Schweitzer Fachinformationen
Wenn es um professionelles Wissen geht, ist Schweitzer Fachinformationen wegweisend. Kunden aus Recht und Beratung sowie Unternehmen, öffentliche Verwaltungen und Bibliotheken erhalten komplette Lösungen zum Beschaffen, Verwalten und Nutzen von digitalen und gedruckten Medien.
Editors
Rogerio Atem de Carvalho, Instituto Federal Fluminense, Brazil
Jaime Estela, Spectrum Aerospace Group, Germany and Peru
Martin Langer, Technical University of Munich, Germany, Orbital Oracle Technologies GmbH, Germany
List of Contributors xxiii
Foreword: Nanosatellite Space Experiment xxix
Introduction by the Editors xxxv
1 I-1 A Brief History of Nanosatellites 1Siegfried W. Janson
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Historical Nanosatellite Launch Rates 1
1.3 The First Nanosatellites 3
1.4 The Large Space Era 8
1.5 The New Space Era 12
1.6 Summary 23
References 24
2 I-2a On-board Computer and Data Handling 31Jaime Estela and Sergio Montenegro
2.1 Introduction 31
2.2 History 31
2.3 Special Requirements for Space Applications 34
2.4 Hardware 35
2.5 Design 41
References 49
3 I-2b Operational Systems 51Lucas Ramos Hissa and Rogerio Atem de Carvalho
3.1 Introduction 51
3.2 RTOS Overview 51
3.3 RTOS on On-board Computers (OBCs): Requirements for a Small Satellite 52
3.4 Example Projects 55
3.5 Conclusions 56
References 59
4 I-2c Attitude Control and Determination 61Willem H. Steyn and Vaios J. Lappas
4.1 Introduction 61
4.2 ADCS Fundamentals 61
4.3 ADCS Requirements and Stabilization Methods 62
4.4 ADCS Background Theory 65
4.5 Attitude and Angular Rate Determination 66
4.6 Attitude and Angular Rate Controllers 72
4.7 ADCS Sensor and Actuator Hardware 75
References 83
5 I-2d Propulsion Systems 85Flavia Tata Nardini, Michele Coletti, Alexander Reissner, and David Krejci
5.1 Introduction 85
5.2 Propulsion Elements 86
5.3 Key Elements in the Development of Micropropulsion Systems 87
5.4 Propulsion System Technologies 90
5.5 Mission Elements 98
5.6 Survey of All Existing Systems 101
5.7 Future Prospect 113
References 113
6 I-2e Communications 115Nicolas Appel, Sebastian Rückerl, Martin Langer, and Rolf-Dieter Klein
6.1 Introduction 115
6.2 Regulatory Considerations 116
6.3 Satellite Link Characteristics 117
6.4 Channel Coding 123
6.5 Data Link Layer 126
6.6 Hardware 128
6.7 Testing 138
References 140
7 I-2f Structural Subsystem 143Kenan Y. Sanl¿¿¿¿türk, Murat Süer, and A. Rüstem Aslan
7.1 Definition and Tasks 143
7.2 Existing State-of-the-Art Structures for CubeSats 145
7.3 Materials and Thermal Considerations for Structural Design 150
7.4 Design Parameters and Tools 152
7.5 Design Challenges 162
7.6 Future Prospects 163
References 164
8 I-2g Power Systems 167Marcos Compadre, Ausias Garrigós, and Andrew Strain
8.1 Introduction 167
8.2 Power Source: Photovoltaic Solar Cells and Solar Array 170
8.3 Energy Storage: Lithium-ion Batteries 172
8.4 SA-battery Power Conditioning: DET and MPPT 175
8.5 Battery Charging Control Loops 178
8.6 Bus Power Conditioning and Distribution: Load Converters and Distribution Switches 179
8.7 Flight Switch Subsystem 183
8.8 DC/DC Converters 183
8.9 Power System Sizing: Power Budget, Solar Array, and Battery Selection 187
8.10 Conclusions 191
References 191
9 I-2h Thermal Design, Analysis, and Test 193Philipp Reiss, Matthias Killian, and Philipp Hager
9.1 Introduction 193
9.2 Typical Thermal Loads 194
9.3 Active and Passive Designs 200
9.4 Design Approach and Tools 204
9.5 Thermal Tests 208
References 212
10 I-2i Systems Engineering and Quality Assessment 215Lucas Lopes Costa, Geilson Loureiro, Eduardo Escobar Bürger, and Franciele Carlesso
10.1 Introduction 215
10.2 Systems Engineering Definition and Process 216
10.3 Space Project Management: Role of Systems Engineers 222
10.4 ECSS and Other Standards 225
10.5 Document, Risk Control, and Resources 228
10.6 Changing Trends in SE and Quality Assessment for Nanosatellites 233
References 233
11 I-2j Integration and Testing 235Eduardo Escobar Bürger, Geilson Loureiro, and Lucas Lopes Costa
11.1 Introduction 235
11.2 Overall Tasks 236
11.3 Typical Flow 241
11.4 Test Philosophies 242
11.5 Typical System Integration Process 244
11.6 Typical Test Parameters and Facilities 244
11.7 Burden of Integration and Testing 245
11.8 Changing Trends in Nanosatellite Testing 249
References 250
12 I-3a Scientific Payloads 251Anna Gregorio
12.1 Introduction 251
12.2 Categorization 252
12.3 Imagers 254
12.4 X-ray Detectors 256
12.5 Spectrometers 259
12.6 Photometers 262
12.7 GNSS Receivers 265
12.8 Microbolometers 267
12.9 Radiometers 269
12.10 Radar Systems 270
12.11 Particle Detectors 274
12.12 PlasmaWave Analyzers 277
12.13 Biological Detectors 280
12.14 Solar Sails 283
12.15 Conclusions 283
References 283
13 I-3b In-orbit Technology Demonstration 291Jaime Estela
13.1 Introduction 291
13.2 Activities of Space Agencies 292
13.3 Nanosatellites 295
13.4 Microsatellites 298
13.5 ISS 301
References 306
14 I-3c Nanosatellites as Educational Projects 309Merlin F. Barschke
14.1 Introduction 309
14.2 Satellites and Project-based Learning 309
14.3 University Satellite Programs 312
14.4 Outcome and Success Criteria 316
14.5 Teams and Organizational Structure 318
14.6 Challenges and Practical Experiences 318
14.7 From Pure Education to Powerful Research Tools 321
References 321
15 I-3d Formations of Small Satellites 327Klaus Schilling
15.1 Introduction 327
15.2 Constellations and Formations 327
15.3 Orbit Dynamics 328
15.4 Satellite Configurations 331
15.5 Relevant Specific Small Satellite Technologies to Enable Formations 332
15.6 Application Examples 334
15.7 Test Environment for Multisatellite Systems 336
15.8 Conclusions for Distributed Nanosatellite Systems 337
Acknowledgments 338
References 338
16 I-3e Precise, Autonomous Formation Flight at Low Cost 341Niels Roth, Ben Risi, Robert E. Zee, Grant Bonin, Scott Armitage, and Josh Newman
16.1 Introduction 341
16.2 Mission Overview 342
16.3 System Overview 343
16.4 Launch and Early Operations 350
16.5 Formation Control Results 353
16.6 Conclusion 360
Acknowledgments 360
References 360
17 I-4a Launch Vehicles-Challenges and Solutions 363Kaitlyn Kelley
17.1 Introduction 363
17.2 Past Nanosatellite Launches 365
17.3 Launch Vehicles Commonly Used by Nanosatellites 367
17.4 Overview of a Typical Launch Campaign 368
17.5 Launch Demand 371
17.6 Future Launch Concepts 372
References 374
18 I-4b Deployment Systems 375A. Rüstem Aslan, Cesar Bernal, and Jordi Puig-Suari
18.1 Introduction 375
18.2 Definition and Tasks 375
18.3 Basics of Deployment Systems 376
18.4 State of the Art 377
18.5 Future Prospects 395
Acknowledgments 396
References 396
19 I-4c Mission Operations 399Chantal Cappelletti
19.1 Introduction 399
19.2 Organization of Mission Operations 400
19.3 Goals and Functions of Mission Operations 401
19.4 Input and Output of Mission Operations 404
19.5 MOP 406
19.6 Costs and Operations 409
References 414
Further Reading 415
20 I-5 Mission Examples 417Kelly Antonini, Nicolò Carletti, Kevin Cuevas, Matteo Emanuelli, Per Koch, Laura León Pérez, and Daniel Smith
20.1 Introduction 417
20.2 Mission Types 418
20.3 Mission Examples 420
20.4 Constellations 433
20.5 Perspective 437
References 438
21 II-1 Ground Segment 441Fernando Aguado Agelet and Alberto González Muíño
21.1 Introduction 441
21.2 Ground Segment Functionalities 441
21.3 Ground Segment Architecture 442
21.4 Ground Station Elements 444
21.5 Ground Segment Software 449
21.6 Ground Segment Operation 451
21.7 Future Prospects 452
References 455
22 II-2 Ground Station Networks 457Lucas Rodrigues Amaduro and Rogerio Atem de Carvalho
22.1 Introduction 457
22.2 Technological Challenges 457
22.3 Visibility Clash Problems of Stations and Satellites 458
22.4 The Distributed Ground Station Network 459
22.5 Infrastructure 459
22.6 Planning and Scheduling 460
22.7 Generic Software Architecture 460
22.8 Example Networks 462
22.9 Traditional Ground Station Approach 462
22.10 Heterogeneous Ground Station Approach 464
22.11 Homogeneous Ground Station Approach 466
22.12 Conclusions 469
References 469
23 II-3 Ground-based Satellite Tracking 471Enrico Stoll, Jürgen Letschnik, and Christopher Kebschull
23.1 Introduction 471
23.2 Orbital Element Sets 472
23.3 Tracklet Generation from Ground Measurements 475
23.4 Tracking CubeSats with Ground Stations 481
23.5 Orbit Propagation 485
23.6 Principle of Operations of Ground Stations 487
23.7 Summary 492
References 493
24 II-4a AMSAT 495Andrew Barron (ZL3DW)
24.1 Introduction 495
24.2 Project OSCAR 496
24.3 AMSAT Satellite Designations 499
24.4 Other Notable AMSAT and OSCAR Satellites 500
24.5 The Development of CubeSats 503
24.6 FUNcube Satellites 504
24.7 Fox Satellites 505
24.8 GOLF Satellites 505
24.9 The IARU and ITU Resolution 659 506
References 507
24 II-4b New Radio Technologies 508Andrew Barron (ZL3DW)
24.10 Introduction 508
24.11 SDR Space Segment 509
24.12 SDR Ground Segment 510
24.13 Modern Transmitter Design 511
Reference 513
25 III-1a Cost Breakdown for the Development of Nanosatellites 515Katharine Brumbaugh Gamble
25.1 Introduction 515
25.2 Recurring Costs 517
25.3 Nonrecurring Costs 521
25.4 Satellite Cost-estimating Models 523
25.5 Risk Estimation and Reduction 528
25.6 Conclusions 530
References 530
26 III-1b Launch Costs 533Merlin F. Barschke
26.1 Introduction 533
26.2 Launching Nanosatellites 533
26.3 Launch Sites 539
26.4 Launch Milestones 539
26.5 Launch Cost 540
References 541
27 III-2a Policies and Regulations in Europe 545Neta Palkovitz
27.1 Introduction 545
27.2 International Space Law 545
27.3 National Laws and Practices in EU Member States 550
27.4 Future Regulation and Prospects 554
References 555
28 III-2b Policies and Regulations in North America 557Mike Miller and Kirk Woellert
28.1 Introduction 557
28.2 Governing Treaties and Laws 558
28.3 Orbital Debris Mitigation 561
28.4 Space Traffic Management 563
28.5 Licensing of Radio Transmission from Space 566
28.6 Licensing for Remote Sensing Activities from Space 570
28.7 Export Control Laws 571
28.8 Conclusion 575
References 577
29 III-2c International Organizations and International Cooperation 583Jean-Francois Mayence
29.1 Introduction 583
29.2 The United Nations and Affiliated Organizations 584
29.3 International Telecommunications Union 589
29.4 Other United Nations Agencies and Bodies 590
29.5 Non-UN Organizations 593
29.6 Main Non-European Spacefaring Nations 597
29.7 Conclusions 600
References 601
30 III-3a Economy of Small Satellites 603Richard Joye
30.1 Introduction 603
30.2 Rethinking the Value Chain 603
30.3 A Hybrid Small Satellite Value Chain 604
30.4 Evolution, Not Revolution? 611
30.5 The Economics at Play 612
30.6 Satellite Manufacturers 612
30.7 Launch Service Providers 614
30.8 Satellite Operators 615
30.9 Satellite Servicing Providers 616
30.10 Data and Solution Providers 616
30.11 A Shift Toward New Models 617
References 618
Further Reading 618
31 III-3b Economics and the Future 621Richard Joye
31.1 Introduction 621
31.2 Themes Shaping the Space Industry 622
31.3 Megatrends 624
31.4 Conclusion: The Space Industry is in Mutation 632
Further Reading 632
32 III-3c Networks of Nanosatellites 635Richard Joye
32.1 Introduction 635
32.2 Why Networks? 635
32.3 Opportunities for Networks of Nanosatellites 641
32.4 Challenges and Issues 646
Reference 648
Further Reading 648
List of Existing and Upcoming Networks of Satellites - January 2018, Updated March 2019 649
Index 663
Bob Twiggs
Morehead State University, Morehead, USA
The use of small satellites in general initiated the space program in 1957 with the launching of Russian Sputnik 1, and then by the United States with Vanguard 1 satellite, which was the fourth artificial Earth orbital satellite to be successfully launched (following Sputnik 1, Sputnik 2, and Explorer 1).
The concept of the CubeSat was developed by Professor Bob Twiggs at the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics at Stanford University in Palo Alto, CA, in collaboration with Professor Jordi Puig-Suari at the Aerospace Department at the California State Polytechnic University in San Luis Obispo, CA, in late 1999. The CubeSat concept originated with the spacecraft OPAL (Orbiting Picosat Automated Launcher), a 23?kg microsatellite developed by students at Stanford University and the Aerospace Corporation in El Segundo, CA, to demonstrate the validity and functionality of picosatellites and the concept of launching picosatellites and other small satellites on-orbit from a larger satellite system. Picosatellites are defined having a weight between 0.1 and 1?kg. OPAL is shown in Figure 1, with four launcher tubes containing picosatellites. One of the picosatellites is shown being inserted into the launcher tube in Figure 2.
The satellites developed by students within university programs in 1980s and 1990s were all nanosatellites (1-10?kg size) and microsatellites (10-50?kg size). The feasibility of independently funding launch opportunities for these nanosatellites and microsatellites was limited, as the costs typically were up to $250?000-a price point well beyond the resources available to most university programs. At that time, the only available option was to collaborate with government organizations that would provide the launch. The OPAL satellite was launched in early 2000 by the US Air Force Space Test Program (STP) with sponsorship from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) for the Aerospace Corporation picosatellites.
The OPAL mission represented a significant milestone in the evolution of small satellites by proving the viability of the concept of the picosatellite and an innovative orbital deployment system. The picosatellite launcher concept used for the OPAL mission represented a major advancement that would enable the technological evolution of small satellites, setting the stage for the development of the CubeSat form factor and the Poly Picosatellite Orbital Deployer (P-POD) orbital deployer system. OPAL demonstrated a new capability with the design of an orbital deployer that could launch numerous very small satellites contained within the launcher tube that simplified the mechanical interface to the upper stage of the launch vehicle and greatly simplified the satellite ejection system. While the OPAL mission was extremely successful and established the validity of a picosatellite orbital deployer, Professor Twiggs and Professor Puig-Suari wanted to find a lower-cost means of launching the satellites built by university students. The stage was set for the development of the CubeSat form factor and its evolution toward an engineering standard.
Figure 1 Picosatellite loaded into OPAL.
Figure 2 OPAL and SAPPHIRE microsatellites.
The primary intent of the development of the CubeSat standard was to provide a standard set of dimensions for the external physical structure of picosatellites that would be compatible with a standardized launcher. Unlike the development of most modern engineering standards, there was no consulting with other universities or with the commercial satellite industry to establish this standard because most other university satellite programs and commercial ventures were concentrating on larger satellites rather than smaller satellites. There were discussions in the late 1990s within the Radio Amateur Satellite Corporation (AMSAT) community in the United Kingdom centering on building a small amateur satellite, but there were never any attempts to develop a standardized design.
The concept of a design standard for a picosatellite and associated launcher that could be used by many universities, the developers believed, would lead to many picosatellites being launched at a time. They envisioned launch vehicles accommodating several launcher tubes, each containing a few picosatellites. The final concept of the CubeSat structural standard was developed by Professor Twiggs and Professor Puig-Suari, and currently adopted by the small satellite community. The developers believed that if one organization could provide the integration of the launcher with the launch vehicle through a carefully orchestrated interface process with the launch services provider, then it seemed possible to acquire launch opportunities for university programs that would be affordable (less than $50?000 per 1?kg satellite).
The first CubeSats were launched on a Russian Dnepr in 2003 through the efforts of Professor Jordi Puig-Suari at Cal Poly. Professor Puig-Suari and his students through the CubeSat integration program at Cal Poly took the initial concept design, established the standards for the 1U CubeSat, designed the P-POD deployer, and planned for the Russian launch.
Initial reaction from the aerospace industry was quite critical of the CubeSat concept. The comments were-"stupidest idea for a satellite," "would have no practical value," "academic faculty did not have the capability to design and launch a satellite." This came mostly from the amateur satellite community that had established building and launching satellites many years prior to this academic program.
Fortunately, these comments did not deter the academic community from pursuing the CubeSat program. In 2008, the National Science Foundation had a conference to explore the use of the CubeSat to do space experiments for space weather. Their initiation and funding of using CubeSats for real scientific space experiments seemed to validate that the CubeSat concept had merit in space experiments.
As of the present, the CubeSat concept is being called a disruptive technology. It seems to have been one of the new concepts in the space industry along with new launch concepts starting with SpaceX that has brought about a new interest in space. With the commercial programs from Planet, with CubeSat space imaging, and Spire with its multisatellite constellations, there is significant investment by the venture capital community in the space industry. To date, there have been more than 900 CubeSats launched since 2003.
The CubeSat concept from the original 1U CubeSat to the 3U CubeSat in the P-POD has expanded larger to now considering 27U concepts. One of the consequences of this new interest is that, to date, there have been more than 900 CubeSats launched in near-Earth orbit as well as two MarCO CubeSats to Mars, and there are plans to launch 13 6U CubeSats on the first Space Launch System (SLS) in the next Moon mission.
One of the consequences of the new acceptance of the CubeSat concept is that the cost of launch from the initial cost of $40?000 for a 1U from Cal Poly has now risen to over $120?000. This has had the greatest impact of having CubeSat programs for educational training and new entrants into space experimentation. There are several small launch vehicles in development to meet this demand, but whether they can launch for lower costs is debatable. One approach to reducing the launch cost is to use the same volume as provided by the P-POD or similar deployer, but keeping launch spacecraft smaller than the 1U, thus reducing the costs of individual experiment launch.
Cornell University has the ChipSats being launched from the 3U CubeSat, as shown in Figure 3. There is also the PocketQube being promoted by Alba Orbital, shown in Figure 4.
Figure 3 Cornell University ChipSats.
Source: Image credit: NASA.
Figure 4 Alba Orbital PocketQube.
In addition to the conventional means of launches for the International Space Station (ISS) and from expendable launch vehicles, the Virginia Commercial Space Flight Authority, a state economic agency of the state of Virginia, along with Northrop Grumman Corp., is providing launches from the NASA Wallops Island flight facilities on the second stage of the Antares launch vehicle that is used to launch the Cygnus resupply capsule for the ISS. This is a unique launch opportunity not used previously. Even though it releases satellites from the Planetary Systems Corporation's canisterized satellite deployer (like the P-POD) at an altitude of near 250?km, it only provides an orbital life of the satellites for a few days. This short orbital lifetime of the satellites provides an excellent opportunity regarding science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) experience to students. In addition, all spacecrafts will deorbit, leaving no debris or collision problems.
The spacecraft proposed for this program is of a sub-CubeSat size called ThinSatT, shown in Figure 5.
Figure 5 ThinSat...
Dateiformat: ePUBKopierschutz: Adobe-DRM (Digital Rights Management)
Systemvoraussetzungen:
Das Dateiformat ePUB ist sehr gut für Romane und Sachbücher geeignet – also für „fließenden” Text ohne komplexes Layout. Bei E-Readern oder Smartphones passt sich der Zeilen- und Seitenumbruch automatisch den kleinen Displays an. Mit Adobe-DRM wird hier ein „harter” Kopierschutz verwendet. Wenn die notwendigen Voraussetzungen nicht vorliegen, können Sie das E-Book leider nicht öffnen. Daher müssen Sie bereits vor dem Download Ihre Lese-Hardware vorbereiten.Bitte beachten Sie: Wir empfehlen Ihnen unbedingt nach Installation der Lese-Software diese mit Ihrer persönlichen Adobe-ID zu autorisieren!
Weitere Informationen finden Sie in unserer E-Book Hilfe.
