OrbitalHub

Wikipedia dixit:

“Earth Observing-1 (EO-1) is a NASA Earth observation satellite created to develop and validate a number of instrument and spacecraft bus breakthrough technologies. These will enable the development of future Earth imaging observatories that will have a significant increase in performance while also having reduced cost and mass. The spacecraft is part of the New Millennium Program.

Its Advanced Land Imager (ALI) measures nine different wavelengths simultaneously, instead of the seven measured by the imager in Landsat 7. This permits a greater flexibility in false-color imagery. Another improvement is that instead of having an imaging spectrometer that sweeps from side to side, the ALI has a linear array of spectrometers that each scan a strip of ground parallel to that of adjacent spectrometers. In order to compare the two imagers, EO-1 follows Landsat 7 in its orbit by exactly one minute. Other new technologies include: Hyperion imaging spectrometer recording more than 200 wavelengths; phased array communications antenna; optical fiber cables connect the data logger with the two IBM RAD6000s; teflon-fueled pulsed plasma thruster; lightweight, flexible solar panel; carbon-coated radiators for thermal control; Linear Etalon Imaging Spectrometer Array equipped with a new atmospheric correction device.

EO-1 has also been used to test new software, like the Autonomous Sciencecraft Experiment. This allows the spacecraft to decide for itself how best to create a desired image. It is only limited by a priority list of different types of images, and by forecasts of cloud cover provided by the NOAA.

It was expected to function for twelve months and was designed to function for eighteen months. Those expectations were greatly exceeded however the hydrazine fuel was mostly depleted in February 2011. Small maneuvers have been successful for debris avoidance but long duration burns for orbit maintenance are not being performed due to insufficient fuel. EO-1 was deactivated on 30 March 2017. At its current altitude, it is estimated that the satellite will remain in orbit until the 2050s, when it will burn up in Earth’s atmosphere.”

Video credit: NASA Goddard

Wikipedia dixit:

“The Bigelow Expandable Activity Module (BEAM) is an experimental expandable space station module developed by Bigelow Aerospace, under contract to NASA, for testing as a temporary module on the International Space Station (ISS) from 2016 to 2018. It arrived at the ISS on April 10, 2016, was berthed to the station on April 16, and was expanded and pressurized on May 28, 2016.

NASA originally considered the idea of inflatable habitats in the 1960s, and developed the TransHab inflatable module concept in the late 1990s. The TransHab project was cancelled by Congress in 2000, and Bigelow Aerospace purchased the rights to the patents developed by NASA to pursue private space station designs. In 2006 and 2007, Bigelow launched two demonstration modules to Earth orbit, Genesis I and Genesis II.

NASA re-initiated analysis of expandable module technology for a variety of potential missions beginning in early 2010. Various options were considered, including procurement from commercial provider Bigelow Aerospace, for providing what in 2010 was proposed to be a torus-shaped storage module for the International Space Station. One application of the toroidal BEAM design was as a centrifuge demo preceding further developments of the NASA Nautilus-X multi-mission exploration concept vehicle. In January 2011, Bigelow projected that the BEAM module could be built and made flight-ready 24 months after a build contract was secured.

On December 20, 2012, NASA awarded Bigelow Aerospace a US$17.8 million contract to construct the Bigelow Expandable Activity Module under NASA’s Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) Program. Sierra Nevada Corporation built the $2 million Common Berthing Mechanism under a 16-month firm-fixed-price contract awarded in May 2013. NASA plans made public in mid-2013 called for a 2015 delivery of the module to the ISS. During a press event on March 12, 2015, at the Bigelow Aerospace facility in North Las Vegas, the completed ISS flight unit, compacted and with two Canadarm2 grapple fixtures attached, was displayed for the media.

The BEAM is an experimental program in an effort to test and validate expandable habitat technology. If BEAM performs favorably, it could lead to development of expandable habitation structures for future crews traveling in deep space. The two-year demonstration period will: demonstrate launch and deployment of a commercial inflatable module; implement folding and packaging techniques for inflatable shell; implement a venting system for inflatable shell during ascent to ISS; determine radiation protection capability of inflatable structures; demonstrate design performance of commercial inflatable structure like thermal, structural, mechanical durability, long term leak performance, etc.; demonstrate safe deployment and operation of an inflatable structure in a flight mission.

At the end of BEAM’s mission, the plan was to remove it from the ISS and burn up during reentry. On January 18, 2017, however, Bigelow and NASA announced they were discussing the possibility of extending the on-orbit life of BEAM and using it for other purposes.

BEAM is composed of two metal bulkheads, an aluminum structure, and multiple layers of soft fabric with spacing between layers, protecting an internal restraint and bladder system; it has neither windows nor internal power. The module was expanded about a month after being attached to the space station. It was inflated from its packed dimensions of 2.16 m (7.1 ft) long and 2.36 m (7.7 ft) in diameter to its pressurized dimensions of 4.01 m (13.2 ft) long and 3.23 m (10.6 ft) in diameter. The module has a mass of 1,413.0 kg (3,115.1 lb), and its interior pressure is 14.7 pounds per square inch (1 atm), the same as inside of the ISS.

BEAM’s internal dimensions provide 16 m3 (565 cu ft) of volume where a crew member will enter the module three to four times per year to collect sensor data, perform microbial surface sampling, conduct periodic change-out of the radiation area monitors, and inspect the general condition of the module. The hatch to the module will otherwise remain closed. Its interior is described as being “a large closet with padded white walls”, with various equipment and sensors attached to two central supports.”

Video credit: NASA/ESA

ESA dixit:

“SmallGEO is a multipurpose satellite platform capable of accommodating a wide range of commercial telecommunications payloads and missions, from TV broadcasting to multimedia applications, Internet access and mobile or fixed services in a wide range of frequency bands.

Its new, modular and flexible design boosts European industry’s ability to play a significant role in commercial satcoms by easing entry into the lower-mass telecom satellite market.

The platform was developed by OHB System (DE) under ESA’s Advanced Research in Telecommunication Systems (ARTES) programme. SmallGEO is the first ESA programme with OHB System AG as the industrial prime. Its first flight and in-orbit demonstration will be with the Hispasat 36W-1 telecom satellite.”

Video credit: ESA

Wikipedia dixit:

“The Interplanetary Transport System (ITS), formerly known as the Mars Colonial Transporter (MCT), is SpaceX’s privately funded development project to design and build a spaceflight system of reusable rocket engines, launch vehicles and spacecraft to transport humans to Mars and return to Earth. SpaceX began development of the large Raptor rocket engine for the Mars Colonial Transporter before 2014. As of June 2016, publicly-announced company conceptual plans included the first Mars-bound cargo flight of ITS launching no earlier than 2022, followed by the first ITS Mars flight with passengers one synodic period later in 2024, following two preparatory research launches of Mars probes in 2018 and 2020 on Dragon/Falcon Heavy equipment. SpaceX CEO Elon Musk unveiled details of the space mission architecture at the 67th International Astronautical Congress on 27 September 2016. The booster will have a diameter of 12 m, the spaceship diameter will be 17 m and stack height of the entire vehicle will be 122 m. The selected fuel type is deep-cryo methalox for 42 Raptor engines on the booster and 9 on the spacecraft.

As early as 2007, Elon Musk stated a personal goal of eventually enabling human exploration and settlement of Mars. Bits of additional information about the mission architecture were released in 2011–2015, including a 2014 statement that initial colonists would arrive at Mars no earlier than the middle of the 2020s. Company plans as of mid-2016 continue to call for the arrival of the first humans on Mars no earlier than 2025.

Musk stated in a 2011 interview that he hoped to send humans to Mars’ surface within 10–20 years, and in late 2012 he stated that he envisioned a Mars colony of tens of thousands with the first colonists arriving no earlier than the middle of the 2020s. In October 2012, Musk articulated a high-level plan to build a second reusable rocket system with capabilities substantially beyond the Falcon 9/Falcon Heavy launch vehicles on which SpaceX had by then spent several billion US dollars. This new vehicle was to be “an evolution of SpaceX’s Falcon 9 booster… much bigger [than Falcon 9].” But Musk indicated that SpaceX would not be speaking publicly about it until 2013. In June 2013, Musk stated that he intended to hold off any potential IPO of SpaceX shares on the stock market until after the “Mars Colonial Transporter is flying regularly.”

In February 2014, Musk stated that Mars Colonial Transporter will be “100 times the size of an SUV”, and capable of taking 100 tons of cargo to Mars. Also, SpaceX engine development head Tom Mueller said SpaceX would use nine Raptor engines on a single rocket, similar to the use of nine Merlin engines on each Falcon 9 booster core. He said “It’s going to put over 100 tons of cargo on Mars.” In early 2014, it appeared that the large rocket core that would be used for the booster to be used with MCT would be at least 10 meters (33 ft) in diameter, nearly three times the diameter and over seven times the cross-sectional area of the Falcon 9 booster cores. In August 2014, media sources speculated that the initial flight test of the Raptor-driven super-heavy launch vehicle could occur as early as 2020, in order to fully test the engines under orbital spaceflight conditions; however, any colonization effort was reported to continue to be “deep into the future”.

In January 2015, Musk said that he hoped to release details of the “completely new architecture” for the Mars transport system in late 2015 but those plans changed and, by December 2015, the plan to publicly release additional specifics had moved to 2016. In January 2016, Musk indicated that he hoped to describe the architecture for the Mars missions with the next generation SpaceX rocket and spacecraft later in 2016, at the 67th International Astronautical Congress conference, in September 2016. Musk stated in June 2016 that the first unmanned MCT Mars flight was planned for departure in 2022, to be followed by the first manned MCT Mars flight departing in 2024. By September 2016, Musk noted that the MCT name would not continue, as the system would be able to “go well beyond Mars”, and that a new name would be needed: Interplanetary Transport System (ITS), with the first spacecraft named “Heart of Gold” in reference to the Infinite Improbability Drive.”

Video credit: SpaceX

Credits: Space Concordia Team

The Canadian Satellite Design Competition (CSDC) is a Canada-wide competition for teams of university students (undergraduate and graduate) to design and build low-cost satellite. The CSDC plans to subject the satellites in competition to full space qualification testing, and to launch the winning satellite into orbit to conduct science research. The CSDC is modeled after existing university engineering competitions, such as those sponsored by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) or the Society for Automotive Engineers (SAE).

The winning teammates are members of Space Concordia, a student-run astronautical engineering association based in the Faculty of Engineering and Computer Science at the Concordia University in Montreal. The selection process was conducted by industry experts at the David Florida Laboratory of the Canadian Space Agency in Ottawa, a highly secured facility where commercial and research satellites from the United States and Europe are routinely tested. From twelve teams that initially entered the competition, Space Concordia Team was among only three to go for final testing. Alex Potapov, Mechanical Team Lead, answered a few questions about the Space Concordia cubesat mission.

Q: What is the scientific payload for the mission you are designing?
A: Our mission is to study the south Atlantic anomaly, more on that here. We plan on doing this by detecting high energy particles present in the region. Our spacecraft is equipped with a Geiger Counter operating in its proportional mode. This will allow us to determine not only the amount of radiation but also the type of particle present.

Q: What hardware do you intend to use? Off-the-shelf boards and software or are you developing your own?
A: Most of our components are of the shelf with the exception of several printed circuit boards. One of the more impressive and less accessible pieces of hardware is the Xiphos Q6, which is a sophisticated FPGA that will be used as the central computer of our satellite. The software is developed internally, and it is based on the Linux operating system.

Q: How do you intend to communicate with your satellite from the ground? UHF, Iridium modem, etc.?
A: The spacecraft will communicate with a ground station located near Montreal by means of an antenna that is capable of transmitting and receiving at UHF and VHF armature frequency bands. At this orbit we will have a communication window of about 10-11 min per pass. The communication system was entirely developed by Tiago Leao, PhD Candidate at Concordia University.

Q: How do you generate and store power onboard the satellite? Batteries, solar panels? Do you intend to use deployable solar panels?
A: The satellite is equipped with four solar arrays made of 6 ultra high efficiency solar cells each, these cells charge 4 lithium ion batteries. The solar cells are mounted to the body panels of the spacecraft and are not deployable. The entire power system was designed and developed by Ty Boer, an electrical engineering student at Concordia University.

Q: Does the attitude determination and control system rely solely on reaction wheels? How do you intend to unload them? Magnetorquers, cold gas thrusters, or have you developed a novel technique?
A: Our approach to ACS does not require any of the above, the philosophy behind the cubesat was to keep it as simple as possible and still perform its mission, therefore a passive ACS system was selected. The system contains of permanent magnets and hysteresis rods, this will allow us to remain stable through communication window. We also have sun sensors for telemetry data.

Q: Do you plan to have any orbit control systems onboard? What is the orbital profile of the mission?
A: No, there is no active orbit control on-board. The flight software has a look up table that it uses to determine the spacecraft position, this table is updated through TLE data. We then use this position to execute certain commands such as power on the transmitter to establish communication.

Q: How do you plan to control the temperature onboard the satellite?
A: The satellite has a passive cooling system, and active heaters that keep critical components such as the batteries within operating range. Cooling is controlled by careful design of conductive elements and optical surfaces.

Q: Who are the members registered with your team? What areas of expertise do they represent?
A: The Space Concordia core team members are: Nick Sweet (Project Manager), Alex Potapov (Mechanical team lead), Tiago Leao (Communication systems lead), Ty Boer (Power system lead), Shawn Stoute (Command and data handling lead), Alex Teodor (Software system lead), Gregory Gibson (ACS and Payload lead), Ivan Ivanov (Manufacturing Lead and Mechanical Design), Mehdi Sabzalian (Procurement lead, Structural analysis, Administration), Robert Jakubowicz (Senior Software Developer), Stefanos Dermenakis (Mechanical design, Thermal analysis), Andrei Jones (Mechanical Harness Design). You can find more about the contributors to the project on our about page.

To find out more about the Space Concordia Team, you can visit the Space Concordia web page. More information about the Canadian Satellite Design Competition can be found on the CSDC web page.

Credits: Clyde Space

The second Canadian Satellite Design Competition (CSDC) team that answered our invitation to a Q&A is the team from Dalhousie University. Colin O’Flynn, graduate student at Dalhousie University and CTO of the CSDC team, answered our questions.

Q: What hardware do you intend to use? Off-the-shelf boards and software or are you developing your own?
A: We are aiming to use COTS boards and software as much as possible, especially during development. Eventually we will be forced to design and build custom hardware, since there is a very specific form-factor which many COTS boards won’t fit inside. Weight is also a huge issue for us – since many COTS boards contain lots of features we might not need (e.g.: LCD display, Ethernet connector), we can shave some weight by spinning our own board and not wasting space or weight with those features.

Ideally though we’ll just adapt the COTS board design to our satellite, meaning we can use a tested design with minimal work. Not Invented Here (NIH) syndrome is dangerous to engineering projects, so while our current research does show we can’t find the correct form factor, we’ll always be checking the market for new products that might let us avoid needless designs and builds.

Q: How do you intend to communicate with your satellite from the ground? UHF, Iridium modem, etc.?
A: Again our satellite has slightly different objectives from a normal commercial satellite, which are primarily concerned with issues such as maximizing bandwidth or minimizing lag, since that gives the best return on investments.

In our project we also want to provide something with a wide scientific and public appeal. To that end we plan on using amateur radio frequencies – this means people around the world can track our satellite. Often amateur radio operators are on the lookout for interesting projects which introduce young students to radio communications. Letting students receiver data from a real satellite overhead does a lot to promote both amateur radio and space, which just maybe will help inspire the next generation of engineers.

Whether this will be in the S-Band or just UHF hasn’t been finalized yet, although there is potential to actually have a beacon running in the more common UHF, and our more bandwidth-intensive comms (e.g.: for downloading payload data) in S-Band. The actual coding technique will use more recent codes (e.g.: turbo or LDPC). Again since this is supposed to be a more ‘innovative’ approach to space, we are working with some of the respected professors and students in our department to get recent advances in both coding and antenna design on our spacecraft.

Q: How do you generate and store power onboard the satellite? Batteries, solar panels? Do you intend to use deployable solar panels?
A: The solar panels will not be deployable, but fixed on the outside surface, with batteries storing the charge. This area will use more mature technology. The power system is so critical, and since testing the components such as panels or batteries for the required environmental conditions is beyond our capabilities, we don’t want to rely on experimental designs.

Q: Does the attitude determination and control system rely solely on reaction wheels? How do you intend to unload them? Magnetorquers, cold gas thrusters, or have you developed a novel technique?
A: The satellite is very small; many Cubesats only use magnetorquers without reaction wheels. This limits what and where you can correct obviously, so we are still exploring more interesting techniques. We have “penciled in” reaction wheels and magnetorquers, but this could drastically change.

The attitude determination is also planned to be pretty standard. Due to the small size of sensors on the market, we actually plan on outfitting our satellite with a wide range of sensors beyond what is required for attitude determination. We plan on adding a three-axis magnetometer, gyro, and accelerometer, along with GPS receiver. The idea is to provide enough data for postprocessing on Earth for testing new algorithms, experiments, etc.

Q: Do you plan to have any orbit control systems onboard? What is the orbital profile of the mission?
A: Nothing planned yet; the orbit we are given is defined as:

The design orbit for the mission has the following parameters (TBC):

• Semi-major Axis: 7078 ± 100 km (600km to 800km altitude)

• Eccentricity: < 0.01
• Inclination: sun-synchronous for the resulting altitude

Launch details won’t be confirmed for some time, so some of this is mostly chance depending what we end up riding along with.

The only possible orbit control system we are investigating would be for deorbiting the satellite at the end of its life. Space is a shared resource, and we want to make sure we aren’t needlessly polluting it with our satellite. If it naturally will deorbit in a reasonable time this won’t be necessary, but it’s something we want to be sure of.

Q: How do you plan to control the temperature onboard the satellite?
A: Currently something we are investigating. Preliminary calculations show we can do this passively to keep things within acceptable limits. Other Cubesats have done this in practice too.

We are trying to use automotive grade parts when possible, which gives us a better temperature range to work with. Understandably this isn’t possible for everything; the solar cells and battery are one obvious example.

Q: Who are the members registered with your team? What areas of expertise do they represent?
A: It’s a huge range of skills we have, including over a quarter that aren’t engineers or scientists. Our team is pushing outreach in the community, so for example running programs to introduce kids to space exploration, and the idea that it’s something they could become involved in themselves. Other sections of the team such as marketing, management, and finances are critical to our success, but have nothing to do with the core technical designs.

The technical team has about ten core members. The number of people working on the project though will be higher: we are defining senior year projects, which students will be able to get credit hours for. Time is always a problem in student run projects, so we are trying to make sure people get credit for all this work. Or as I like to point out: once they agree to help, they have to help, because otherwise they will fail the senior year project! It’s one way of retaining “volunteers”.