KGrothe Capstone Project Final Presentation

Using the Systems Engineering

Process for a Conceptual

Mercury CubeSat Mission

Karen Grothe

SELP 695: Systems Engineering Integrative Project

Advisor: Dr. Bohdan Oppenheim

Loyola Marymount University

Fall 2015

Overview

• Mission objectives

• Ethical considerations

• Stakeholders

• Mission timeline

• Top-level requirements

• Alternative mission

architectures

• Concept of operations

• System drivers and key

requirements

• Trade studies

• Propulsion

• Power generation

• Communications

• Mission utility

• Mission risks and mitigation

• Baseline mission concept

and architecture

• Proposed subsystem block

diagrams

Karen Grothe 212/1/2015

This project uses a systems engineering process to propose a conceptual interplanetary CubeSat mission to gather science data at Mercury’s poles.

CubeSat History

1999

• CubeSat concept defined

2003

• First flight –university CubeSats

2006

• First NASA CubeSat –GENESAT

2007

• First CubeSat launched by commercial company (Boeing)

2013

• First USAF SMC CubeSatslaunched

• First PlanetLabsDoves launched

2015

• 101st

PlanetLabsDove launched

Karen Grothe12/1/2015 3

CubeSat Mission Types By Year


Num

ber

Launched

Year

The Decadal Survey

In 2011, the National

Academy of Sciences

released Vision and

Voyages for Planetary

Science in the Decade

2013 – 2022 outlining

science priorities for

NASA’s planetary science

missions.

12/1/2015 Karen Grothe 5

Image source: http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/2013decadal/

Space Missions Are ExpensiveNASA Funding Limits the Number of Missions


NASA’s Planned Interplanetary CubeSat Missions

Auxiliary Payload on Europa Mission (2020s)

MarCO (March 2016)

Lunar Flashlight (July 2018)NEA Scout (July 2018)


Methodology:

Space Mission Engineering Process

1. Define Broad (Qualitative) Objectives and Constraints

2. Define Principal Players (Stakeholders)

3. Define Program Timescale

4. Estimate Quantitative Needs, Requirements, and

Constraints

5. Identify Alternative Mission Architectures

6. Identify Alternative Mission Concepts

7. Identify Likely System Drivers and Key Requirements

8. Conduct Performance Assessments and System

Trades

9. Evaluate Mission Utility

10. Define Baseline Mission Concept and Architecture

11. Revise Quantitative Requirements and Constraints

12. Iterate and Explore Other Alternatives

13. Define System Requirements

14. Allocate Requirements to System Elements

This project covers

the first ten steps of

the 14-step Space

Mission Engineering

Process presented

in Space Mission

Engineering: The

New SMAD.

Image Source: http://www.sme-smad.com/index.asp


Mission Objectives and Constraints (Step 1)

Proposed Mercury CubeSat Mission Statement

After the success of the MESSENGER spacecraft in mapping Mercury, planetary scientists have more questions about Mercury, but the expense of a large mission means that it may be many years before another mission to Mercury is undertaken. The United States needs a less expensive class of spacecraft to perform such planetary science in a more timely fashion.

Credit: NASA/Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory/Carnegie Institution of Washington


Mission Objectives and Constraints (Step 1)

Proposed Mercury CubeSat Mission Objectives

•Primary Objective: To investigate the state, extent, and chemical compositions of surface volatiles in the polar regions of Mercury

•Secondary Objective: To demonstrate the functionality of small spacecraft designed to the CubeSat standard in planetary exploration

Credit: NASA/Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory/Carnegie Institution of Washington/National Astronomy and Ionosphere Center, Arecibo Observatory


Ethical Considerations

• Environmental Ethics• Human-centered

• Utilitarian: Human survival on Earth may depend on understanding solar system beginnings and the planetary process through time. *

• Justice: Smaller, and thus cheaper, interplanetary spacecraft can reduce the inequality inherent thus far in space exploration by opening up possibilities to more nations.

• Ecocentric: Understanding the nature of the volatiles on the surface of Mercury can prepare us for what precautions to take to preserve the planetary environment if landers are sent later.


Stakeholders (Step 2)

• NASA – Determines science objectives with NSF; manages spacecraft development and operates spacecraft

• NSF – Determines science objectives with NASA and provides funding for scientific investigations

• Federal Government – Provides funding for NASA and NSF

• Suppliers – Tyvek, Vacco, launch provider, etc.

• Universities – Prime Investigators (PIs) and partners with NASA and NSF

• Scientists – End users of data returned from mission

• Community – Educators and the general public benefit from scientific findings

• Media – Disseminates announcements from NASA, NSF, Federal Government, Universities, and Scientists.


Mission Timeline (Step 3)

Phase End Defined By Duration

Typical Duration *

(Small Program)

Concept Exploration

Start of tech. funding; preliminary

requirements release 3 months 1-6 months

Detailed Development

Risk Reduction/Technology

Development Start of program funding 3 - 6 months 0 - 12 months

Detailed Design and

Development Formal requirements release 6 months 2 - 12 months

Production and Deployment

Production Ship to Launch Site 6 months 6 - 24 months

Launch Lift-Off and Arrival in LEO 1 month 1 month

On-Orbit Checkout/Transfer

to Operational Orbit Start of operations 6 years

Up to 10 years

interplanetary

Operations and Support

Operations

Spacecraft dies or decision to be

put to sleep 1+ years 1 month - 5 years

Disposal Re-entry or turn-off 0 years 0 - 5 years

Karen Grothe 13

* Typical Durations come from SME-SMAD [14, Table 3-3, Page 54]

12/1/2015

Top-Level Requirements Summary (Step 4)

1. Spacecraft payload shall be appropriate to investigate surface volatiles in the polar regions of Mercury.

2. Spacecraft shall fit into 12U CubeSat size specification.

3. Spacecraft lifetime shall be at least 8 years.

4. Spacecraft shall be capable of communicating with Earth from Mercury’s orbit.

5. Thermal management shall protect components from the extreme temperatures present near Mercury.

6. Spacecraft shall be capable of providing power and fault protection to sensor payload.


Alternative Mission Architectures (Step 5)

• Operational views

• OV-1: Overview

• OV-5: Operational Activities Chart

• System views

• SV-1: System Interface Description (for two options)

• SV-4: Systems Functionality Description

• Spacecraft, Ground Segment, Launch Segment

• SV-5: Operational Activity to System Functionality Traceability Matrix


Karen Grothe 16

Space Flight Operations Facility

Deep Space Network

Users/CustomersPasadena, CA

Launch

Mercury CubeSat

Mission Architecture

OverviewCubeSat

Image Credit: Tomas Svitek

12/1/2015

Mercury CubeSat MissionOperational Activities

Program Office

Build Spacecraft

Build SystemsIntegrate Systems

Launch Spacecraft

Operate Spacecraft

Send Commands

Collect Science Data

Receive Data on Ground

Monitor Spacecraft

Health

Manage Budget

Manage Mission Data

Process DataDistribute

Data



System Interface Description (Option A)

18Karen Grothe12/1/2015


System (with Relay) Interface Description (Option B)

19Karen Grothe12/1/2015

Ground Segment

JPL’s Space Flight Operations Facility Deep Space Network

Karen Grothe 20

(Source: NASA/JPL-Caltech)

12/1/2015

Typical Ground Segment Functionality Description

Ground Segment

Ground Communications

Transmit Receive

Ground Network Operations

Ground Flight Operations

Commands PlanningMonitoring

Health

Ground Data Processing


Launch Segment

• CubeSat Mercury

Mission shall launch as a

secondary payload.

• A Canisterized Satellite

Dispenser (CSD) will be

used to encapsulate the

spacecraft on the launch

vehicle and dispense it

on an appropriate Earth

orbit.

Karen Grothe 22

Images Source: Planetary Systems Corporation

12/1/2015

Typical Launch Segment Functionality Description

Launch Segment

Launch Facility

Launch Vehicle

Launch Control


Top Level Spacecraft Block Diagram

Karen Grothe 24

Command and Data Handling Subsystem

Electrical Power Subsystem

Attitude Determination & Control Subsystem

Communications Subsystem

Payload Subsystem

Propulsion Subsystem

Thermal Control Subsystem

Solar Array

Battery

S/C Ground

Power Mgmt. Ckts.

Power Distrib. Module

Battery Charge

Reg. To Other Subsystems

On-Board Data Storage

On-Board Computer (OBC)

Commands to Subsystems

Data Handling Function

ADCS Function

Command Function

Transceiver

Antenna

Mission DataAttitude

Determination Sensors

Attitude Control

Actuators

Instrument 1

Commands from OBC

Data to OBC

HeatersRadiatorsHeat Pipes Coatings Multi-Layer Insulation

Commands from Earth

Propellant

Thrusters

Sun Shield

Commands to Thrusters

Instrument 2

Flow Control Valve

Commands from OBC

12/1/2015

Typical Spacecraft Systems Functionality Description

Spacecraft

Data Collection (Payload)

Communications

Transmit Receive

Command and Data Handling

Attitude Control Propulsion Power

Storing Generating

Telemetry and Command

Thermal Control



Operational Activity to System Functionality Traceability Matrix


Build Spacecraft Launch Operate Spacecraft Manage Mission Data

Build Systems

Integrate Systems

Launch Spacecraft

Send Commands

Collect Science Data

Receive Data on Ground

Monitor Spacecraft

Health

ProcessData

Distribute to Users

Spac

e Se

gmen

t

Payload Sensing X

SpacecraftPower

Power X X X X

SpacecraftComms.

Transmit X X

Receive X

Ground Equipment

Ground Handling

X X

Systems Test Equip.

Systems Test

X

Lau

nch

Seg

men

t LaunchFacility

X X

Launch Vehicle

X

Launch Control

X

Gro

un

d S

egm

ent

Ground Comms.

GroundTransmit

X

GroundReceive

X X

Flight Operations X X X

Network Operations X

Data Processing X

Comms. = CommunicationsEquip. = Equipment

Concept of Operations (Step 6)Launch and Trajectory

• Launch as a

secondary payload

• Take a trajectory

similar to that of the

MESSENGER

spacecraft

• Orbit insertion at

Mercury in about 6

yearsExample trajectory: MESSENGER

Image source: http://messenger.jhuapl.edu/the_mission/trajectory.html


Mercury CubeSat Concept of Operations(Step 6)

Mission Timeline/Schedule (The overall schedule for planning,

building, deployment, operations, replacement, and end-of-life) – 1

spacecraft developed over 2 years, launched in the earliest available

window, operates for 8 years.

Tasking, Scheduling & Control (How the system decides what to do

in the long term and short term) – Single mission operations center

Communications Architecture (How the various components of the

system talk to each other) – Space/Ground: Either direct downlink to

Deep Space Network or relayed to Earth via nearby spacecraft;

Ground/User: Internet distribution

Data Delivery (How mission and housekeeping data are generated or

collected, distributed & used) – Sensor data and spacecraft health and

orbit/attitude data sent to ground and distributed to users


System Drivers and Key Requirements(Step 7)

• Mass and power are typical spacecraft system drivers.

• Using the CubeSat standard adds the volume that

subsystems occupy as a constraint.

• Additional system drivers and key requirements are imposed

on the subsystems.

• Payload

• Electrical Power Subsystem (EPS)

• Communications

• Attitude Determination and Control Subsystem (ADCS)

• Thermal Control

• Propulsion


Proposed Mass, Volume, and Power Budget

System Description HeritageMass (kg)

Volume (U)

Power (W) (Peak)

ADCSStar tracker, sun sensor, reaction wheels, IMU

BCT XACT (star trackers, IMU), sun sensor, reaction wheels 1 1 3

Propulsion Microthrusters Busek electrospray thrusters 1 1 30C&DH/ Processing

Science & Engrg. Management, processing SpaceCube Mini, Lunar Ice CubeSat 0.5 0.5 5

Thermal/ Radiation

Passive shielding, passive cooling, heaters, sun shield

MESSENGER's sunshade and other thermal defense 3 2 8

Structures/ Mechanisms

Frame, deployer, deployables(gimballed, stowed solar panel array, antennas)

Planetary Systems Corp. 12U deployer, MMA Design Ehawk gimballed solar panels 8 - 1

Comm Antenna, transceiverSERC's deployable high gain antenna, JPL's IRIS X-Band Radio 3.5 2.5 10

PowerElectrical system, conversion, regulation, batteries 1.5 1.5 5

Payload:

Near Infrared Spectrometer

Detector, optics, associated electronics, cryocooling

JPL Lunar Flashlight's spectrometer, Lunar IceCube's Broadband InfraRed Compact High Resolution Explorer Spectrometer (BIRCHES), Moon Mineralogy Mapper 2.5 1.5 7

Laser AltimeterOptics, associated electronics, cryocooling (If required)

JPL Lunar Flashlight's laser, MESSENGER Laser Altimeter (MLA) 4 2 14

Total withoutpropulsion 25 12 83


PayloadDriving Requirements

• Scientific objectives

• Investigate the state, extent, and chemical compositions of

surface volatiles in the polar regions of Mercury

• Thermal environment

• Small size



•Design Drivers

• Orbit: Mercury orbit requires enough battery power to

supply the spacecraft power during eclipse.

• Payload requirements: Instruments require power, fault

protection, bursts of power when imaging a particular

commanded area.

• Distribute power to all subsystems

• Spacecraft lifetime of 8 years


Communication Subsystem Driving Requirements

• Distance of the mission from Earth

• Pointing requirements

• Small size of satellite

• Power availability

• Thermal control

• Telemetry and sensor data downlinked at X-band• In the range 8400 - 8450 MHz for DSN

• Commands uplinked at X-band• In the range 7145 - 7190 MHz for DSN

• Data rate – If the data rate is too slow, data storage

capability will need to increase.


Attitude Determination & Control Subsystem (ADCS)

Driving Requirements

• Three-axis stabilization

• Power: Solar panels need to point to the sun to

produce sufficient power

• Pointing accuracy necessary to complete the science objectives


Thermal Control SubsystemDriving Requirements

• Thermal Environment: Orbiting Mercury presents

extreme temperatures as the spacecraft moves

between eclipse and sun exposure

• Large thermal effect from sunlight reflected up from

Mercury

• Infrared heat emanating from the planet's

scorching day-side surface

• Spacecraft size

• Instruments may need extra thermal control


Propulsion SubsystemDriving Requirements

•Distance to destination

•Fuel

• Influence on weight and size

•High performance less weight

•Spacecraft lifetime of 8 years


Performance Assessments and Trade Studies (Step 8)

Trade studies:


Source: http://www.tethers.com/Products.html

Credit: NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory

Image Credit: USC

Propulsion

Power Generation

Communications

Performance Assessments & Trade Studies (Step 8)Measures of Effectiveness

• The following measures of effectiveness are used to

evaluate propulsion, power, and communications

alternatives:

• Technology Readiness Level (TRL)

• Performance specifications

• Propulsion: Thrust, Isp, and power required

• Power generation: Power output (W)

• Communications: Data rate and power required

• Mass


Performance Assessments & Trade Studies (Step 8) Propulsion Alternatives

1. VACCO Propulsion Unit for CubeSats –

a COTS propulsion system which

includes a warm gas thruster

2. CubeSat Ambipolar Thrusters (CAT)

3. HYDROS™ Water Electrolysis Thruster

4. Solar sail

5. Solar Electric Power/Solar Electric

Propulsion (SEP^2)

6. Colloidal Thruster, a.k.a. electrospray

thruster


Image Sources: 1. VACCO Industries2. http://pepl.engin.umich.edu/thrusters.html3. Tethers Unlimited, Inc.4. NASA6. Busek Co., Inc.

No picture

available

1

2

3

4

5

6

Propulsion Trade StudyAlternative Measures of Effectiveness Comments

TRL Thrust Isp Power Mass

VACCOPropulsion Unit for CubeSats

TRL-7+ 5.4 mN 70 s 15 W < 1 kg Includes Warm Gas Thruster, Useful for attitude control

CubeSatAmbipolarThruster

TRL-3 ≤ 2 mN Up to 2000 s(About 800 s in July 2015 tests with Xenon ions)

≤ 10 W ≤ 1 kg Flexible propellant (water or iodine, ideally); first launch planned for early 2017

HYDROS™ Water Electrolysis Thruster

TRL-5 (Expected to mature to TRL-6 Winter 2015)

≤ 1 N 300 s Water propellant;“green”

Solar sail TRL-5 < 7mN 4 – 10 kg(NanoSail-D was ~ 4 kg)

Thrust from solar pressure on sail

Solar Electric Power/Solar Electric Propulsion (SEP^2)

TRL-3 (est.) TBD by mfr.

Up to 3000 s Generates 80 W,20 W when thrusting

TBD Xenon propellant; System comes with solar panels

Colloidal (Electrospray) Thruster

TRL-7+TRL-5

100 µN ≤ 1 mN

2300 s400 s to > 1300 s

5 W15 W

320 g (wet)1.15 kg

Busek has delivered 100-µN thrusters to NASA


Performance Assessments & Trade Studies (Step 8) Power Alternatives

1. Solar panels

2. Mini-Radioisotope

Generator (Mini-RTG)

3. Solar Electric

Power/Solar Electric

Propulsion (SEP^2)


1

2

3

Image Sources:1. Tethers Unlimited, Inc. 2. University of Bristol

Power Trade Study

Alternative

Measures of Effectiveness

CommentsTRLPower

Generated Mass

Deployable Solar Panels

TRL-9 Typically up to 80 W

6U side panel: ≤ 340 g3U side panel: ≤ 190 g

Readilyavailable; scalable

Mini-RTG ≤ TRL-3 (est.)

40 – 250 mW 300 – 600 g Thermoelectric

Solar ElectricPower/Solar Electric Propulsion (SEP^2)

TRL-3 (est.) 80 W,20 W when thrusting

TBD


Performance Assessments & Trade Studies (Step 8) Communications Alternatives

1. Laser communication

2. Direct microwave

communication with

deployable high-gain

antenna

3. Integrated Solar Array &

Reflectarray Antenna

4. Using a relay spacecraft


Image Sources: 1. NASA2. USC3. NASA4. ESA

1

2

3

4

Communications Trade Study

Alternative Measures of Effectiveness Comments

TRL Data Rate Power Used Mass

Laser Communication

TRL-6 < 625 Mbps to < 2.88 Gbps40 – 50 kbps from 2 AU

50 – 140 W(LADEE)0.5 W average

30 kg(LADEE)

Optical receiverrequired; LADEEtransmitter is too heavy

Direct MicrowaveCommunication with Deployable High Gain Antenna

X: TRL-9K: TRL-3 to TR-9Antenna:TRL-6 to TRL-9

X: < 500 MbpsKa: < 3 GbpsKu: <150 MbpsK: < 1.2 Gbps

X: < 90–120 WKa: N/AKu: 47 WK: 30 W

X: ≤ 4 kgKa: 2.7 kgKu: 2.3 kgK: 2.8 kg

JPL-developed IRIS X-band radio is specifically designed for CubeSats

Integrated Solar Array & ReflectarrayAntenna

TRL-5(Flying in Nov. to raise to TRL-7)

≥ 100 Mbps No more than system with deployable parabolic antenna

Minimal difference from deployable parabolic antenna

High Bandwidth Ka-band, high gain antenna integrated into COTS solar array

Relay Spacecraft TRL-9 Possibility: BepiColombo or Akatsuki


Evaluating Mission Utility (Step 9)


How much will it cost?

Is the mission worthwhile?

How much meaningful science data

can we collect?

What are the risks?

Mission Risks and Mitigation

Mission Risks Mitigation

1. Launch delays Have a secondary launch

date

2. Communication failure Testing; plan an alternative

communication path or

redundancy

3. Radiation environment causing failure Ruggedize; use shielding

4. Collision with space debris or another

spacecraft

No mitigation

5. Technology readiness lacking Use technology already in

development; fly technology

that is not less than TRL 5


Mission Risk Matrix

Very Low Low Medium High Very High

Very High

High

Medium

Low

Very low

Lik

eli

ho

od

Impact

2

1

35

4


Risks:

1. Launch delays

2. Comm. failure

3. Radiation env.

causes failure

4. Collision

5. TRL

Baseline Mission Concept and Architecture (Step 10)


Top Level Spacecraft Block Diagram

Karen Grothe 49

Command and Data Handling Subsystem


Attitude Determination & Control Subsystem


Payload Subsystem

Propulsion Subsystem

Thermal Control Subsystem

Solar Array

Battery

S/C Ground

Power Mgmt. Ckts.

Power Distrib. Module

Battery Charge

Reg. To Other Subsystems

On-Board Data Storage

On-Board Computer (OBC)

Commands to Subsystems

Data Handling Function

ADCS Function

Command Function

X-Band Transceiver

Deployable Antenna

Mission Data

Star Trackers

Sun Sensors

IMU

Reaction Wheels

Infrared Spectrometer

Commands from OBC

Data to OBC

HeatersRadiatorsHeat Pipes Coatings Multi-Layer Insulation

Commands from Earth

Ionic Liquid

Propellant

Electrospray Thrusters

Sun Shield

Commands to Thrusters

Laser Altimeter

Flow Control Valve

Commands from OBC

12/1/2015

Payload Possibilities

• Near infrared

spectrometer

• Laser to illuminate

shadowed craters

• Altimeter capability

would allow mapping

spectrometer data to

depth within craters


Example InstrumentJPL’s NanoSat Spectrometer

Example of illuminating shadowed crater with laserImages source: NASA (both)

Diagram ofProposed Thermal Control Subsystem

Karen Grothe 51

Coatings

Radiators Multi-LayerInsulationBlankets

Heat Pipes

Sun Shield

Heaters

Dimensions in mm

12U CubeSat Payload Spec Source: http://www.planetarysystemscorp.com/web/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/2002367C-Payload-Spec-for-3U-6U-12U-27U1.pdf

12/1/2015

Additional Possibilities

• MBSE: Project could be further developed using the CubeSat SysML model developed by the INCOSE Space Systems Working Group

• Interplanetary CubeSats in constellations

• Interplanetary CubeSats inserted in the orbit of a planetary body from a mothership

• Weight reduction:

• Wireless intra-spacecraft communication

• Eliminate black boxes and create an optimized design


Lessons Learned

• The Space Mission Engineering steps are a tailored

version of the SE Process in the INCOSE SE Handbook.

• The SE process offers a disciplined approach to analyzing

possible space missions.

• System trade studies and mission analyses require more

expertise than one systems engineer usually has.

• Although a CubeSat is small and less expensive than

typical interplanetary spacecraft, it is still a complex system.

• In the next few years, there likely will be several

interplanetary CubeSat missions launched.


References

• [1] Committee on the Planetary Science Decadel Survey, Voyages and Vision for Planetary Science in the Decade 2013 - 2022, Washington D.C.: National Academies Press, 2011.

• [2] S. Squyres, "Vision and Voyages for Planetary Science in the Decade 2013-2022, Rollout at LPSC," 11 March 2010. [Online]. Available: http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/docs/Squyres_2013_Decadal_Rollout_at_LPSC.pdf. [Accessed 4 May 2015].

• [3] The CubeSat Program, , "CubeSat Design Specification Rev 13, Final2, PDF File," 6 April 2015. [Online]. Available: http://cubesat.org/images/developers/cds_rev13_final2.pdf. [Accessed 4 May 2015].

• [4] The Planetary Society, "NASA's Planetary Science Division Funding and Number of Missions 2004 - 2020," 9 February 2015. [Online]. Available: http://www.planetary.org/multimedia/space-images/charts/historical-levels-of-planetary-exploration-funding-fy2003-fy2019.html. [Accessed 6 May 2015].

• [5] Solar System Exploration Research Virtual Institute (SSERVI), "Lunar Flashlight," NASA, [Online]. Available: http://sservi.nasa.gov/articles/lunar-flashlight/. [Accessed 6 May 2015].

• [6] P. Banazadeh and A. Frick, "ISSC - A3_Banazadeh_Presentation.pdf," 2014. [Online]. Available: http://www.intersmallsatconference.com/. [Accessed 6 May 2015].

• [7] R. Staehle and e. al., "Staehle-presentation-Lunar-Flashlight-20131109.pdf," 13 November 2013. [Online]. Available: http://sservi.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Staehle-presentation-Lunar-Flashlight-20131109.pdf. [Accessed 6 May 2015].

• [8] Michael Swartwout, PhD, Associate Professor, Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering, Saint Louis University, CubeSat Database. [Online]. Available: https://sites.google.com/a/slu.edu/swartwout/home/cubesat-database

• [9] Green, Brian, “Space Ethics: Is Exploration a Moral Imperative? Why to Go or Stay Home”, 18 January 2014. [Online]. Available: https://moralmindfield.wordpress.com/2014/01/18/space-ethics-is-exploration-a-moral-imperative-why-to-go-or-stay-home/

• [10] Williamson, M. (2002). Space ethics and protection of the space environment. 1st ed. [pdf] Elsevier Science Ltd. Available at: http://www.chriscunnings.com/uploads/2/0/7/7/20773630/space_environment.pdf [Accessed 16 Nov. 2014].


https://sites.google.com/a/slu.edu/swartwout/home/cubesat-database

https://moralmindfield.wordpress.com/2014/01/18/space-ethics-is-exploration-a-moral-imperative-why-to-go-or-stay-home/

References

• [11] M. Martin and R. Schinzinger, Ethics in engineering, 4th Ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2005.

• [12] NASA, “NASA Technology Roadmaps, TA 2: In-Space Propulsion Technologies”, May 2015 Draft. [Online.] Available at: http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/2015_nasa_technology_roadmaps_ta_2_in_space_propulsion.pdf [Accessed 12 October 2015]

• [13] NASA, “Definition of Technology Readiness Levels.” [Online]. Available at: http://esto.nasa.gov/files/trl_definitions.pdf [Accessed 12 October 2015]

• [14] J. Wertz, D. Everett and J. Puschell, Space Mission Engineering: The New SMAD. Hawthorne, CA: Microcosm Press, 2011.

• [15] C. Gustafson and S. Janson, 'Think Big, Fly Small', Crosslink, 2014.

• [16] NASA Ames Research Center, 'Small Spacecraft Technology State of the Art', NASA Center for AeroSpaceInformation, 2014.

• [17] Canisterized Satellite Dispenser (CSD) Data Sheet, 1st ed. Planetary Systems Corporation, 2015. [Online]. Available at: http://www.planetarysystemscorp.com/web/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/2002337C-CSD-Data-Sheet.pdf [Accessed 31 October 2015]

• [18] W. Holemans, 'Lunar Water Distribution (LWaDi)-- a 6U Lunar Orbiting spacecraft SSC14-WK-22', 11th Annual Summer CubeSat Developers' Workshop, 2014. [Online]. Available at: http://www.planetarysystemscorp.com/web/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Lunar-Water-Distribution-LWaDi-a-6U-Lunar-Orbiting-spacecraft.pdf [Accessed 31 October 2015]

• [19] Mmadesignllc.com, 'E-HaWK (Pat.) NanoSat Solar Arrays | MMA Design', 2015. [Online]. Available: http://www.mmadesignllc.com/products/e-hawk-pat-nanosat-solar-arrays [Accessed: 01- Nov- 2015]

• [20] J. Sheehan, 'PEPL: Thrusters: CubeSat Ambipolar Thruster', Plasmadynamics and Electric Propulsion Laboratory, University of Michigan, 2015. [Online]. Available: http://pepl.engin.umich.edu/thrusters/CAT.html[Accessed: 01- Nov- 2015].


http://www.planetarysystemscorp.com/web/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/2002337C-CSD-Data-Sheet.pdf

http://www.planetarysystemscorp.com/web/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Lunar-Water-Distribution-LWaDi-a-6U-Lunar-Orbiting-spacecraft.pdf

http://www.mmadesignllc.com/products/e-hawk-pat-nanosat-solar-arrays

http://pepl.engin.umich.edu/thrusters/CAT.html

References

• [21] Aerojet Rocketdyne, 'MPS-160™ Solar Electric Power / Solar Electric Propulsion System', 2015. [Online]. Available: http://www.rocket.com/cubesat/mps-160 [Accessed: 01- Nov- 2015].

• [22] Propulsion Unit for CubeSats (PUC), 1st ed. VACCO Industries, 2015. [Online]. Available: http://www.vacco.com/images/uploads/pdfs/11044000-01_PUC.pdf [Accessed: 01- Nov- 2015].

• [23] ARTEMIS Space, 'ARTEMIS Lunar Constellation', 2014. [Online]. Available: http://www.artemis-space.com/artemis-lunar-constellation/ [Accessed: 01- Nov- 2015].

• [24] P. Dyches, 'JPL Selects Europa CubeSat Proposals for Study', NASA JPL News, 2014. [Online]. Available: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=4330 [Accessed: 01- Nov- 2015].

• [25] D. Spence, E. Ehrbar, N. Rosenblad, N. Demmons, T. Roy, S. Hoffman, D. Williams, V. Hruby and C. Tocci, Electrospray Propulsion Systems for Small Satellites, 1st ed. Busek Co., Inc., 2013. [Online]. Available: http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?filename=0&article=2960&context=smallsat&type=additional [Accessed: 01-Nov- 2015].

• [26] Busek 100uN-Class Electrospray Thrusters, 1st ed. Busek Co., Inc., 2015. [Online]. Available: http://www.busek.com/index_htm_files/70008516E.pdf [Accessed: 01- Nov- 2015].

• [27] HYDROS Thruster, 1st ed. Bothell, WA: Tethers Unlimited, Inc., 2015. [Online]. Available: http://www.tethers.com/SpecSheets/Brochure_HYDROS.pdf [Accessed: 01- Nov- 2015].

• [28] L. Johnson, Solar Sail Propulsion for Interplanetary Small Spacecraft, 1st ed. NASA, 2015. [Online]. Available: http://images.spaceref.com/fiso/2015/032515_les_johnson_nasa_msfc/Johnson_3-25-15.pdf [Accessed: 01- Nov- 2015].

• [29] E. Wertheimer, L. Berthoud and M. Johnson, PocketRTG – a CubeSat scale radioisotope thermoelectric generator using COTS fuel, 1st ed. University of Bristol, 2015. [Online]. Available: https://icubesat.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/icubesat-2015_org_b-3-3_pocketrtg_berthoud.pdf [Accessed: 01- Nov- 2015].

• [30] J. Fleurial, Thermoelectrics in Space: A Success Story, What’s Next and What Might Be Possible, 1st ed. Pasadena, CA: JPL, 2015. [Online]. Available: http://www.kiss.caltech.edu/study/adaptiveII/Kiss%202015%20Workshop%20JPF%20TE%20Brief%20rev1.pdf [Accessed: 01-Nov- 2015].


http://www.rocket.com/cubesat/mps-160

http://www.vacco.com/images/uploads/pdfs/11044000-01_PUC.pdf

http://www.artemis-space.com/artemis-lunar-constellation/

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=4330

http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?filename=0&article=2960&context=smallsat&type=additional

http://www.busek.com/index_htm_files/70008516E.pdf

http://www.tethers.com/SpecSheets/Brochure_HYDROS.pdf

http://images.spaceref.com/fiso/2015/032515_les_johnson_nasa_msfc/Johnson_3-25-15.pdf

https://icubesat.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/icubesat-2015_org_b-3-3_pocketrtg_berthoud.pdf

http://www.kiss.caltech.edu/study/adaptiveII/Kiss 2015 Workshop JPF TE Brief rev1.pdf

References

• [31] K. Grothe, 'Applications for Microsatellites', AIAA Orange County Aerospace Systems and Technology Conference, 2015.

• [32] B. Cohen, 'Lunar Flashlight and Near Earth Asteroid Scout: Exploration Science Using Cubesats', 2nd NASA Exploration Science Forum; Moffett Field, CA, 2015. [Online]. Available: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20150015511.pdf [Accessed: 01- Nov- 2015].

• [33] R. Hodges, 'ISARA: Integrated Solar Array Reflectarray Mission Overview', CubeSat Developers Workshop at the Small Satellite Conference, 2013. [Online]. Available: http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?filename=0&article=2877&context=smallsat&type=additional[Accessed: 01- Nov- 2015].

• [34] M. Aherne, J. Barrett, L. Hoag, E. Teegarden and R. Ramadas, Aeneas -- Colony I Meets Three-Axis Pointing, 1st ed. Marina del Rey, CA: Space Engineering Research Center, 2011. [Online]. Available: http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1181&context=smallsat [Accessed: 01- Nov- 2015].

• [35] Messenger.jhuapl.edu, 'MESSENGER: MErcury Surface, Space ENvironment, GEochemistry, and Ranging -Thermal Design', 2015. [Online]. Available: http://messenger.jhuapl.edu/spacecraft/thermal.html [Accessed: 01- Nov-2015].

• [36] Messenger.jhuapl.edu, 'MESSENGER: MErcury Surface, Space ENvironment, GEochemistry, and Ranging -Power', 2015. [Online]. Available: http://messenger.jhuapl.edu/spacecraft/power.html [Accessed: 01- Nov- 2015].

• [37] Messenger.jhuapl.edu, 'MESSENGER: MErcury Surface, Space ENvironment, GEochemistry, and Ranging -Mission Design', 2015. [Online]. Available: http://messenger.jhuapl.edu/the_mission/mission_design.html [Accessed: 01- Nov- 2015].

• [38] Messenger.jhuapl.edu, 'MESSENGER: MErcury Surface, Space ENvironment, GEochemistry, and Ranging - The Payload Instruments', 2015. [Online]. Available: http://messenger.jhuapl.edu/instruments/index.html [Accessed: 01-Nov- 2015].

• [39] Messenger.jhuapl.edu, 'MESSENGER: MErcury Surface, Space ENvironment, GEochemistry, and Ranging -Working from Orbit', 2015. [Online]. Available: http://messenger.jhuapl.edu/the_mission/orbit.html [Accessed: 01- Nov-2015].

• [40] B. Oppenheim, 'Improving Affordability: Separating Research from Development and from Design in Complex Programs', Crosstalk, pp. 27-30, 2013.

• [41] S. Greenland and C. Clark, CUBESAT PLATFORMS AS AN ON-ORBIT TECHNOLOGY VALIDATION AND VERIFICATION VEHICLE, 1st ed. Glasgow, UK: Clyde Space Ltd., 2010. [Online]. Available: http://www.clyde-space.com/documents/1805 [Accessed: 01- Nov- 2015].


http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20150015511.pdf

http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?filename=0&article=2877&context=smallsat&type=additional

http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1181&context=smallsat

http://messenger.jhuapl.edu/spacecraft/thermal.html

http://messenger.jhuapl.edu/spacecraft/power.html

http://messenger.jhuapl.edu/the_mission/mission_design.html

http://messenger.jhuapl.edu/instruments/index.html

http://messenger.jhuapl.edu/the_mission/orbit.html

http://www.clyde-space.com/documents/1805

Supplemental Slides


Decadal Survey Recommendations

• Flagship Missions: ($2.5B cap) Probably only 1 - 2• Mars Astrobiology Explorer-Cacher (MAX-C)

• Jupiter Europa Orbiter (JEO)

• Uranus Orbiter and Probe

• Enceladus Orbiter or Venus Climate Mission

• New Frontiers Missions: ($1B cap) Probably only 1 - 2• Choose one:

• Comet Surface Sample Return

• Lunar South Pole Sample Return

• Saturn Probe

• Trojan Asteroid Tour and Rendezvous

• Venus In Situ Explorer

• Choose next one from remaining above candidates plus:• Io Observer

• Lunar Geophysical Network


Mercury CubeSat Concept of Operations

Problem Definition

Space missions are expensive!

How can we build small spacecraft based on the

CubeSat design standard to use in deep space

missions?

Propulsion

Power

Communications


Project Plan and Schedule (Step 3)

DescriptionPlanned

Start Date

Planned

End Date

Planned

Duration

Actual

Start Date

Actual

End Date

Project Proposal 9/8/2015 9/15/2015 1 week 9/8/2015 9/15/2015

Project Presentation Outline 9/10/2015 9/17/2015 1 week 9/10/2015 9/17/2015

Background research (history, related

projects, Decadal Survey, CubeSat

advancements)

9/15/2015 9/22/2015 1 week 9/17/2015 9/23/2015

Customer CONOPS, Stakeholders, and

Requirements9/15/2015 9/25/2015 1.5 weeks 9/15/2015 10/8/2015

Alternative Architectures (operational and

system views) and Measures of Effectiveness9/22/2015 9/29/2015 1 week 9/29/2015 10/8/2015

Risks and Mitigations 9/22/2015 10/2/2015 1.5 weeks 9/29/2015 11/2/2015

Trade Studies (Power, Communications,

Propulsion)9/22/2015 10/6/2015 2 weeks 9/22/2015 10/31/2015

Integration, Verification, and Validation 9/29/2015 10/6/2015 1 week 9/29/2015 11/2/2015

Cost Analysis 9/29/2015 10/13/2015 2 weeks 9/29/2015 10/13/2015

Ethics 10/8/2015 10/15/2015 1 week 10/8/2015 10/15/2015

Lessons Learned 10/8/2015 10/15/2015 1 week 10/8/2015 11/2/2015

Finish Draft of Presentation 10/8/2015 10/15/2015 1 week 10/1/2015 10/17/2015

Write Draft of Report 10/1/2015 10/15/2015 2 weeks 10/8/2015 10/17/2015

Address Advisor Comments on Presentation

and Report10/15/2015 11/12/2015 4 weeks 10/15/2015 11/10/2015

Dry Run Presentation 11/12/2015 12/6/2015 3.5 weeks 11/2/2015 12/1/2015

Finalize Project Presentation 11/12/2015 12/7/2015 3.5 weeks 11/2/2015 12/2/2015

Finalize Project Report 11/12/2015 12/7/2015 3.5 weeks 10/15/2015 12/2/2015


Proposed Payload Block Diagram

Karen Grothe 62

Infrared Spectrometer Laser Altimeter

Command & Data Handling Subsystem

Commands Commands DataData

12/1/2015

Proposed Electrical Power Subsystem Block Diagram

Karen Grothe 63

Solar Panel 3

Solar Panel 2

Solar Panels

Power Management

Circuits

Spacecraft Ground

Battery Charge Regulator

Spacecraft Battery

Power Distribution

Module

AttitudeDetermination

& Control Subsystem


Payload

Thermal Control

Subsystem

Command & Data Handling

Subsystem

Power Subsystem Architecture (Simplified)

12/1/2015

Proposed Communication Subsystem

Block Diagram

Karen Grothe 64

Command & Data Handling Subsystem

X-Band Transponder

Deployable High Gain Antenna

Commands

Telemetry Inputs Mission Data

Commands from Earth

12/1/2015

Proposed ADCS Block Diagram

Karen Grothe 65

On-Board ComputerADCS Function

Sun Sensors

Star Trackers

Attitude Determination

Attitude Control

Reaction Wheels

IMUThrusters

12/1/2015

Proposed Propulsion Subsystem Block Diagram

Karen Grothe 66

Ionic Liquid Propellant

Flow Control Valve

Electrospray Thrusters

Command & Data Handling

Subsystem

12/1/2015

Cost AnalysisProposed Work Breakdown Structure

1.0 Program Level

1.1 Program Management - Analogy

1.2 Systems Engineering - Analogy

1.3 System Integration and Test - Analogy

1.4 Quality Assurance - Analogy

2.0 Spacecraft

2.1 Spacecraft Bus

2.1.1 Structure - SSCM

2.1.2 Thermal Control Subsystem – SSCM

2.1.3 Attitude Determination and Control Subsystem –

SSCM

2.1.4 Electrical Power Subsystem – SSCM

2.1.5 Propulsion Subsystem – SSCM

2.1.6 Communication Subsystem – Extrapolation from

Actuals

2.1.7 Command and Data Handling Subsystem –

Extrapolation from Actuals

2.1.8 Integration, Assembly, and Test - Analogy

2.1.9 Flight Software (for controlling the spacecraft) –

COCOMO tool

2.2 Payload – SSCM

2.2.1 Instruments – NASA Instrument Cost Model (NICM)

2.2.2 Mission Software (for controlling the payload) -

COCOMO tool

2.3 Spacecraft Integration, Assembly, and Test -

SSCM

3.0 Launch Segment

3.1 Launch Vehicle Integration – Analogy to similar

missions

3.2 Launch Operations – Analogy to similar

missions

4.0 Ground Segment

4.1 Communication Services – Analogy to similar

missions

4.2 Flight Operations – Analogy to similar missions

4.3 Network Operations - Analogy to similar

missions

4.4 Data Processing - Analogy to similar missions

5.0 Ground Handling Equipment and

System Test Equipment – SSCM


Verification of Requirements

1. Requirement: Spacecraft payload shall be appropriate to investigate surface volatiles in the polar regions of Mercury.

• Verification Method: Analysis

• Needs: Preliminary data on ice in the polar craters from MESSENGER mission.

• Criteria: Spectrometer used on mission will be capable of measuring the volatiles predicted to exist from MESSENGER data.

2. Requirement: Spacecraft shall fit into 12U CubeSat size specification to allow for use of a containerized satellite dispenser (CSD).

• Verification Method: Demonstration

• Needs: Accurate CSD mockup to verify fit

• Criteria: Spacecraft meets CubeSat Specification dimensions and fits in CSD mockup.



3. Requirement: Spacecraft lifetime shall be at least 8 years to allow spacecraft time to reach Mercury’s orbit and perform at least one year of science.

• Verification Method: Analysis

• Needs: Lifetime data of spacecraft bus and payload

• Criteria: Spacecraft is predicted to meet lifetime requirement based on analysis of the lifetime data of individual components and the spacecraft bus

4. Requirement: Spacecraft shall be capable of communicating with Earth from Mercury’s orbit either directly or via relay satellite.

• Verification Method: Test and demonstration on orbit

• Needs: Test messages

• Criteria: Successful communication



5. Requirement: Thermal management shall protect

components from the extreme temperatures present near

Mercury.

• Verification Method: Environmental lab testing

• Needs: Environmental test procedure

• Criteria: Components withstand testing at extreme temperatures

6. Requirement: Spacecraft shall be capable of providing

power and fault protection to sensor payload.

• Verification Method: Lab testing

• Needs: Test procedure including some failure modes

• Criteria: Spacecraft provides appropriate levels of power and fault

protection to subsystems.


Documents

KGrothe Capstone Project Final Presentation