University Nanosat Program

Nanosat-5 KickoffFriday 26 January 2007

AFOSR AIAAAFRL/VS

Briefing Outline

• Introductions– Program Partners

– Universities

• Program Overview– Description

– Goals / Objectives

• NS-5 User’s Guide Review– Program Schedule

– Competition Details

• Design Guidance Details– Requirements

– System Interfaces

– Testing

– Hardware & Vendors2 of 16

University Nanosat-5 Program POC’s

Program PI’s:

Kent Miller – AFOSRkent.miller@afosr.af.mil

Jayesh Hirami – AIAAjayeshh@aiaa.org

Scott Franke – AFRL/VSscott.franke@kirtland.af.mil

UNP Program Manager

Jared Clementsjared.clements@kirtland.af.mil

UNP Systems Engineer

(…Jeff Ganley)Nanosat Guru / Structural

(officially off the program now)

University PI’s:Chris Kitts – Santa Clara University

ckitts@me.scu.edu

Demoz Gebre-Ezglabher – University of Minnesota

gebre@aem.umn.edu

Glenn Lightsey – University of Texas at Austin

lightsey@mail.utexas.edu

Helen Reed – Texas A&M University

helen.reed@tamu.edu

Mike Swartwout – Washington University - St. Louis

mas@me.wustl.edu

Chuck Swenson – Utah State University

Charles.Swenson@usu.edu

Chris Koehler – University of Colorado – Boulder

Koehler@colorado.edu

Sven Bilen – Pennsylvania State University

sbilen@psu.edu

Theodore Fritz – Boston University

fritz@bu.edu

Dave Klumpar – Montana State University

klump@physics.montana.edu

L. Brad King – Michigan Tech University

lbking@mtu.edu3 of 16

University Nanosat-5 (NS-5)Program Overview

• OBJECTIVES

– Future Workforce Training Through a National Student Satellite Design and Fabrication Competition

– Development of the Small Satellite Technology Area, Including Subsystems Development and Standard Deployment Systems with Rapid Launch Capability at Low Cost

• DESCRIPTION

– Satellite Design and Fabrication Competition to be Sponsored by AIAA (Recurring 2 Year Cycle) – Winning design selected for space flight

– AFOSR to Provide Nominal Funding to Universities to Participate in the Competition

– AFRL/VS and NASA will Provide Design and Safety Related Guidance to the Participating Universities

– AFRL/VS will Integrate and Test Winning University Nanosat

4 of 16

NANOSAT-4U CincinnatiU Minnesota

U Central FloridaSanta Clara U

Cornell U Missouri - Rolla

Texas A&MNew Mexico State

Washington U - St. LouisUtah State UT Austin

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

NS-3 Competition

NS-4 Competition

NS-5 Competition

NANOSAT-3 UT Austin

Washington U - St. LouisMichigan TechArizona State

Montana State - Bozeman Penn State

Taylor UU Colorado, BoulderU Hawaii at Manoa

U MichiganWorcester Polytechnic

New Mexico State Utah State

NS-6 CompetitionNS-3 Flight Build / Ops / Flight Readying

NS-3 I&T

NS-4 / Ops / Flight Readying

NS-4 I&T

FASTRAC Delivered to AFRL

NS-5 I&TNS-4 Delivered to AFRL

NS-5 / Ops / Flight Readying

NS-5 Delivered to AFRL

NS-5 Competition

Ns-5 Kickoff

Jan 07

Ns-5 SCR

Apr 07

Ns-5 PDR

Aug 07

Ns-5

CDR

Jan-Mar 08

Ns-5 PQR

Aug 08

Ns-5 FCR

Jan 09

5 of 16

University Nanosat-5Design Competition Highlights

2 year effort

Kick Off

Competition Begins

Jan (Feb) 07 Jan 09

Flight Competition Review

Winner is selected

09-10

FLIGHT

Design, build, test protoflight nanosats

Document and update

Winner delivers flight H/W

Integrate & test at AFRL

All candidates build fully-functioning Protoflight Nanosat All candidates participate in conferences, reviews, briefings Emphasis on open design process, less on competitive “secrets” Winner selected for USAF Space Test Program Flight Second and third place receive awards (TBD)

Design Reviews

USAF/NASA feedback & guidance

6 of 16

Schedule (from NS-5 User’s Guide)

7 of 16

Milestone Venue (Tentative) Date

Kickoff Meeting Telecon Jan 2007

Systems Engineering Seminar Series Telecon Jan-May 07

System Concept Review (SCR) Telecon Apr/May 07

Student Hands-on Training Workshop (SHOT I) University of Colorado at Boulder June 07

Preliminary Design Review (PDR) Small Sat Conference, Logan UT Aug 07

Satellite Fabrication Class Air Force Research Lab, Albuquerque NM Fall 07

Critical Design Review (CDR) On-site at each participating University Jan-Apr 08

SHOT II Workshop University of Colorado at Boulder TBD (anticipated June 08)

Proto-Qualification Review (PQR) Small Sat Conference, Logan, UT Aug 08

Flight Competition Review (FCR) TBD Jan 09

Nanosat Final Integration Review(s) On-site at the university/universities Feb-May 09

Nanosat Flight Unit Delivery to AFRL Air Force Research Lab, Albuquerque NM June 09

Accelerated Integrated Testing of Flight Hardware Air Force Research Lab, Albuquerque NM June-July 09

Launch TBD TBD

User’s GuideDesign Competition

• Evaluation Criteria (See User’s Guide, Section 3)– Student Participation and Education (40 points)

• Student involvement at all levels: Management, Design, Test, Assembly

• Educational outreach to students in Grades K-12

• Participation at Program Milestone Events

• Involvement of students from various disciplines, undergraduate and graduate

– Technical Relevance / Excellence (35 points)

• Relevance to the Air Force

• See User’s Guide, Appendix B: Tech Areas of Interest

– Flyability (25 points)

• Mission success and requirements verification

• Competition Final Deliverable Items– Protoflight Nanosat

– Detailed documentation including analysis and test results, drawings, reports, budgets, materials list, etc: see User’s Guide, Table 2-2 Design Review Requirements

8 of 16

Nanosat Design Requirements

• Envelope: 60 X 60 X 50 cm

• Mass: 50 kg, including Lightband separation system attachment bolts.

– these are MAX limits, smaller is acceptable

• Any satellite geometry is acceptable provided that it meets requirements

• Pay close attention to accrued program experience:

– User’s Guide Chapter 6

• Especially tables 6-6 and 6-7: Do’s and Do not’s

– User’s Guide Appendix C: Power System/Battery Box Design Guidance

9 of 16

Mechanical Interface

• 15” Diameter Circular Bolt Pattern – 24, ¼-28 bolts.

• Nanosat interface must accommodate Lightband™ Nanosat Separation System (NSS) contact area and meet flatness requirements.

• Lightband Upper Adapter Ring will remain attached to the Nanosat after separation.

• See User’s Guide figures 5-1 and 6-1

Lightband total weight = 6.18 Lbf

Upper Ring = 1.76 Lbf

Lower Ring = 4.42 Lbf

10 of 16

Typical Motorized Lightband

Motor Assembly Upper Ring (Stays with Nanosat)

Lower Ring

Separation spring

11 of 16

Electrical Interface

• Two or four 15 pin separation connectors will be mounted on the Lightband at the Satellite Separation Plane (SSP).

• A wiring pigtail will be provided to universities for connection to the Nanosat.

• Lightband will provide separation detection at the SSP.

• Expected Nanosat uses for separation connectors:

• Ground test and Maintenance

• Monitoring of Safety Features

• Nanosat structural ground connections

• NSS separation detection

12 of 16

Analysis and Test

BehaviorResponsibility

Analysis Test

Structural Strength (Limit, Ultimate) Universities, AFRL AFRL

Stiffness (Modal Frequency) Universities, AFRL Universities, AFRL

Random Vibration / Acoustic AFRL

Shock AFRL

Mass properties Universities, AFRL Universities, AFRL

Thermal Vacuum Universities, AFRL AFRL

Pressure Profile Universities, AFRL

Bake out AFRL

Envelope Verification Universities, AFRL Universities, AFRL

EMI/EMC (includes electrical self-compatibility) Universities Universities, AFRL

Electrical System Aliveness and Functional Tests Universities

13 of 16

Documentation

• All universities are required to maintain documentation IAW the NS-5 Program CM plan (Document # UN5-0002).

• Drawings

• Certification Logs

• Change notices

• Certificates of Compliance

• All Universities are required to compile a materials list.

• Materials must meet outgassing, flammability, and stress corrosion cracking requirements

• All universities are required to submit information required for design reviews and Flight Competition.

14 of 16

Documentation Responsibilities

Documentation All Universities Flight Competition Winner

Design Review Support Documentation(See User’s Guide Table 2-2)

X X

CM Documentation including: Engineering Definition Program Management/Systems Engineering

Data & Documentation As-built Data Analysis Documentation Test Plans, Procedures and Reports Certification Logs

X X

Materials List X X

Integrated Payload Documents XNote: Inputs only.

AFRL is responsible for overall preparation.

15 of 16

Notes on H/W & Vendors

• Some vendors have no exposure to spaceflight rigor

– No familiarity w/ Certs of compliance / conformance

• Typically, solar panels & extra separation systems (besides NSS) are the most expensive and needed H/W

– Carefully weigh options / mission reqs for these items

– Develop a good procedure early to lay up / fab solar panels

– Obtain “scrap” panels (sub-standard efficiency) from vendors

• Vendors do work with universities if asked

– Will supply prototypical h/w

– Like the “free” labor / tests of their products

• GPS systems (maybe others) are under ITAR (Intl Traffic in Arms Regs)

– Any GPS hardware that is sent into orbit is considered export controlled if certain parameters (e.g. nav data above 60K ft / 1K knots) are operational

• Contact your congress person (funding)

16 of 16