DOCSLIB.ORG

Delft University of Technology Cubesats to Pocketqubes

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Delft University of Technology Cubesats to Pocketqubes Delft University of Technology Cubesats to pocketqubes Opportunities and challenges Speretta, Stefano; Pérez Soriano, Tatiana; Bouwmeester, Jasper; Carvajal Godínez, Johan; Menicucci, Alessandra; Watts, Trevor; Sundaramoorthy, Prem; Guo, Jian; Gill, Eberhard Publication date 2016 Document Version Submitted manuscript Published in Proceedings of the 67th International Astronautical Congress (IAC) Citation (APA) Speretta, S., Pérez Soriano, T., Bouwmeester, J., Carvajal Godínez, J., Menicucci, A., Watts, T., Sundaramoorthy, P., Guo, J., & Gill, E. (2016). Cubesats to pocketqubes: Opportunities and challenges. In Proceedings of the 67th International Astronautical Congress (IAC): Guadalajara, Mexico [IAC-16-B4.7.5_A] IAF. Important note To cite this publication, please use the final published version (if applicable). Please check the document version above. Copyright Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons. Takedown policy Please contact us and provide details if you believe this document breaches copyrights. We will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. This work is downloaded from Delft University of Technology. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to a maximum of 10. CUBESATS TO POCKETQUBES: OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES Dr. Stefano Speretta* Delft University of Technology (TU Delft), The Netherlands, [email protected] Mrs. Tatiana Perez Soriano Delft University of Technology (TU Delft), The Netherlands, [email protected] Mr. Jasper Bouwmeester Delft University of Technology (TU Delft), The Netherlands, [email protected] Mr. Johan Carvajal-Godinez Delft University of Technology (TU Delft), The Netherlands, [email protected] Dr. Alessandra Menicucci Delft University of Technology (TU Delft), The Netherlands, [email protected] Mr. Trevor Watts Delft University of Technology (TU Delft), The Netherlands, [email protected] Mr. Prem Sundaramoorthy Delft University of Technology (TU Delft), The Netherlands, [email protected] Dr. Jian Guo Delft University of Technology (TU Delft), The Netherlands, [email protected] Prof. Eberhard Gill Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands, [email protected] * Corresponding Author Abstract In the last two decades, CubeSats have changed the perception of satellite missions aided by standardization and usage of commercial-off-the-shelf components. CubeSats have also proven the feasibility of low cost and short development time space missions. The PocketQube with a form factor of 5x5x5 cm has been proposed as the next class of spacecraft to benefit from miniaturization. This paper presents a comparison between the two standards and analyzes the impact of miniaturization on spacecraft design and performance. At satellite level, the reduction of volume has a tremendous impact on the available power and makes energy management and efficiency critical. Thermal issues become important due to the reduced thermal capacitance, leading to higher thermal swings and larger temperature variations than CubeSats. The other important impact on the satellite bus is the reduced communication capacity due to several reasons: the reduced volume limits the available antenna size and also the available power available. At mission level, other factors have a substantial impact: de-orbit time becomes a major criterion in the launch selection process to comply with orbital debris policy. The volume reduction also affects the radar cross-section making the satellite more difficult to detected for space surveillance radars. Despite these challenges, PocketQubes are an attractive standard currently for academic and research groups as a way to reduce the cost and development time considerably. Payload capabilities also can force a paradigm shift from single to multiple satellites more than it was already happening with CubeSats: PocketQubes could better fit certain niches where high spatial or temporal resolutions are required instead of full resolution. Distributed space weather monitoring could be an interesting application where specific phenomena could benefit from multi-point sensing. All these strong points can also be coupled with a bigger satellite to complement and enhance its capabilities. Delfi-PQ is a PocketQube currently being developed at TU Delft using an agile approach, contrary to the typical V-model design. Shorter life cycle development benefits students, allowing them to get more involved in every iteration. The reduction in cost and development cycle increases the launch frequency. Incremental engineering becomes fundamental, also providing benefits on the reliability side because flight experience becomes more frequent than when following traditional development strategies. End-to-end development motivates students and provides them with a better insight into real-world engineering opportunities and training experiences. With this strategy, technical and educational objectives are more aligned, and the integration of such a project in the curriculum is facilitated. Keywords: PocketQube CubeSat agile development Delfi-PQ Page 1 of 10 1. Introduction constant and it was shown in both cases). The inertia CubeSats have been getting a steady growth in has been calculated as the inertia of a cube supposing a popularity in the past years after they were first constant density D. The magnetic moment has been proposed in 1999. The concept of a modular standard considered for his implications with attitude control and coupled with a simple and (relatively) inexpensive is expected to be generated by a coil (magnetorquer). deployment system allowed an institution with limited budgets a direct access to space [1]. CubeSats are based on standard modules of 10x10x10 cm (also called units Table 1: Length scaling of key parameters or just U) that can be coupled together in different fashions. CubeSat PocketQube In the push to further democratize this, PocketQubes 1 were proposed to evolve regarding reducing costs and Side � � system size: now the core building block has been 2 1 shrunk to 5x5x5 cm (small enough to fit in someone Area �& �& pocket, as the name was originally conceived) [2]. 4 1 Both standards became the most popular for two Volume �( �( different class of satellites: CubeSats typically span 8 � from 1kg till 10kg in mass (but bigger and heavier Mass ��( �( examples have also been proposed) while PocketQubes 8 � target the range between 0.1 and 1kg. Solar power ��& �& This paper presents a comparison between the 4 different satellite classes rather than on the specific ��, ��, Inertia standards or configurations to highlight challenges and 6 64 opportunities for PocketQubes. In section 2 the Magnetic 6� 2 � dependence of the key features of size are discussed, moment ��( 3 ��( and the ability of current systems to track these tiny spacecraft is addressed. Delfi-PQ is the PocketQube currently being developed at the Delft University of Technology. The 2.1 Satellite Tracking preliminary design of Delfi-PQ is presented in section 3 This section focuses on the tracking of PocketQubes and the development strategy for the PocketQube line of and CubeSats, analyzing a real case: the launch of the spacecraft is provided in section 4. Dnepr-19 on Nov 21st, 2013. This launch was the first (and only one at the time of writing) with PocketQubes 2. Size comparison and CubeSats. 31 satellites were launched, 23 of them Several parameters can be used to characterize the directly from the deck and 8 of them from a micro- different satellite classes but, since both “standards” are satellite (UNISAT-5) 49 minutes after deployment from focused towards a small building block that can be the rocket [3][4]. The comparison is performed based on repeated multiple times, we will look at the basic the data provided by NORAD by analyzing the TLE of building block. In CubeSats, as it was already pointed each satellite [5]. Position accuracy cannot be estimated out, this is a 10x10x10 cm cube while in the at this stage due to the lack of a second reference, like a PocketQubes this is a 5x5x5 cm cube. GPS receiver onboard some of the satellites, but To make an effective comparison, a set of common tracking update rate and TLE acquisition time can be and constant factors have been considered. For example, compared. satellite side (L) that was established to 10cm (as in The first parameter considered was the acquisition CubeSats); satellite density (D) is assumed to be time, defined as the time in between satellite constant due to the common concept the satellite are deployment from the rocket (07:11 UTC on Nov 21st, built on; solar power conversion efficiency (η) 2013) and the time the first TLE was available for each considering that the same type of solar cells is used. A satellite. Figure 1 shows the acquisition time for all the brief comparison is presented in Table 1 based on these satellites deployed as a function of the approximate constants. Side, area and volume are straightforward, satellite cross-section (estimated from public while other quantities require a bit more investigation. information about the satellite size). PocketQubes and Solar power depends on the available area for solar cells CubeSats are highlighted in the figure showing no major (making the hypothesis of a constant fill factor) and on difference in object acquisition performances. It can the conversion efficiency (which is supposed to be also be seen that statistically bigger objects are acquired Page 2 of 10 first, and smaller objects took on average more time significant. It is interesting to notice that the TLE update (with exceptions, as is evident from the figure). rate for nano- and pico- satellites increased after August Most likely due to the limited ∆v provided during 2015 (an improvement in update rate can be noticed this deployment, the satellites remained too close to be from Figure 3 for small satellites probably due to a detected. After approximately nine days most of the system upgrade).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Gauss Approach to the Lean-Satellite Methodology
    INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP ON LEAN SATELLITE KITAKYUSHU, JAN 22-24 2018 GAUSS APPROACH TO THE LEAN-SATELLITE METHODOLOGY 2018 Riccardo Di Roberto - GAUSS Srl GAUSS Srl History q Early 1990: G.A.U.S.S. (Gruppo di Astrodinamica dell’Università degli studi La Sapienza) was established as a Laboratory of the School of Aerospace Engineering in La Sapienza Rome University. The purpose was to involve directly the students in the design and the manufacturing of University Microsatellites. q Up to 2012: Six microsatellites have been developed and launched into orbitwith Dnepr and Vega launch vehicles. q 2012: Starting from the experience and the enthusiasm grown at the School of Aerospace Engineering, some professors, researchers and students decided to continue the tradition of the school in the private sector. The Italian limited liability company G.A.U.S.S. Srl (Group of Astrodynamics for the Use of Space Systems) was founded. q 2013-2014: GAUSS Srl realized the innovated idea of an autonomous micro-platform able to launch nanosatellites as CubeSats. Since then, two micro-platforms, UniSat-5 and UniSat-6, have carried into space 12 nanosatellites. q 2016 onwards: UniSat-7 micro-platform, with several CubeSats onboard, is under development. GAUSS Approach to the Lean-Satellite Methodology– Riccardo Di Roberto, GAUSS Srl GAUSS Srl History Unisat Unisat-2 Unisat-3 Unisat-4 EduSat UniC-GG 26 Sep 20 Dec 29 Jun 26 Jul 17 Aug 13 Feb 2000 2002 2004 2006 2011 2012 GAUSS Approach to the Lean-Satellite Methodology– Riccardo Di Roberto, GAUSS Srl CubeSats
    [Show full text]
  • Satellite Constellations - 2021 Industry Survey and Trends
    [SSC21-XII-10] Satellite Constellations - 2021 Industry Survey and Trends Erik Kulu NewSpace Index, Nanosats Database, Kepler Communications [email protected] ABSTRACT Large satellite constellations are becoming reality. Starlink has launched over 1600 spacecraft in 2 years since the launch of the first batch, Planet has launched over 450, OneWeb more than 200, and counting. Every month new constellation projects are announced, some for novel applications. First part of the paper focuses on the industry survey of 251 commercial satellite constellations. Statistical overview of applications, form factors, statuses, manufacturers, founding years is presented including early stage and cancelled projects. Large number of commercial entities have launched at least one demonstrator satellite, but operational constellations have been much slower to follow. One reason could be that funding is commonly raised in stages and the sustainability of most business models remains to be proven. Second half of the paper examines constellations by selected applications and discusses trends in appli- cations, satellite masses, orbits and manufacturers over the past 5 years. Earliest applications challenged by NewSpace were AIS, Earth Observation, Internet of Things (IoT) and Broadband Internet. Recent years have seen diversification into majority of applications that have been planned or performed by governmental or military satellites, and beyond. INTRODUCTION but they are regarded to be fleets not constellations. There were much fewer Earth Observation com- NewSpace Index has tracked commercial satellite panies in 1990s and 2000s when compared to com- constellations since 2016. There are over 251 entries munications and unclear whether any large constel- as of May 2021, which likely makes it the largest lations were planned.
    [Show full text]
  • Pocketqube Standard Issue 1 7Th of June, 2018
    The PocketQube Standard Issue 1 7th of June, 2018 The PocketQube Standard June 7, 2018 Contributors: Organization Name Authors Reviewers TU Delft S. Radu S. Radu TU Delft M.S. Uludag M.S. Uludag TU Delft S. Speretta S. Speretta TU Delft J. Bouwmeester J. Bouwmeester TU Delft - A. Menicucci TU Delft - A. Cervone Alba Orbital A. Dunn A. Dunn Alba Orbital T. Walkinshaw T. Walkinshaw Gauss Srl P.L. Kaled Da Cas P.L. Kaled Da Cas Gauss Srl C. Cappelletti C. Cappelletti Gauss Srl - F. Graziani Important Note(s): The latest version of the PocketQube Standard shall be the official version. 2 The PocketQube Standard June 7, 2018 Contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Purpose .............................................................................................................................................................. 4 2. PocketQube Specification ......................................................................................................................................... 4 1.2 General requirements ....................................................................................................................................... 5 2.2 Mechanical Requirements ................................................................................................................................. 5 2.2.1 Exterior dimensions ..................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ground-Based Demonstration of Cubesat Robotic Assembly
    Ground-based Demonstration of CubeSat Robotic Assembly CubeSat Development Workshop 2020 Ezinne Uzo-Okoro, Mary Dahl, Emily Kiley, Christian Haughwout, Kerri Cahoy 1 Motivation: In-Space Small Satellite Assembly Why not build in space? GEO MEO LEO The standardization of electromechanical CubeSat components for compatibility with CubeSat robotic assembly is a key gap 2 Goal: On-Demand On-Orbit Assembled CubeSats LEO Mission Key Phases ➢ Ground Phase: Functional electro/mechanical prototype ➢ ISS Phase: Development and launch of ISS flight unit locker, with CubeSat propulsion option ➢ Free-Flyer Phase: Development of agile free-flyer “locker” satellite with robotic arms to assemble and deploy rapid response CubeSats GEO ➢ Constellation Phase: Development of strategic constellation of agile free-flyer “locker” satellites with robotic Internal View of ‘Locker’ Showing Robotic Assembly arms to autonomously assemble and deploy CubeSats IR Sensors VIS Sensors RF Sensors Propulsion Mission Overview Mission Significance • Orbit-agnostic lockers deploy on-demand robot-assembled CubeSats Provides many CubeSat configurations responsive to • ‘Locker’ is mini-fridge-sized spacecraft with propulsion rapidly evolving space needs capability ✓ Flexible: Selectable sensors and propulsion • Holds robotic arms, sensor, and propulsion modules for ✓ Resilient: Dexterous robot arms for CubeSat assembly 1-3U CubeSats without humans-in-the-loop on Earth and on-orbit Build • Improve response: >30 days to ~hours custom-configured CubeSats on Earth or in space saving
    [Show full text]
  • Spaceflight, Inc. General Payload Users Guide
    Spaceflight, Inc. SF‐2100‐PUG‐00001 Rev F 2015‐22‐15 Payload Users Guide Spaceflight, Inc. General Payload Users Guide 3415 S. 116th St, Suite 123 Tukwila, WA 98168 866.204.1707 spaceflightindustries.com i Spaceflight, Inc. SF‐2100‐PUG‐00001 Rev F 2015‐22‐15 Payload Users Guide Document Revision History Rev Approval Changes ECN No. Sections / Approved Pages CM Date A 2011‐09‐16 Initial Release Updated electrical interfaces and launch B 2012‐03‐30 environments C 2012‐07‐18 Official release Updated electrical interfaces and launch D 2013‐03‐05 environments, reformatted, and added to sections Updated organization and formatting, E 2014‐04‐15 added content on SHERPA, Mini‐SHERPA and ISS launches, updated RPA CG F 2015‐05‐22 Overall update ii Spaceflight, Inc. SF‐2100‐PUG‐00001 Rev F 2015‐22‐15 Payload Users Guide Table of Contents 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 7 1.1 Document Overview ........................................................................................................................ 7 1.2 Spaceflight Overview ....................................................................................................................... 7 1.3 Hardware Overview ......................................................................................................................... 9 1.4 Mission Management Overview .................................................................................................... 10 2 Secondary
    [Show full text]
  • Space Science Beyond the Cubesat
    Deepak, R., Twiggs, R. (2012): JoSS, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 3-7 (Feature article available at www.jossonline.com) www.DeepakPublishing.com www.JoSSonline.com Thinking Out of the Box: Space Science Beyond the CubeSat Ravi A. Deepak 1, Robert J. Twiggs 2 1 Taksha University, , 2 Morehead State University Abstract Over a decade ago, Professors Robert (Bob) Twiggs (then of Stanford University) and Jordi Puig-Suari (CalPoly- SLO) effected a major paradigm shift in space research with the development of the 10-cm CubeSat, helping to provide a new level of student accessibility to space science research once thought impossible. Seeking a means to provide students with hands-on satellite development skills during their limited time at university, and inspired by the successful deployment of six 1-kg, pico-satellites from Stanford’s Orbiting Picosatellite Automatic Launcher (OPAL) in 2000, Twiggs and Puig-Suari ultimately developed the 10-cm CubeSat. In 2003, the first successful CubeSat deployment into orbit demonstrated the very achievable possibilities that lay ahead. By 2008, 60 launch missions later, new industries had arisen around the CubeSat, creating new commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) satellite components and parts, and conventional launch resources became overwhelmed. This article recounts this history and related issues that arose, describes solutions to the issues and subsequent developments in the arena of space science (such as further miniaturization of space research tools), and provides a glimpse of Twiggs’ vision of the future of space research. Mavericks of Space Science With the development of the Cubesat over a decade ago, Bob Twiggs, at Stanford University (now faculty at Morehead State University), (Figure 1) and Jordi Puig-Suari, at California Polytechnic State University (CalPoly) (Figure 2), changed the paradigm of space research, helping to bring a new economy to space sci- ence that would provide accessibility once thought im- possible to University students around the globe.
    [Show full text]
  • Cubesat-Based Science Missions for Geospace and Atmospheric Research
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION (NSF) CUBESAT-BASED SCIENCE MISSIONS FOR GEOSPACE AND ATMOSPHERIC RESEARCH annual report October 2013 www.nasa.gov www.nsf.gov LETTERS OF SUPPORT 3 CONTACTS 5 NSF PROGRAM OBJECTIVES 6 GSFC WFF OBJECTIVES 8 2013 AND PRIOR PROJECTS 11 Radio Aurora Explorer (RAX) 12 Project Description 12 Scientific Accomplishments 14 Technology 14 Education 14 Publications 15 Contents Colorado Student Space Weather Experiment (CSSWE) 17 Project Description 17 Scientific Accomplishments 17 Technology 18 Education 18 Publications 19 Data Archive 19 Dynamic Ionosphere CubeSat Experiment (DICE) 20 Project Description 20 Scientific Accomplishments 20 Technology 21 Education 22 Publications 23 Data Archive 24 Firefly and FireStation 26 Project Description 26 Scientific Accomplishments 26 Technology 27 Education 28 Student Profiles 30 Publications 31 Cubesat for Ions, Neutrals, Electrons and MAgnetic fields (CINEMA) 32 Project Description 32 Scientific Accomplishments 32 Technology 33 Education 33 Focused Investigations of Relativistic Electron Burst, Intensity, Range, and Dynamics (FIREBIRD) 34 Project Description 34 Scientific Accomplishments 34 Education 34 2014 PROJECTS 35 Oxygen Photometry of the Atmospheric Limb (OPAL) 36 Project Description 36 Planned Scientific Accomplishments 36 Planned Technology 36 Planned Education 37 (NSF) CUBESAT-BASED SCIENCE MISSIONS FOR GEOSPACE AND ATMOSPHERIC RESEARCH [ 1 QB50/QBUS 38 Project Description 38 Planned Scientific Accomplishments 38 Planned
    [Show full text]
  • Signature Redacted a U Th O R
    A Systems Analysis of CubeSat Constellations with Distributed Sensors by Ayesha Georgina Hein B.S. Astronautical Engineering United States Air Force Academy, 2015 Submitted to the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Aeronautics and Astronautics at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY June 2017 @ Massachusetts Institute of Technology 2017. All rights reserved. Signature redacted A u th o r ................................ .--- - -- - - - - - - - - Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics May 25, 2017 Certified by ...................... Signature redacted Y Kerri Cahoy Associate Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics Thesis Supervisor Accepted by .................. Signature redacted Yodisein . Marzouk ARCHNES Associate Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics Graduate Program Committee MASSACHUS ITUTE Chair, OF TECHNOLOGY JUL 11 2017 LIBRARIES 7 Disclaimer: The views expressed in this thesis are those of the author and do not .reflect the official policy or position of the United States Air Force, the United States Department of Defense, or the United States Government. 2 A Systems Analysis of CubeSat Constellations with Distributed Sensors by Ayesha Georgina Hein Submitted to the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics on May 25, 2017, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Aeronautics and Astronautics Abstract This thesis explores the use of CubeSat constellations as "gap fillers" and supple- ments to traditionally complex, multi-sensored satellites, increasing resiliency of the system at very low cost. In standard satellite acquisitions, satellites can take years and billions of dollars to reach operational status. Should there be delays in schedule or on-orbit failures, gaps in data integral to US operations can be lost.
    [Show full text]
  • L-8: Enabling Human Spaceflight Exploration Systems & Technology
    Johnson Space Center Engineering Directorate L-8: Enabling Human Spaceflight Exploration Systems & Technology Development Public Release Notice This document has been reviewed for technical accuracy, business/management sensitivity, and export control compliance. It is Montgomery Goforth suitable for public release without restrictions per NF1676 #37965. November 2016 www.nasa.gov 1 NASA’s Journey to Mars Engineering Priorities 1. Enhance ISS: Enhanced missions and systems reliability per ISS customer needs 2. Accelerate Orion: Safe, successful, affordable, and ahead of schedule 3. Enable commercial crew success 4. Human Spaceflight (HSF) exploration systems development • Technology required to enable exploration beyond LEO • System and subsystem development for beyond LEO HSF exploration JSC Engineering’s Internal Goal for Exploration • Priorities are nice, but they are not enough. • We needed a meaningful goal. • We needed a deadline. • Our Goal: Get within 8 years of launching humans to Mars (L-8) by 2025 • Develop and mature the technologies and systems needed • Develop and mature the personnel needed L-8 Characterizing L-8 JSC Engineering: HSF Exploration Systems Development • L-8 Is Not: • A program to go to Mars • Another Technology Road-Mapping effort • L-8 Is: • A way to translate Agency Technology Roadmaps and Architectures/Scenarios into a meaningful path for JSC Engineering to follow. • A way of focusing Engineering’s efforts and L-8 identifying our dependencies • A way to ensure Engineering personnel are ready to step up
    [Show full text]
  • Space Biology Research and Biosensor Technologies: Past, Present, and Future †
    biosensors Perspective Space Biology Research and Biosensor Technologies: Past, Present, and Future † Ada Kanapskyte 1,2, Elizabeth M. Hawkins 1,3,4, Lauren C. Liddell 5,6, Shilpa R. Bhardwaj 5,7, Diana Gentry 5 and Sergio R. Santa Maria 5,8,* 1 Space Life Sciences Training Program, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA 94035, USA; [email protected] (A.K.); [email protected] (E.M.H.) 2 Biomedical Engineering Department, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA 3 KBR Wyle, Moffett Field, CA 94035, USA 4 Mammoth Biosciences, Inc., South San Francisco, CA 94080, USA 5 NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA 94035, USA; [email protected] (L.C.L.); [email protected] (S.R.B.); [email protected] (D.G.) 6 Logyx, LLC, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA 7 The Bionetics Corporation, Yorktown, VA 23693, USA 8 COSMIAC Research Institute, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131, USA * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-650-604-1411 † Presented at the 1st International Electronic Conference on Biosensors, 2–17 November 2020; Available online: https://iecb2020.sciforum.net/. Abstract: In light of future missions beyond low Earth orbit (LEO) and the potential establishment of bases on the Moon and Mars, the effects of the deep space environment on biology need to be examined in order to develop protective countermeasures. Although many biological experiments have been performed in space since the 1960s, most have occurred in LEO and for only short periods of time. These LEO missions have studied many biological phenomena in a variety of model organisms, and have utilized a broad range of technologies.
    [Show full text]
  • The Washington Institute for Near East Policy August
    THE WASHINGTON INSTITUTE FOR NEAR EAST POLICY n AUGUST 2020 n PN84 PHOTO CREDIT: REUTERS © 2020 THE WASHINGTON INSTITUTE FOR NEAR EAST POLICY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. FARZIN NADIMI n April 22, 2020, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Aerospace Force (IRGC-ASF) Olaunched its first-ever satellite, the Nour-1, into orbit. The launch, conducted from a desert platform near Shahrud, about 210 miles northeast of Tehran, employed Iran’s new Qased (“messenger”) space- launch vehicle (SLV). In broad terms, the launch showed the risks of lifting arms restrictions on Iran, a pursuit in which the Islamic Republic enjoys support from potential arms-trade partners Russia and China. Practically, lifting the embargo could facilitate Iran’s unhindered access to dual-use materials and other components used to produce small satellites with military or even terrorist applications. Beyond this, the IRGC’s emerging military space program proves its ambition to field larger solid-propellant missiles. Britain, France, and Germany—the EU-3 signatories of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, as the 2015 Iran nuclear deal is known—support upholding the arms embargo until 2023. The United States, which has withdrawn from the deal, started a process on August 20, 2020, that could lead to a snapback of all UN sanctions enacted since 2006.1 The IRGC’s Qased space-launch vehicle, shown at the Shahrud site The Qased-1, for its part, succeeded over its three in April. stages in placing the very small Nour-1 satellite in a near circular low earth orbit (LEO) of about 425 km. The first stage involved an off-the-shelf Shahab-3/ Ghadr liquid-fuel missile, although without the warhead section, produced by the Iranian Ministry of Defense.2 According to ASF commander Gen.
    [Show full text]
  • Thermal Analysis of the SMOG-1 Pocketqube Satellite
    Applied Thermal Engineering 139 (2018) 506–513 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Applied Thermal Engineering journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apthermeng Thermal analysis of the SMOG-1 PocketQube satellite T ⁎ Róbert Kovácsa,b, Viktor Józsaa, a Department of Energy Engineering, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, H-1111 Budapest, Műegyetem rkp. 3., Hungary b Department of Theoretical Physics, Wigner Research Centre for Physics, H-1121 Budapest, Konkoly-Thege Miklós út 29-33., Hungary HIGHLIGHTS • Thermal analysis of the SMOG-1 picosatellite is presented. • Results of a simple thermal network and finite element methods were compared. • The sensitive battery just fulfills all the requirements for continuous operation. • The thermal network model underpredicts the temperature due to its simplicity. • A simple thermal network is able to predict the temperature variations appropriately. ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: CubeSats have revolutionized the space industry in the past two decades. Its successor, the PocketQube class Picosatellite seems to be a lower size limit for a satellite which can operate continuously and can be received by radio Satellite amateur equipment. The present paper discusses the simulation of the thermal environment of the SMOG-1 Finite element method PocketQube satellite at low Earth orbit by both thermal network and finite element models. The major findings Thermal network of the analyses are the following. Even a single node per printed circuit board model can provide adequate Thermal analysis information about the thermal behavior without tuning the physical parameters. By applying a finite element Low Earth orbit model with few magnitudes more nodes, the predicted inner temperature increased as the losses were reduced in the radiation-dominant environment compared to the thermal network model.
    [Show full text]