Panel Area
• Pointing requirements
• Tracking array
• Thermal issues:
- internal dissipation
- large day / night ∆
• Heavier spacecraft
- more costly launch
• Consider GaAs vs. Silicon
• Cost of Deployables
• Cost / mass of batteries
• Structural support / mount batteries
• G&C disturbance by array
• More power -> more data ->
- more processor cost
- higher radio & memory costs
• Higher launch cost ->
higher rel. required ->
higher parts count and cost

A weapon: Power Conservation:

- Duty cycle: 75 W Tx @ 20 min per day = 1 W equivalent
- Do all you can to cut power on 100% DC items (e.g. processor),
- Integrate payload / bus ops: 1 µp working 2x as hard is more efficient
- Limit downlink: compression, GS antenna gain, optimal modulation,
coding, use L or S band, spacecraft antenna gain / switch,
selectable downlink data rate, Rx cycling, Tx off and scheduled ops.
- Local DC / DC conversion where / when needed
- Careful parts selection, dynamic clocks
 Mission Cost / Complexity Drivers
Technical - slide #1

Feature Impact

Electric Power • Array size • High efficiency photovoltaics
(more of it and • Deployables • Batteries
at higher duty cycle) • Thermal Effects • RFI and stray fields
• Tracking arrays

Thermal • Design / Analysis complexity • How to test?
(special thermal • Reduces overall thermal mass • Heaters, coolers => more power
requirements for • Power supply reliability • Transients (deployment, slews,
discrete components) • Restricts attitude options lock loss...)

Data Rate • Large memory • Data analysis cost
(fast downlink) • Wider frequency allocation • Large Ground Station antenna
• Processor: push speed • More complex GS receiver
• Software efficiency • Directional on-board antenna(s)

Processing Power • Electric power, volume, mass • Mature development environment?
(using latest, greatest • lack of "space" features (e.g. EDAC • Integrated support circuits?
available µprocessors) multiple copies, current monitor...) • Available development boards?
• "Efficient" code (i.e. complex • H'wr, s'wr, documentation bugs
expensive, non-readable, test?)
 Mission Cost / Complexity Drivers
Technical - slide #2

Feature Impact

Raw Mass • Bigger test fixtures • No piggyback / shared launch slots
("250 kg of silicon • Difficult to transport • ACS actuator scale up
doesn't add to • Launch cost increase -> tougher standards system wide
complexity") (rules, reviews, signoffs, meetings, unwinnable arguments...)
• Difficult safety qual. • 50 kg to Pluto: not a small spacecraft!

Attitude Control & • Sensor upgrades: no home brews • Actuator upgrades: quieter wheels
Determination • Different sensor suite • Different actuator suite
(0.25° v. 0.05°) (e.g. HCI no better than 0.1°) (e.g. mag coils = insufficient authority)
• Need higher loop bandwidth: rate sensors (gyros)
• Structure rigidity: heavier and more complex modeling
• Thermal effects significant: more complex thermal mgt & modeling
• Alignment precision: complex machining, testing, calibration
(plus maintaining alignment in transport, test, launch environments)
• ACS Algorithmic complexity - more perturbations count - how to test?

∆V • Complexity: control, integration, launch prep
• Safety: pressure, chemicals, pyros... • Mass distribution restriction
• Additional ACS modes • Higher launch mass (see above)
• Orbit determination • Cost of propulsion system itself
 Mission Cost / Complexity Drivers
Technical - slide #3

Feature Impact

Reliability / • Redundancy: 2+x mass / volume • Limited selection of hardware

Lifetime • Hi Rel parts: older, longer lead, more $, lower performance
(usually results in higher parts count and lower reliability)
• Mil-Spec batteries: 100x cost, only large sizes, redundancy difficult
• Analysis cost: FMECA - how to prove reliability - extensive testing

"Special" • Clean spec: overhead of clean facilities, access hassle

• Special orbit: custom launch and/or on-board propulsion
• Highly integrated design (payload / bus / launch vehicle):
religious wars, pre-integration test fixturing, finger pointing @ integration,
full team cooperation throughout mission ops phase
• Low mass: modeling, high cost materials, testing
• low magnetic environment: booms, testing, materials and wiring, rework, retest
• Low Outgas: materials restrictions, bake-out

-> In general, specials move the team off optimal <-

 Mission Cost / Complexity Drivers
Management - slide #1
Feature Conventional Small / Low Cost

QC / Traceability • Separate QC Team • Responsibility of each engineer

Documentation • Documentation team: imposes • Minimal documentation -
overhead on engineers restricted to docs needed and
read by engineers

Heritage • De Facto Mandatory • Used only when cheaper / faster

Reviews • Infrequent, huge, critical, • frequent, small, focused, brief,
week(s) long non- critical

Contract • CPFF • Fixed Price - delivery on orbit

Risk • not tolerated (infinite failure cost) • accepted (risk v. $ traded off)
(officially)
Standards • externally imposed - infinite price • created / negotiated by engineers
price is negotiable

Staffing • by slot • Diverse team - all always busy

Staffing insurance • by documentation per slot • buddy system
 Mission Cost / Complexity Drivers
Management - slide #2
Feature Conventional Small / Low Cost

Tools • minimum: large # hours @ low $/hr • maximize: thus minimize total $,
minimum organizational complexity

Operations • dedicated staff @ dedicated facility • minimal staff, GS on site
• "person in the loop" • local ops or via internet
• exploit spacecraft autonomy

Intra-team interface • Documentation • engineer - to - engineer

Staff Organization • segregated by technical specialty • integrated project

Hardware Flow • specialty group to specialty group • same team cradle to on-orbit ops

 Reducing Cost & Complexity
Cost Driver Cost Saving Tactics

Power Requirement • Duty Cycle • Sun Pointing

• offload secondary payloads • Reduce margins

Tight Attitude Control • Tight attitude determination instead

High Speed Downlink • Duty cycle (truncate instrument data flux)
• On-board compression (2:1 is easy, 10:1 possible)
• Do the best you can - it's better than you think: variable data
• Choose orbit for better linkrate / tolerate link fallibility

Tight Thermal • Power down during hot seasons
Requirements • Use instruments as heaters

General Budget • Let mass grow • Offload some of payload • Don't conformal coat
Panics • Let volume grow - no deployables
• Higher inclination orbit - local, not remote, GS
• No clean room - use "remove before flight" covers
• Startup related program - give people someplace to go
• Use flight-spare and leftover components
• Fly protoflight hardware - don't build flight hardware
 How to succeed in microspace...

...without really trying

1. It doesn’t have to be difficult to be good

Your engineering education =


your #1 asset and your #1 liability

2. Pick easy problems (or simplify hard ones)

Low power / Low data rate
Minimal stabilization / short life time
No propulsion
Small & Aluminum

3. Solve appropriately

Match tools to job
 Documentation
• Basic Rule: Don’t write what no one will read.

• Easy documentation:
– Email exchanges - Photographs of everything
– Manufacturer’s data on purchased parts - Test & failure logs
– Videos of procedures - Well documented code

• Automatic documentation
– Fabrication drawings & schematic diagrams - Block diagrams

• Documents worth writing

– ICDs - System Requirements Documents

– (H&S’wr) - Launch environment
– Cabling diagram - Thermal / Structure analysis
reports
– Users’ manual - Test plans & results
– Contracts, change orders etc.
(Some) STP-Sat Requirements
2.0 System Definition Requirements & Sys
2.1 Mission Description
2.2 Interface Design Definition go together
2.2.1 SV-LV Interface
2.2.2 SC-Experiments Interface
2.2.3 Satellite Operations Center (SOC) Interface
3.0 Requirements
3.1 Performance and Mission Requirements
3.2 Design and Construction
3.2.1 Structure and Mechanisms
3.2.2 Mass Properties
3.2.3 Reliability NB: this is
3.2.4 Environmental Conditions
3.2.4.1 Design Load Factors an excerpt
3.2.4.2 SV Frequency Requirements of the
3.2.5 Electromagnetic Compatibility
3.2.6 Contamination Control Contents -
3.2.7 Telemetry, Tracking, and Commanding entire docs
(TT&C) Subsystem
3.2.7.1 Frequency Allocation are (or will
Highly structured
3.2.7.2 Commanding be) on the
outline form is 3.2.7.3 Tracking and Ephemeris
3.2.7.4 Telemetry class site
clearest
and 3.2.7.5 Contact Availability
industry standard
3.2.7.6 Link Margin and Data Quality
3.2.7.7 Encryption
Mission: Entertainment
Encounter
Mission: Entertainment: Encounter

Mission Statement:
• Use a Solar Sail to propel 1 kg of DNA Samples
out of solar system.
• Escape trajectory must be verified
 • Lunar Impactor / FLASH;

– Impact lunar surface at > 10 km/s

Mission Statement:
• Impact lunar surface with minimum 5 kg mass
• Impact visible from earth during night
STAR: Student Telescope
for Astronomical Research

Mission Statement:
• Place a useful optical telescope in LEO that
can be operated by students worldwide
Echo Mission Statement:
place a large retroreflector in LEO
• TAO… (The Art Of…)
– All operating specs and missions negotiable
– Buildable by students with no money in < 1 year
– Insignificant launch mass (preferably < 5 kg)
– Demonstrate nano launch vehicle application

Mission Statement:
• Build a satellite that does something and can be
built by <8 students in < 1 year.
 ✴Teather:
✴Power Generation/Propulsion
✴VLF Propagation
✴Particle impact
✴micro Space Elevator

✴Micro Solar Sail:

✴Leave LEO?
✴Other apps:
✴night illumination
✴advertising
Cubesat Kits ✴drag for reentry
 Other Mission Ideas
• Climate monitor / control
• Advertising from orbit
• Planetary defense (asteroid detection)
• Space agriculture (0-g grapes)
• ASAT Defense (= ASAT?)
• Cube-sat, Can-sat (TAO)
• Space Elevator tech demo (e.g. tether)
Your missions for Next Class:
Organize into groups / squadre
- minimum 3 people
- maximum 5 people
- seek diversity
Invent / select ~ 2 missions
describe in <250 words
prepare to talk about your favorite:
- 5 minutes or less
- voluntary