Nanosatellites E-Book

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Fachliteratur
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 1231

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2020

Beschreibung

Nanosatellites: Space and Ground Technologies, Operations and Economics

Rogerio Atem de Carvalho, Instituto Federal Fluminense, Brazil

Jaime Estela, Spectrum Aerospace Group, Germany and Peru

Martin Langer, Technical University of Munich, Germany

Covering the latest research on nanosatellites

Nanosatellites: Space and Ground Technologies, Operations and Economics comprehensively presents the latest research on the fast-developing area of nanosatellites. Divided into three distinct sections, the book begins with a brief history of nanosatellites and introduces nanosatellites technologies and payloads, also explaining how these are deployed into space. The second section provides an overview of the ground segment and operations, and the third section focuses on the regulations, policies, economics, and future trends.

Key features:

• Payloads for nanosatellites
• Nanosatellites components design
• Examines the cost of development of nanosatellites.
• Covers the latest policies and regulations.
• Considers future trends for nanosatellites.

Nanosatellites: Space and Ground Technologies, Operations and Economics is a comprehensive reference for researchers and practitioners working with nanosatellites in the aerospace industry.

Leseprobe

Nanosatellites

Space and Ground Technologies, Operations and Economics

Edited by

Rogerio Atem de Carvalho

Reference Center for Embedded and Aerospace Systems (CRSEA)

Polo de Inovação Campos dos Goytacazes (PICG)

Instituto Federal Fluminense (IFF)

Brazil

Jaime Estela

Spectrum Aerospace Group

Germering

Germany

Martin Langer

Institute of Astronautics

Technical University of Munich

Garching

Germany

and

Orbital Oracle Technologies GmbH

Munich

Germany

This edition first published 2020

© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, except as permitted by law. Advice on how to obtain permission to reuse material from this title is available at http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions.

The right of Rogerio Atem de Carvalho, Jaime Estela, and Martin Langer to be identified as the authors of the editorial material in this work has been asserted in accordance with law.

Registered Office

John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USA

Editorial Office

The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK

For details of our global editorial offices, customer services, and more information about Wiley products, visit us at www.wiley.com.

Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats and by print-on-demand. Some content that appears in standard print versions of this book may not be available in other formats.

Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty

While the publisher and authors have used their best efforts in preparing this work, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this work and specifically disclaim all warranties, including without limitation any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives, written sales materials, or promotional statements for this work. The fact that an organization, website, or product is referred to in this work as a citation and/or potential source of further information does not mean that the publisher and authors endorse the information or services the organization, website, or product may provide or recommendations it may make. This work is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a specialist where appropriate. Further, readers should be aware that websites listed in this work may have changed or disappeared between when this work was written and when it is read. Neither the publisher nor authors shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Carvalho, Rogério Atem de, author. | Estela, Jaime, 1972- author. | Langer, Martin, 1986- author.

Title: Nanosatellites : space and ground technologies, operations and economics / Professor Rogerio Atem de Carvalho, University of Fluminese, Rio, Brazil, Jaime Estela, Spectrum Aerospace Group, Germering, Germany, Martin Langer, Technical University of Munich & Orbital Oracle Technologies GmbH, Bavaria, Germany.

Description: First edition. | Hoboken, NJ : Wiley, [2020] | Includes bibliographical references and index.

Identifiers: LCCN 2019049523 (print) | LCCN 2019049524 (ebook) | ISBN 9781119042037 (hardback) | ISBN 9781119042068 (adobe pdf) | ISBN 9781119042051 (epub)

Subjects: LCSH: Microspacecraft.

Classification: LCC TL795.4 .C37 2020 (print) | LCC TL795.4 (ebook) | DDC 629.46–dc23

LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019049523

LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019049524

Cover Design: Wiley

Cover Image: © Stocktrek Images/Getty Images

List of Contributors

Fernando Aguado-Agelet

Department of Signal Theory and Communications

University of Vigo

EE Telecomunicación

Spain

Lucas Rodrigues Amaduro

Reference Center for Embedded and Aerospace Systems (CRSEA)

Polo de Inovação Campos dos Goytacazes (PICG)

Instituto Federal Fluminense (IFF)

Brazil

Kelly Antonini

GomSpace A/S

Aalborg

Denmark

Nicolas Appel

Institute of Astronautics

Technical University of Munich

Garching

Germany

Scott Armitage

Space Flight Laboratory (SFL)

UTIAS,

Toronto

Canada

Alim Rüstem Aslan

Space Systems Design and Test Lab

Department of Astronautical Engineering

Istanbul Technical University

Turkey

Andrew Barron

Broadspectrum (New Zealand) Limited

Christchurch

New Zealand

Merlin F. Barschke

Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Technische Universität Berlin

Germany

Cesar Bernal

ISIS – Innovative Solutions In Space B.V.

Delft

The Netherlands

Grant Bonin

Space Flight Laboratory (SFL)

UTIAS

Toronto

Canada

Eduardo Escobar Bürger

Federal University of Santa Maria (UFSM)

Brazil

Franciele Carlesso

National Institute for Space Research

São José dos Campos

Brazil

Nicolò Carletti

GomSpace A/S

Aalborg

Denmark

Rogerio Atem de Carvalho

Reference Center for Embedded and Aerospace Systems (CRSEA)

Polo de Inovação Campos dos Goytacazes (PICG)

Instituto Federal Fluminense (IFF)

Brazil

Chantal Cappelletti

University of Nottingham

United Kingdom

Michele Coletti

Mars Space Ltd.

Southampton

United Kingdom

Marcos Compadre

Clyde Space Limited

Glasgow

United Kingdom

Lucas Lopes Costa

National Institute for Space Research

São José dos Campos

Brazil

Kevin Cuevas

GomSpace A/S

Aalborg

Denmark

Matteo Emanuelli

GomSpace A/S

Aalborg

Denmark

Jaime Estela

Spectrum Aerospace Group

Germering

Germany

Katharine Brumbaugh Gamble

Washington D.C.

United States of America

Ausias Garrigós

Miguel Hernández University of Elche

Spain

Anna Gregorio

Department of Physics

University of Trieste

Italy

Philipp Hager

European Space Agency

Noordwijk

The Netherlands

Lucas Ramos Hissa

Reference Center for Embedded and Aerospace Systems (CRSEA)

Innovation Hub

Instituto Federal Fluminense (IFF)

Campos dos Goytacazes

Brazil

Siegfried W. Janson

xLab

The Aerospace Corporation

El Segundo

United States of America

Richard Joye

KCHK – Key Capital Hong Kong Limited

Hong Kong

Christopher Kebschull

Institute of Space Systems

Technical University of Braunschweig

Germany

Kaitlyn Kelley

Spaceflight Industries

Seattle

United States of America

Matthias Killian

Institute of Astronautics

Technical University of Munich

Garching

Germany

Rolf-Dieter Klein

Multimedia Studio Rolf-Dieter Klein

München

Germany

Per Koch

GomSpace A/S

Aalborg

Denmark

David Krejci

ENPULSION

Wiener Neustadt

Austria

and

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Cambridge

United States of America

Martin Langer

Orbital Oracle Technologies GmbH

Munich

Germany

and

Institute of Astronautics

Technical University of Munich

Garching

Germany

Vaios J. Lappas

Department of Mechanical Engineering and Aeronautics

University of Patras

Greece

Jürgen Letschnik

Institute of Astronautics

Technical University of Munich

Garching

Germany

and

Airbus

Taufkirchen/Ottobrunn

Germany

Geilson Loureiro

Laboratory of Integration and Testing (LIT)

National Institute for Space Research (INPE)

São José dos Campos

Brazil

Jean-Francois Mayence

Belgian Federal Science Policy Office (BELSPO)

Brussels

Belgium

Mike Miller

Sterk Solutions Corporation

Philipsburg

United States of America

Sergio Montenegro

University Würzburg

Germany

Alberto González Muíño

University of Vigo

EE Telecomunicación

Spain

Flavia Tata Nardini

Fleet Space Technologies

Beverley

Australia

Josh Newman

Space Flight Laboratory (SFL)

UTIAS

Toronto

Canada

Neta Palkovitz

ISIS – Innovative Solutions In Space B.V.

Delft

The Netherlands

and

International Institute of Air and Space Law (IIASL)

Leiden University

The Netherlands

Laura León Pérez

GomSpace A/S

Aalborg

Denmark

Jordi Puig-Suari

Cal Poly

Aerospace Engineering Department

San Luis Obispo

United States of America

Philipp Reiss

Institute of Astronautics

Technical University of Munich

Garching

Germany

Alexander Reissner

ENPULSION

Wiener Neustadt

Austria

Ben Risi

Space Flight Laboratory (SFL)

UTIAS

Toronto

Canada

Niels Roth

Space Flight Laboratory (SFL)

UTIAS

Toronto

Canada

Sebastian Rückerl

Institute of Astronautics

Technical University of Munich

Garching

Germany

Kenan Y. Şanlıtürk

Department of Mechanical Engineering

Istanbul Technical University

Turkey

Klaus Schilling

University Würzburg

and

Zentrum für Telematik

Germany

Daniel Smith

GomSpace A/S

Aalborg

Denmark

Willem Herman Steyn

University of Stellenbosch

South Africa

Enrico Stoll

Institute of Space Systems

Technical University of Braunschweig

Germany

Andrew Strain

Clyde Space Limited

Glasgow

United Kingdom

Murat Süer

Gumush AeroSpace & Defense

Maslak

Istanbul

Turkey

Bob Twiggs

Morehead State University

United States of America

Kirk Woellert

ManTech International supporting DARPA

Arlington

United States of America

Robert E. Zee

Space Flight Laboratory (SFL)

UTIAS

Toronto

Canada

Foreword: Nanosatellite Space Experiment

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.

CubeSat Engineering Design Standard

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).

Evolution History of the CubeSat Program

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.

Today: The CubeSat Concept

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.

The Future of the CubeSat Concept

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 ThinSat™, shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5 ThinSat sub-CubeSat satellites.

This program starting with launches in spring 2019 has the capability of launching 84 of the small satellites at one time. Also, the Antares launches every six months to resupply to the ISS. The goal for this STEM program is to provide a full year of education using real hardware to collect data, and launching a ThinSat and recovering space data for a total cost of less than $50 000.

Introduction by the Editors

Since the 1990s, Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) have played a fundamental role in the restructuring of organizations, which have been able to horizontalize their structures and, through low-cost ICTs, to distribute and commoditize production. This impact came to be felt more strongly in the late 1990s and early 2000s in many areas of the economy. A strong tendency to “distribute” and “horizontalize” the production became commonplace.

Moreover, a need to have flexible systems to adapt to constant innovations not only in ICTs but also in electronics and materials has led production systems to move increasingly toward solutions that could be quickly prototyped, tested, implemented, and modified. ICTs have made it possible to bring production to a level of flexibility and innovation never seen before.

The space sector has not been left out of these trends, and small satellites have begun to show themselves, with all their known limitations, as technologically and economically viable platforms to test and even implement innovations. Moreover, players who until then were kept apart or operating marginally in space missions, such as universities, small businesses and research centers in countries with less space tradition, could now design and build spacecrafts almost from the bottom up.