Date post: | 10-Mar-2016 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | meidad-pariente |
View: | 217 times |
Download: | 1 times |
Nanosatellite Industry Overview
•1
Content of the Presentation
• Introduction
• Capabilities of Nano satellites
• Nano satellites statistics
• Past launches and launchers
• Nano satellites Failure analysis
• The Israeli Aspect
•2
Introduction (1)
• Satellites are categorized by their weight according to the following key:
– Less than 1 kg: Pico satellite
– Less than 10 kg: Nano satellite
– Less than 100 kg: Micro satellite
•3
Credit: CUTE XI-IV University of Tokyo
Introduction (2)
• Since the dawn of the space age in 1955, small satellites were used and launched mainly for communication missions such as store-and-forward and relay (e.g. the “Strella” constellation).
• In 1981 the first University satellite UoSAT-1 build by Surrey university and launched on Delta-2310 from Vandenberg AFB.
• The CubeSat small satellite standard was jointly created by Stanford University and Cal Poly State University in 1999
•4
Understanding the Jargon
• 1U – A 10 cm * 10 cm * 10 cm cube (hence CubeSat)
• Other versions include: – 1.5U (15 cm * 10 cm * 10 cm)
– 2U (20 cm * 10 cm * 10 cm)
– 3U (34 cm * 10 cm * 10 cm)
– 4U (45 cm * 10 cm * 10 cm)
– 5U (57 cm * 10 cm * 10 cm)
– 6U (34 cm * 23 cm * 10 cm)
– 12U (34 cm * 23 cm * 23 cm)
Note: Red marks not yet launched
•5
Nano Satellites Architecture
• Mission lifetime: at least three years
– Several Nano satellites crossed the “3 years mark” (amongst them, Delfi-C3).
•6
Attitude Control
Full three axis with <0.1º accuracy
Sensors: • Earth sensors • Sun sensors • Star trackers • GPS receiver
Actuators: • Miniature reaction wheels • Propulsion will be available next year
Power Subsystem Thermal Control Subsystem
• Full EPS with 3j GaAs deployable solar arrays (power production depends on SA size) • Batteries for eclipse operation • Regulated and unregulated bus versions • PCU and PDU to better control and isolate components
• Based on passive means (MLI, coatings, etc…) • Maximum use of heat dissipation as heaters • Minimum use of external heaters
MAI-400 ADACS
GaAs 3j solar panel
Nano Satellites Payloads
Optical Payloads
•Visible light cameras including video • NIR • Multispectral • SAR
Communication Payloads
•S-band and UHF/VHF Narrowband communication •Store and forward •Relay stations
•7
NanoCam C1U
CubeSatShop – The “AMAZON” of the Industry
•8
Nano satellite uses
• Science Missions – In 2006, NASA was the first to comprehend the benefits of
Nano-satellites. – Since Then Nano satellites were used for deep space
observations, biological experiments, earth quake measurements and earth observation.
• Narrow-band communication – Used as amateur radio relays – Store and forward applications
• Technological Demonstrator – New components – New materials – New techniques
•9
GeneSat integrated in a P-POD and ready
for Launch, courtesy of NASA
Some numbers and statistics (1)
•10
Manifested Small Satellites by Year
Manifested satellites
from 1999 to 2011
135 More than 70% in the
last 5 years
Some numbers and statistics (2)
•11
Mission Type by Year
Some numbers and statistics (3)
•12
Mission Developer by Nation/Region Manifested by Year
Some numbers and statistics (4)
•13 Repeat Missions vs. Single-Launch programs
Nano Satellites Launch History
•14 Previous Launches (failures in Red)
# of Satellites Launch Vehicle Year
6 Rokot/Briz-KM 2003
3 Kosmos-3M 2005
14 Dnepr 2006
1 Minotaur-1 2006
7 Dnepr 2007
6 PSLV-CA 2008
2 Falcon-1 2008
4 Minotaur-1 2009
5 PSLV-CA 2009
3 H-IIA 2010
2 PSLV-CA 2010
3 Taurus-XL 2011
3 Dnepr 2011
6 VEGA 2012
Manifested Satellite
From 2003 to 2012:
136 Satellite Launched
From 2003 to 2012:
65
50% of manifested
satellites were
launched
between 2003 and 2012
Launcher Interfaces – The Challenge
•15
Integrated Payloads being loaded into the DNPER cluster launch
The POD – a standard for the industry
• Launching Nano satellites from within a POD (Pico satellite Orbital Deployer) simplify the launch campaign.
• Nano satellites are placed within a POD which reduces the interface with the launcher to a minimum.
• PODs are common and became standard allowing launch brokers much more flexibility and management ever
• Actual interfaces are with the adaptor, hence the payload has no influence
•16
6-Pack ISIPOD made
by ISIS for up to six
1U’s
Failure Statistics by Root Cause (1999-2011)
•17
Success 67%
CPU 2%
Power 6%
Communication 8%
Structure 4%
Thermal 1%
Radiation 1%
Unknown 11%
Success
CPU
Power
Communication
Structure
Thermal
Radiation
Unknown
Why Nano satellites failed ? – Past events
• Radiation: 1 (TUBSAT-B). Killed by the Van Allen Belts due to its orbit altitude of 1250 km.
• Structure/Launch interface: 3 (Mozhayets 5, BEVO 1, AggieSat-2). Mozhayets 5 failed to separate from the launch vehicle, the other two spacecraft were launched as a unit and failed to disconnect from each other.
• Thermal: 1 (UNAMSAT-B). Cold prelaunch thermal conditions led to an inability to contact the spacecraft immediately after launch, leading to more thermally-induced battery problems
Why Nano satellites failed ? – Past events – cont’
• Communications: 7½ (Arsene, SEDsat [partial], JAWSAT, Cute-1.7, UWE-1, STUDSAT, UNITEC-1, K-SAT). These spacecraft were operational for a short time, losing either their transmitters or receivers (or both) unexpectedly. Bad wiring is suspected in some cases
• Power: 5½ (SEDsat [partial], ASUSat-1, FalconSAT-1, AAU CubeSat-I, SSETI-Experss, UGATUSAT). The reason vary, but all of these vehicles had problems, typically with the connection between batteries and solar arrays.
Why Nano satellites failed ? – Past events – cont’
• CPU: 2 (SpriteSat, STARS-1). Both of these spacecraft encountered unexpected CPU lockups within days of launch, they have not been recoverd
• Unknown: 10 (JAK, Louise, Thelma, CanX-1, DTUsat, NCube II, YES2/Fotino, KKS 1, Waseda-SAT2, UWE-2). These ten spacecraft were confirmed to have released, but contact was never made. Bad communications or bad power is suspected.
The Israeli Aspect (1/4)
• Name: Duchifat-1, HSL
• Mission: AIS
• Type: Picosatellite (1U)
• Initiation: 2002
• Status: Early integration stage
• Launch date: Unknown
•21
Credit: HSL
The Israeli Aspect (2/4)
• Name: Inklajn-1
• Mission: Laboratory
• Type: Nanosatellite (3U)
• Initiation: 2006
• Status: Final integration stage
• Launch date: Unknown
•22
Credit: IAI
The Israeli Aspect (3/4)
• Name: SAMSON
• Mission: Formation flying and Geo Location
• Type: Nanosatellite constellation
– (three 6U)
• Initiation: 2012
• Status: Early design phase
• Launch date: Unknown
•23
Credit: The Technion
The Israeli Aspect (4/4)
First signs of educational endeavors
• Mor Metrowest Ra’anana
– Space Lab + Clean room
– Educational program
• Ort
– Space educational programs in Arad and Ma’ale Adumim
•24
Summary • Nano satellites are launched as a piggyback along
with primary payload – In 2014, ESA plans the first Nano satellite dedicated
launch on a Vega launcher (QB50)
• Currently all Nano satellites are launched to LEO
• There are more than 250 nano satellites built across the globe and planned to be launch in the next three years. – In 1994 they were only 10 cubesat programs in the
US. In 2011 there are more than 150 !!
• Israel didn’t launch yet
•25
Sources of Information
• 25 Years of Small Satellites – Siegfried Janson – The Aerospace Corporation
• Attack of the CubeSats: A Statistical Look – Michael Swartwout – Saint Louis University
• Recent CubeSat Launch Experiences on U.S. Launch Vehicles – Jordi Puig-Suari, Roland Coelho – California Polytechnic State
University; Scott Williams, Victor Aguero, Kyle Leveque, Bryan Klofas – SRI International
• Distant Horizons: Smallsat Evolution in the Mid-to-Far Term – Matt Bille, Paul Kolodziejski, Tom Hunsaker – Booz Allen Hamilton
•26