SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 22
Download to read offline
Preliminary AROSAT 
system study 
RHI, 16 –17 Nov. 2009 
By: G.Perrotta / SpaceSys
Preliminary requirements (1) 
• Coverage: temperate latitude belt up to +- 50° (tbc). The coverage 
of the polar caps is: optional 
• Fully operational system: two or three satellite system, all 
operating. Graceful degradation with just two spacecraft 
operational 
• Orbital planes: tbd, under evaluation; 
• Pancromatic camera with better than 0.5 m grd resol. at nadir 
• Images: square, around 6 x 6 km (goal: 12 x 12 km) ; 
• continuous strips 6 km wide (goal: 12 km) x 70 km long 
• Optical beam repointing: up to +- 35° cross-track 
• Optional: up to +- 30° along track fast repointing ( for 3D 
imaging) 
• Operational duty: nominal average of 0.2% on a per-orbit basis, 
with a maximum of 1 % on one orbit per day;
Preliminary Requirements (2) 
• On board memory : compatible with 50% (tbc) of the data 
acquired daily; 
• Gathered data download data rate: < 150 Mbps, 1 or 2 channels 
• On-board data download antennas: 1 or 2,directional, repointable, 
providing simultaneous or independent operation; 
• Ground receive data stations: multiple, provided with antennas 
with diameter in the 4 to 5 m range; 
• Full system: compatible with single VEGA launch and other 
vehicles capable of multisatellite launches; 
• Single spacecraft (demostration flight): launch vehicle and site is: 
tbd 
• Replacement or substitution satellite(s): under study
Impact of Requirements 
• We face contrasting requirements: 
a) To point the optical telescope beam at nadir while allowing 
cross-track or along-track repointing, on demand; 
b) To extract from the Sun the maximum energy possible 
minimizing the costs; 
c) To minimize the spacecraft and appendages cross-section area 
to minimize drag; 
d) To go down as fas as possible in altitude to increase ground 
resolution while minimizing the telescope size and mass; 
• Besides, the cost reduction pressure by Customers push towards 
avoiding unnecessary sophistications
Alternate spacecraft configurations (1) 
Nadir pointing 
Sun vector 
Pitch axis 
This conventional approach deploys two solar wings which are kept Sun-pointed 
via slip-rings throughout the orbit portion wherein the spacecraft is sunlit.The 
telescope axis is , normally, nadir pointed. 
This configuration presents a large cross-section to the air flow and is not the 
‘optimum’ for low-altitude flying spacecraft. A positive factor is that the solar 
panels can be kept sun-pointed thoughout the ‘active’ orbit portion, therefore the 
solar cells are efficiently used. To achieve this the solar panels must be equipped 
with a BAPTA and drive system, which are critical and costly items.
Alternate spacecraft configurations (2) 
Sun vector 
Pitch axis 
Specular 
flat surface 
Optical beam direction 
In this configuration a 45° flat mirror redirects the optical beam towards 
nadir, Te cross section area-affecting the drag force- in minimized also 
because the solar wings are edge-seen, with a positive impact on mass and 
propulsion system 
The solar arrays are folded onto the spacecraft body and in-orbit deployed. 
The solar energy capture varies throughout the orbit thus deceasing the 
mean energy collection.However the lower efficiency is counterbalanced by 
a much simpler solar plant, needing only simple hinges to deploy the solar 
wings.
Alternate spacecraft configurations (3) 
Sun vector 
Roll axis = 
velocity vector 
45° inclined flat 
reflector 
Nadir-looking 
optical beam 
This is the previous configuration rotated by 90° . The side solar panels are 
provided with motorized hinges so that during the near polar portions of 
the orbit one can get more power from the Sun rays than with the previous 
configuration. 
The advantages, to be better quantized depending on specific mission 
requirements, are counterbalanced by a greater cross sectional area 
impacting the drag, which results to be of the same order of magnitude ot 
the first configuration.
Alternate spacecraft configurations (4) 
• Assumptions: spacecraft body lenght x width: 1.5 x 0.6 m 
• Solar panels: 1.5 x 0.6 m each 
Computed mean solar panel effective area (over the sunlit orbit 
portion) : 
Conf. #1 = 2.7 m^2 
Conf. #2 = 1.9 m^2 
Conf #3 = 2.15 m^2 
Computed equiv. Area for drag during the sunlit (*) orbit portion: 
Conf. #1 = 2.7 m^2 
Conf.#2 = 0.42 m^2 
Conf. #3= 1.55 m^2 
(*) in eclipse all config. are modified to minimize air drag
Preferred solution 
Ae for drag Solar array 
effectiveness 
Risk and 
maturity 
Config. #1 High Good Reference 
Config. #2 Very Low Medium Equivalent to 
reference 
Config. #3 Medium to 
High 
Slightly 
better than 
medium 
A bit worse 
than config. #2 
Configuration # 2 can be advantageously pursued from a drag (and 
propulsion) viewpoint , Solar Array type ( simple mechanisms) and 
related cost savings. The flat specular mirror will have to be designed 
and built with utmost care, however.
Basic formulas for optical instrument 
• IFOV = Rs/H ( Rs= ground resolution; H= satellite altitude) 
• F = ps/IFOV ( F= focal lenght; ps= pixel size) 
• Do = 1.22 *F* /ps ( Do= pupil diameter;  = wavelenght) 
• Telescope size is mainly affected by Do and F. 
The equations can be rewritten as: 
• Do = 1.22*  * H/Rs : a low H reduces the pupil size 
• F= ps* H/Rs : the smaller the pixel size the better 
• Most existing and planned satellite fly high to avoid counteracting the 
drag using the heavy chemical propulsion. But doing so increases F and 
Do with attendant significant cost and mass increases. 
• Lowering the orbit altitude restores manageable values for telescope and 
spacecraft mass, power and cost, but this cannot be cheaply achieved 
with chemical propulsion (high mass impact) so one has to resort to 
electric propulsion
Impact of spacecraft altitude on camera parameters 
12 
10 
8 
6 
4 
2 
0 
altitude, km 
focal lenght, m 
pupil diameter for 0.5 m grd resolution 
1.2 
1 
0.8 
0.6 
0.4 
0.2 
0 
350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 
orbit altitude , km 
diameter, m 
The Focal lenght is valid for a 
specific value of the pixel size, 
here 7 microns
Athmospheric drag compensation 
• Alternatives: 
• Chemical propulsion, Isp of 210 sec 
• Electric propulsion, Isp of 1000 sec. (conservative, Hall-thrusters) 
• The drag was computed for 7 years starting from 2012 assuming 
mean values for F10.7 and Kp coefficients . 
The ballistic coefficient was 
computed for different 
spacraft configurations 
The V required to 
counteract the drag was then 
computed vs orbit altitude 
and S/C configuration.
Athmospheric drag compensation 
• From published forecasts of the expected Sun activity for the next 
Sun cycle, which seems to be considerably more quiet than the 
previous one, a mean F10.7 value around 120 can be computed. 
This was increaded to 140 for margin 
• With these assumptions the 5 years velocity increment required to 
counteract the drag effect for the three configurations was 
computed 
• For the two propulsion systems the propellant mass result as 
follows: 
chemical electrical 
• Conf # 1 163.6 kg 29.8 kg 
• Conf. # 2 18.9 “ 3.9 “ 
• Conf. # 3 74.8 “ 14.7 “ 
These data show that Config. #2 could be a valid candidate in all 
cases
Propulsion system considerations 
• The data shown above imply that Configuration #2 could be 
supported by a less costly chemical propulsion system, while 
Configuration #1 would likely have to be equipped with electric 
propulsion not to increase too much the launch mass and 
spacecraft size that could make difficult the compatibility with 
less expensive launchers, VEGA included; 
• Nevertheless other requirements, including allowances for 
‘missions of opportunity’ requiring orbit changes, or demanding 
orbit injection manoeuvres, and a more precise assessment of the 
spacecraft dimensions and mass – depending from the optical 
instrument configuration and features- might lead to different 
conclusions; 
• The use of a mixed chemical and electric propulsion cannot be 
excluded at this stage and will be reconsideed in the following;
Spacecraft architecture (1) 
The satellite #2 
architecture would 
include a cradle 
supporting the telescope, a 
propulsion module (in 
yellow) carrying either the 
chemical or the electrical 
propulsion items, a frame 
supporting a 45° inclined 
flat mirror, and the solar 
array in three panels, two 
of which stowed during 
launch and deployed in 
orbit by means of 
motorized hinges
Spacecraft architecture (2) 
This is a pictorial view of 
the spacecraft with the solar 
array deployed. Heat 
rejection can occurr via the 
side panels. The back of the 
45° mirror is available for 
carrying an ISL package for 
data relay to a tbd satellite 
system. Two additional 
panels could be installed 
between the mirror and the 
cradle to support high 
datarate X_band link with 
Earth, and also at S_band 
for TT&C and GPS 
reception.
Spacecraft architecture (3) 
• The spacecraft electronics is rather conventional with few exceptions. 
• The short term pointing stability implies the elimination or reduction of 
microvibrations, and suitable technologies will have to be used; 
• The image center should be within a 10% of the image size which is felt 
to be sufficient for surveillance / defense tasks in populated areas. This 
would imply an angular pointing indetermination of 1.5 mrad, implying 
the use of star sensors; 
• The X_band transmission system would be based on 8PSK modulation, 
effective coding and the use of on-board compression systems. The 
approach of having two transmission chains centered on different center 
frequencies and radiating through two separately pointed directive 
antennas, provides operational flexibility, redundancy and graceful 
degradation; 
• The use of multiple TT&C S_band and of GPS antennas for signal 
reception, is also envisaged to widen the accessibility coverage;
Spacecraft High Data rate transmitter 
The high data rate transmission system is an outstanding spacecraft 
subsystem. A candidate block diagram is shown below, with two 
independent transmission chains, each carrying a wideband moulated 
carrier centered on different frequencies and linked to an independently 
repointable directive antenna The latter can transmit the same, or 
different, data towards the same, or different, destination stations within 
the istantaneously available but time-variable access area.
Spacecraft budgets 
• Spacecraft mass and DC power budgets cannot be properly 
elaborated without a precise knowledge of the Camera 
geometrical envelope and of the key electrical interfaces. The 
Camera lenght has, indeed, a deep impact on the structure , solar 
array and other subsystems. 
• However, and for reference purposes, we have estimated the mass 
budget for the Camera version that we propose for an advanced 
implementation based on a 0.5 m diameter pupil, a focal lenght 
around 5 m , an APS-CMOS detector matrix with 7 micron pixels. 
We assumed a spacecraft flying around 400 km and provided 
with chemical propulsion system (worst case). The mass depends 
on the redundancy implementation but we are well below the 
target of 400 kg at launch. 
• Once the Camera will have been chosen, we plan to reconsider 
both the configuration choice ( either the #2 or the more 
conventionall #1) and the overall mass budget.
System coverage (1) 
The coverage, intended as extension of the access area, has been assessed with 
one, two and three satellites. The access area limits was taken, respectively, 30° 
and 40° half-cone angle. With one satellite the access are is extremely limited 
and does not allow to decrease the revisit interval below 3 or 4 days. The 
situation improves with 2 satellites and can be considered satisfactory with three 
spacecraft .
System coverage (2) 
These graphs show the access area improvement feasible using three satellite 
spaced by 120° in true anomaly,same orbital plane. The satellite must rotate in 
roll by, respectivly, +- 30° ( with a resolution loss of 22% in the cross –track 
direction) or +- 40° ( with a resolution loss , cross-track, of 30% ) . This system 
configuration allows a revisit interval of 1 day for almost all points of the 
Earth, except small areas close to the poles.
VEGA compatibility 
•The system coverage can be 
achieved incrementally, launching 
satellites one-at-the-time. 
•However if achieving a very short 
revisit interval is a priority issue, 
then multiple simultaneous launches 
are mandatory. 
•In case of a three-satellite system 
they could be accommodated inside 
the VEGA shroud and launched 
together: but the satellites cross 
sections should be kept (see the side 
picture) within a 650 x 950 mm 
envelope. 
The VEGA inner shroud diameter is 
2380 mm and can accommodate one 
satellite or even two spacecraft with 
cross-sections around 1.1 x 1 m.

More Related Content

What's hot

A coupled Electromagnetic-Mechanical analysis of next generation Radio Telesc...
A coupled Electromagnetic-Mechanical analysis of next generation Radio Telesc...A coupled Electromagnetic-Mechanical analysis of next generation Radio Telesc...
A coupled Electromagnetic-Mechanical analysis of next generation Radio Telesc...Altair
 
Electromagnetic formationflightoct02
Electromagnetic formationflightoct02Electromagnetic formationflightoct02
Electromagnetic formationflightoct02Clifford Stone
 
Impact of Different Wake Models on the Estimation of Wind Farm Power Generation
Impact of Different Wake Models on the Estimation of Wind Farm Power GenerationImpact of Different Wake Models on the Estimation of Wind Farm Power Generation
Impact of Different Wake Models on the Estimation of Wind Farm Power GenerationWeiyang Tong
 
Presentation on the background theory of InSAR
Presentation on the background theory of InSARPresentation on the background theory of InSAR
Presentation on the background theory of InSARSERC at Carleton College
 
Multilayer based soft-x-ray polarimeter at MAX IV Laboratory
Multilayer based soft-x-ray polarimeter at MAX IV LaboratoryMultilayer based soft-x-ray polarimeter at MAX IV Laboratory
Multilayer based soft-x-ray polarimeter at MAX IV LaboratoryJoakim Laksman
 
Optical power output of an unidentified high altitude light source by bruc...
Optical power output of an unidentified high altitude light source    by bruc...Optical power output of an unidentified high altitude light source    by bruc...
Optical power output of an unidentified high altitude light source by bruc...PublicLeaker
 
Velocity Models Difference
Velocity Models DifferenceVelocity Models Difference
Velocity Models DifferenceShah Naseer
 
2009 Dransfield - conforming falcon gravity and the global gravity anomaly
2009 Dransfield - conforming falcon gravity and the global gravity anomaly2009 Dransfield - conforming falcon gravity and the global gravity anomaly
2009 Dransfield - conforming falcon gravity and the global gravity anomalyBrett Johnson
 
hi7ccd2c88 2153-4361-a543-a7a28578cdc6
hi7ccd2c88 2153-4361-a543-a7a28578cdc6hi7ccd2c88 2153-4361-a543-a7a28578cdc6
hi7ccd2c88 2153-4361-a543-a7a28578cdc6Vinod Kumar Tummalur
 
Dhrimaj_Helion_FinalPaper_ECE523
Dhrimaj_Helion_FinalPaper_ECE523Dhrimaj_Helion_FinalPaper_ECE523
Dhrimaj_Helion_FinalPaper_ECE523Helion Dhrimaj
 
GIS Plateform and satellite
GIS Plateform and satelliteGIS Plateform and satellite
GIS Plateform and satelliteMohsin Siddique
 
Simulation of Deployment and Operation of an Earth Observing Satellite
Simulation of Deployment and Operation of an Earth Observing SatelliteSimulation of Deployment and Operation of an Earth Observing Satellite
Simulation of Deployment and Operation of an Earth Observing SatelliteAlber Douglawi
 

What's hot (20)

Chapter2
Chapter2Chapter2
Chapter2
 
A coupled Electromagnetic-Mechanical analysis of next generation Radio Telesc...
A coupled Electromagnetic-Mechanical analysis of next generation Radio Telesc...A coupled Electromagnetic-Mechanical analysis of next generation Radio Telesc...
A coupled Electromagnetic-Mechanical analysis of next generation Radio Telesc...
 
Electromagnetic formationflightoct02
Electromagnetic formationflightoct02Electromagnetic formationflightoct02
Electromagnetic formationflightoct02
 
Xray interferometry
Xray interferometryXray interferometry
Xray interferometry
 
Impact of Different Wake Models on the Estimation of Wind Farm Power Generation
Impact of Different Wake Models on the Estimation of Wind Farm Power GenerationImpact of Different Wake Models on the Estimation of Wind Farm Power Generation
Impact of Different Wake Models on the Estimation of Wind Farm Power Generation
 
Presentation on the background theory of InSAR
Presentation on the background theory of InSARPresentation on the background theory of InSAR
Presentation on the background theory of InSAR
 
Multilayer based soft-x-ray polarimeter at MAX IV Laboratory
Multilayer based soft-x-ray polarimeter at MAX IV LaboratoryMultilayer based soft-x-ray polarimeter at MAX IV Laboratory
Multilayer based soft-x-ray polarimeter at MAX IV Laboratory
 
ICES_2016_348
ICES_2016_348ICES_2016_348
ICES_2016_348
 
Optical power output of an unidentified high altitude light source by bruc...
Optical power output of an unidentified high altitude light source    by bruc...Optical power output of an unidentified high altitude light source    by bruc...
Optical power output of an unidentified high altitude light source by bruc...
 
Dsbr
DsbrDsbr
Dsbr
 
Gps
GpsGps
Gps
 
Sst space observatory
Sst space observatorySst space observatory
Sst space observatory
 
Velocity Models Difference
Velocity Models DifferenceVelocity Models Difference
Velocity Models Difference
 
2009 Dransfield - conforming falcon gravity and the global gravity anomaly
2009 Dransfield - conforming falcon gravity and the global gravity anomaly2009 Dransfield - conforming falcon gravity and the global gravity anomaly
2009 Dransfield - conforming falcon gravity and the global gravity anomaly
 
hi7ccd2c88 2153-4361-a543-a7a28578cdc6
hi7ccd2c88 2153-4361-a543-a7a28578cdc6hi7ccd2c88 2153-4361-a543-a7a28578cdc6
hi7ccd2c88 2153-4361-a543-a7a28578cdc6
 
Dhrimaj_Helion_FinalPaper_ECE523
Dhrimaj_Helion_FinalPaper_ECE523Dhrimaj_Helion_FinalPaper_ECE523
Dhrimaj_Helion_FinalPaper_ECE523
 
GPS Orbits
GPS OrbitsGPS Orbits
GPS Orbits
 
Aas 20 final_20paper
Aas 20 final_20paperAas 20 final_20paper
Aas 20 final_20paper
 
GIS Plateform and satellite
GIS Plateform and satelliteGIS Plateform and satellite
GIS Plateform and satellite
 
Simulation of Deployment and Operation of an Earth Observing Satellite
Simulation of Deployment and Operation of an Earth Observing SatelliteSimulation of Deployment and Operation of an Earth Observing Satellite
Simulation of Deployment and Operation of an Earth Observing Satellite
 

Similar to VHR_preliminary-system_study_issue2

AROSAT_updated-spacesegment_presentation_NO_loghi
AROSAT_updated-spacesegment_presentation_NO_loghiAROSAT_updated-spacesegment_presentation_NO_loghi
AROSAT_updated-spacesegment_presentation_NO_loghiStefano Coltellacci
 
AROSAT Mission and Spacecraft Configuration_rev3
AROSAT Mission and Spacecraft Configuration_rev3AROSAT Mission and Spacecraft Configuration_rev3
AROSAT Mission and Spacecraft Configuration_rev3Stefano Coltellacci
 
Importance of SSPS in SDG and ESG, and importance of antennas in SSPS
Importance of SSPS in SDG and ESG, and importance of antennas in SSPSImportance of SSPS in SDG and ESG, and importance of antennas in SSPS
Importance of SSPS in SDG and ESG, and importance of antennas in SSPSAdvanced-Concepts-Team
 
Two-Axis_Gimbal_for_Air-to-Air_and_Air-to-Ground_Laser_Communications
Two-Axis_Gimbal_for_Air-to-Air_and_Air-to-Ground_Laser_CommunicationsTwo-Axis_Gimbal_for_Air-to-Air_and_Air-to-Ground_Laser_Communications
Two-Axis_Gimbal_for_Air-to-Air_and_Air-to-Ground_Laser_CommunicationsAmnon G. Talmor, PhD
 
Senior Design Project "Space-Based Solar Power System"
Senior Design Project "Space-Based Solar Power System"Senior Design Project "Space-Based Solar Power System"
Senior Design Project "Space-Based Solar Power System"Aliya Burkit
 
Optical_Requirements_for_Orbital_Surveillance
Optical_Requirements_for_Orbital_SurveillanceOptical_Requirements_for_Orbital_Surveillance
Optical_Requirements_for_Orbital_SurveillanceMatt Vaughn
 
Mars CubeSat Telecom Relay Constellation_JPL Final
Mars CubeSat Telecom Relay Constellation_JPL FinalMars CubeSat Telecom Relay Constellation_JPL Final
Mars CubeSat Telecom Relay Constellation_JPL FinalRohan Deshmukh
 
PowerPoint Powerpoint
PowerPoint PowerpointPowerPoint Powerpoint
PowerPoint Powerpointwebhostingguy
 
PowerPoint Powerpoint
PowerPoint PowerpointPowerPoint Powerpoint
PowerPoint Powerpointwebhostingguy
 
Conceptual design and architecture of turkish communication satellite turksat...
Conceptual design and architecture of turkish communication satellite turksat...Conceptual design and architecture of turkish communication satellite turksat...
Conceptual design and architecture of turkish communication satellite turksat...Atılay Mayadağ
 
Team ESAT Preliminary Design Review
Team ESAT Preliminary Design ReviewTeam ESAT Preliminary Design Review
Team ESAT Preliminary Design Reviewmarc_cattrell
 
solar based aircraft
solar based aircraftsolar based aircraft
solar based aircraftKuldeep Meena
 
Satellite Imaging System
Satellite Imaging SystemSatellite Imaging System
Satellite Imaging SystemCSCJournals
 
NTN channel model relative work.pptx
NTN channel model relative work.pptxNTN channel model relative work.pptx
NTN channel model relative work.pptxssuser60a6ab1
 
IRJET - Intelligence Satellite Tracking System
IRJET - Intelligence Satellite Tracking SystemIRJET - Intelligence Satellite Tracking System
IRJET - Intelligence Satellite Tracking SystemIRJET Journal
 
report of power transmission via sps-1
report of power transmission via sps-1report of power transmission via sps-1
report of power transmission via sps-1Doddoji Adharvana
 

Similar to VHR_preliminary-system_study_issue2 (20)

AROSAT_updated-spacesegment_presentation_NO_loghi
AROSAT_updated-spacesegment_presentation_NO_loghiAROSAT_updated-spacesegment_presentation_NO_loghi
AROSAT_updated-spacesegment_presentation_NO_loghi
 
AROSAT Mission and Spacecraft Configuration_rev3
AROSAT Mission and Spacecraft Configuration_rev3AROSAT Mission and Spacecraft Configuration_rev3
AROSAT Mission and Spacecraft Configuration_rev3
 
Importance of SSPS in SDG and ESG, and importance of antennas in SSPS
Importance of SSPS in SDG and ESG, and importance of antennas in SSPSImportance of SSPS in SDG and ESG, and importance of antennas in SSPS
Importance of SSPS in SDG and ESG, and importance of antennas in SSPS
 
Two-Axis_Gimbal_for_Air-to-Air_and_Air-to-Ground_Laser_Communications
Two-Axis_Gimbal_for_Air-to-Air_and_Air-to-Ground_Laser_CommunicationsTwo-Axis_Gimbal_for_Air-to-Air_and_Air-to-Ground_Laser_Communications
Two-Axis_Gimbal_for_Air-to-Air_and_Air-to-Ground_Laser_Communications
 
Senior Design Project "Space-Based Solar Power System"
Senior Design Project "Space-Based Solar Power System"Senior Design Project "Space-Based Solar Power System"
Senior Design Project "Space-Based Solar Power System"
 
Optical_Requirements_for_Orbital_Surveillance
Optical_Requirements_for_Orbital_SurveillanceOptical_Requirements_for_Orbital_Surveillance
Optical_Requirements_for_Orbital_Surveillance
 
MY ME PROJECT 2013-2015
MY ME PROJECT 2013-2015MY ME PROJECT 2013-2015
MY ME PROJECT 2013-2015
 
Mw2421212125
Mw2421212125Mw2421212125
Mw2421212125
 
Poster- QCS
Poster- QCSPoster- QCS
Poster- QCS
 
Mars CubeSat Telecom Relay Constellation_JPL Final
Mars CubeSat Telecom Relay Constellation_JPL FinalMars CubeSat Telecom Relay Constellation_JPL Final
Mars CubeSat Telecom Relay Constellation_JPL Final
 
PowerPoint Powerpoint
PowerPoint PowerpointPowerPoint Powerpoint
PowerPoint Powerpoint
 
PowerPoint Powerpoint
PowerPoint PowerpointPowerPoint Powerpoint
PowerPoint Powerpoint
 
Conceptual design and architecture of turkish communication satellite turksat...
Conceptual design and architecture of turkish communication satellite turksat...Conceptual design and architecture of turkish communication satellite turksat...
Conceptual design and architecture of turkish communication satellite turksat...
 
Team ESAT Preliminary Design Review
Team ESAT Preliminary Design ReviewTeam ESAT Preliminary Design Review
Team ESAT Preliminary Design Review
 
solar based aircraft
solar based aircraftsolar based aircraft
solar based aircraft
 
Satellite Imaging System
Satellite Imaging SystemSatellite Imaging System
Satellite Imaging System
 
NTN channel model relative work.pptx
NTN channel model relative work.pptxNTN channel model relative work.pptx
NTN channel model relative work.pptx
 
IRJET - Intelligence Satellite Tracking System
IRJET - Intelligence Satellite Tracking SystemIRJET - Intelligence Satellite Tracking System
IRJET - Intelligence Satellite Tracking System
 
report of power transmission via sps-1
report of power transmission via sps-1report of power transmission via sps-1
report of power transmission via sps-1
 
Seminar ppt
Seminar pptSeminar ppt
Seminar ppt
 

VHR_preliminary-system_study_issue2

  • 1. Preliminary AROSAT system study RHI, 16 –17 Nov. 2009 By: G.Perrotta / SpaceSys
  • 2. Preliminary requirements (1) • Coverage: temperate latitude belt up to +- 50° (tbc). The coverage of the polar caps is: optional • Fully operational system: two or three satellite system, all operating. Graceful degradation with just two spacecraft operational • Orbital planes: tbd, under evaluation; • Pancromatic camera with better than 0.5 m grd resol. at nadir • Images: square, around 6 x 6 km (goal: 12 x 12 km) ; • continuous strips 6 km wide (goal: 12 km) x 70 km long • Optical beam repointing: up to +- 35° cross-track • Optional: up to +- 30° along track fast repointing ( for 3D imaging) • Operational duty: nominal average of 0.2% on a per-orbit basis, with a maximum of 1 % on one orbit per day;
  • 3. Preliminary Requirements (2) • On board memory : compatible with 50% (tbc) of the data acquired daily; • Gathered data download data rate: < 150 Mbps, 1 or 2 channels • On-board data download antennas: 1 or 2,directional, repointable, providing simultaneous or independent operation; • Ground receive data stations: multiple, provided with antennas with diameter in the 4 to 5 m range; • Full system: compatible with single VEGA launch and other vehicles capable of multisatellite launches; • Single spacecraft (demostration flight): launch vehicle and site is: tbd • Replacement or substitution satellite(s): under study
  • 4. Impact of Requirements • We face contrasting requirements: a) To point the optical telescope beam at nadir while allowing cross-track or along-track repointing, on demand; b) To extract from the Sun the maximum energy possible minimizing the costs; c) To minimize the spacecraft and appendages cross-section area to minimize drag; d) To go down as fas as possible in altitude to increase ground resolution while minimizing the telescope size and mass; • Besides, the cost reduction pressure by Customers push towards avoiding unnecessary sophistications
  • 5. Alternate spacecraft configurations (1) Nadir pointing Sun vector Pitch axis This conventional approach deploys two solar wings which are kept Sun-pointed via slip-rings throughout the orbit portion wherein the spacecraft is sunlit.The telescope axis is , normally, nadir pointed. This configuration presents a large cross-section to the air flow and is not the ‘optimum’ for low-altitude flying spacecraft. A positive factor is that the solar panels can be kept sun-pointed thoughout the ‘active’ orbit portion, therefore the solar cells are efficiently used. To achieve this the solar panels must be equipped with a BAPTA and drive system, which are critical and costly items.
  • 6. Alternate spacecraft configurations (2) Sun vector Pitch axis Specular flat surface Optical beam direction In this configuration a 45° flat mirror redirects the optical beam towards nadir, Te cross section area-affecting the drag force- in minimized also because the solar wings are edge-seen, with a positive impact on mass and propulsion system The solar arrays are folded onto the spacecraft body and in-orbit deployed. The solar energy capture varies throughout the orbit thus deceasing the mean energy collection.However the lower efficiency is counterbalanced by a much simpler solar plant, needing only simple hinges to deploy the solar wings.
  • 7. Alternate spacecraft configurations (3) Sun vector Roll axis = velocity vector 45° inclined flat reflector Nadir-looking optical beam This is the previous configuration rotated by 90° . The side solar panels are provided with motorized hinges so that during the near polar portions of the orbit one can get more power from the Sun rays than with the previous configuration. The advantages, to be better quantized depending on specific mission requirements, are counterbalanced by a greater cross sectional area impacting the drag, which results to be of the same order of magnitude ot the first configuration.
  • 8. Alternate spacecraft configurations (4) • Assumptions: spacecraft body lenght x width: 1.5 x 0.6 m • Solar panels: 1.5 x 0.6 m each Computed mean solar panel effective area (over the sunlit orbit portion) : Conf. #1 = 2.7 m^2 Conf. #2 = 1.9 m^2 Conf #3 = 2.15 m^2 Computed equiv. Area for drag during the sunlit (*) orbit portion: Conf. #1 = 2.7 m^2 Conf.#2 = 0.42 m^2 Conf. #3= 1.55 m^2 (*) in eclipse all config. are modified to minimize air drag
  • 9. Preferred solution Ae for drag Solar array effectiveness Risk and maturity Config. #1 High Good Reference Config. #2 Very Low Medium Equivalent to reference Config. #3 Medium to High Slightly better than medium A bit worse than config. #2 Configuration # 2 can be advantageously pursued from a drag (and propulsion) viewpoint , Solar Array type ( simple mechanisms) and related cost savings. The flat specular mirror will have to be designed and built with utmost care, however.
  • 10. Basic formulas for optical instrument • IFOV = Rs/H ( Rs= ground resolution; H= satellite altitude) • F = ps/IFOV ( F= focal lenght; ps= pixel size) • Do = 1.22 *F* /ps ( Do= pupil diameter;  = wavelenght) • Telescope size is mainly affected by Do and F. The equations can be rewritten as: • Do = 1.22*  * H/Rs : a low H reduces the pupil size • F= ps* H/Rs : the smaller the pixel size the better • Most existing and planned satellite fly high to avoid counteracting the drag using the heavy chemical propulsion. But doing so increases F and Do with attendant significant cost and mass increases. • Lowering the orbit altitude restores manageable values for telescope and spacecraft mass, power and cost, but this cannot be cheaply achieved with chemical propulsion (high mass impact) so one has to resort to electric propulsion
  • 11. Impact of spacecraft altitude on camera parameters 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 altitude, km focal lenght, m pupil diameter for 0.5 m grd resolution 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 orbit altitude , km diameter, m The Focal lenght is valid for a specific value of the pixel size, here 7 microns
  • 12. Athmospheric drag compensation • Alternatives: • Chemical propulsion, Isp of 210 sec • Electric propulsion, Isp of 1000 sec. (conservative, Hall-thrusters) • The drag was computed for 7 years starting from 2012 assuming mean values for F10.7 and Kp coefficients . The ballistic coefficient was computed for different spacraft configurations The V required to counteract the drag was then computed vs orbit altitude and S/C configuration.
  • 13. Athmospheric drag compensation • From published forecasts of the expected Sun activity for the next Sun cycle, which seems to be considerably more quiet than the previous one, a mean F10.7 value around 120 can be computed. This was increaded to 140 for margin • With these assumptions the 5 years velocity increment required to counteract the drag effect for the three configurations was computed • For the two propulsion systems the propellant mass result as follows: chemical electrical • Conf # 1 163.6 kg 29.8 kg • Conf. # 2 18.9 “ 3.9 “ • Conf. # 3 74.8 “ 14.7 “ These data show that Config. #2 could be a valid candidate in all cases
  • 14. Propulsion system considerations • The data shown above imply that Configuration #2 could be supported by a less costly chemical propulsion system, while Configuration #1 would likely have to be equipped with electric propulsion not to increase too much the launch mass and spacecraft size that could make difficult the compatibility with less expensive launchers, VEGA included; • Nevertheless other requirements, including allowances for ‘missions of opportunity’ requiring orbit changes, or demanding orbit injection manoeuvres, and a more precise assessment of the spacecraft dimensions and mass – depending from the optical instrument configuration and features- might lead to different conclusions; • The use of a mixed chemical and electric propulsion cannot be excluded at this stage and will be reconsideed in the following;
  • 15. Spacecraft architecture (1) The satellite #2 architecture would include a cradle supporting the telescope, a propulsion module (in yellow) carrying either the chemical or the electrical propulsion items, a frame supporting a 45° inclined flat mirror, and the solar array in three panels, two of which stowed during launch and deployed in orbit by means of motorized hinges
  • 16. Spacecraft architecture (2) This is a pictorial view of the spacecraft with the solar array deployed. Heat rejection can occurr via the side panels. The back of the 45° mirror is available for carrying an ISL package for data relay to a tbd satellite system. Two additional panels could be installed between the mirror and the cradle to support high datarate X_band link with Earth, and also at S_band for TT&C and GPS reception.
  • 17. Spacecraft architecture (3) • The spacecraft electronics is rather conventional with few exceptions. • The short term pointing stability implies the elimination or reduction of microvibrations, and suitable technologies will have to be used; • The image center should be within a 10% of the image size which is felt to be sufficient for surveillance / defense tasks in populated areas. This would imply an angular pointing indetermination of 1.5 mrad, implying the use of star sensors; • The X_band transmission system would be based on 8PSK modulation, effective coding and the use of on-board compression systems. The approach of having two transmission chains centered on different center frequencies and radiating through two separately pointed directive antennas, provides operational flexibility, redundancy and graceful degradation; • The use of multiple TT&C S_band and of GPS antennas for signal reception, is also envisaged to widen the accessibility coverage;
  • 18. Spacecraft High Data rate transmitter The high data rate transmission system is an outstanding spacecraft subsystem. A candidate block diagram is shown below, with two independent transmission chains, each carrying a wideband moulated carrier centered on different frequencies and linked to an independently repointable directive antenna The latter can transmit the same, or different, data towards the same, or different, destination stations within the istantaneously available but time-variable access area.
  • 19. Spacecraft budgets • Spacecraft mass and DC power budgets cannot be properly elaborated without a precise knowledge of the Camera geometrical envelope and of the key electrical interfaces. The Camera lenght has, indeed, a deep impact on the structure , solar array and other subsystems. • However, and for reference purposes, we have estimated the mass budget for the Camera version that we propose for an advanced implementation based on a 0.5 m diameter pupil, a focal lenght around 5 m , an APS-CMOS detector matrix with 7 micron pixels. We assumed a spacecraft flying around 400 km and provided with chemical propulsion system (worst case). The mass depends on the redundancy implementation but we are well below the target of 400 kg at launch. • Once the Camera will have been chosen, we plan to reconsider both the configuration choice ( either the #2 or the more conventionall #1) and the overall mass budget.
  • 20. System coverage (1) The coverage, intended as extension of the access area, has been assessed with one, two and three satellites. The access area limits was taken, respectively, 30° and 40° half-cone angle. With one satellite the access are is extremely limited and does not allow to decrease the revisit interval below 3 or 4 days. The situation improves with 2 satellites and can be considered satisfactory with three spacecraft .
  • 21. System coverage (2) These graphs show the access area improvement feasible using three satellite spaced by 120° in true anomaly,same orbital plane. The satellite must rotate in roll by, respectivly, +- 30° ( with a resolution loss of 22% in the cross –track direction) or +- 40° ( with a resolution loss , cross-track, of 30% ) . This system configuration allows a revisit interval of 1 day for almost all points of the Earth, except small areas close to the poles.
  • 22. VEGA compatibility •The system coverage can be achieved incrementally, launching satellites one-at-the-time. •However if achieving a very short revisit interval is a priority issue, then multiple simultaneous launches are mandatory. •In case of a three-satellite system they could be accommodated inside the VEGA shroud and launched together: but the satellites cross sections should be kept (see the side picture) within a 650 x 950 mm envelope. The VEGA inner shroud diameter is 2380 mm and can accommodate one satellite or even two spacecraft with cross-sections around 1.1 x 1 m.