Applying the Microspace Philosophy at the Norwegian Space Agency
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Applying the Microspace Philosophy at the Norwegian Space Agency Tyler Jones Engineer – Project Department [email protected] Overview • Space and Systems Engineering • A Few Words on “New Space” • Microspace Philosophy and «Big Space» • Microspace Project Structure and Phases • Application to AIS satellite system Space? Systems Engineering? Why space? Systems engineering? • A global perspective‐ the • Holistic approach‐ Technical Process ultimate high ground and Management Process • A clear view of the heavens‐ • Elicit and analyze user needs unobscured by the atmosphere • Determine requirements • A free‐fall environment‐ enables • Mission design advanced material development • Design synthesis • Abundant resources‐ solar energy and extraterrestrial • System validation materials • Lifecycle and stakeholder • The Final Frontier considerations A Few Words on «New Space» New Space refers to the emergence of private spaceflight companies and ventures that operate more or less independent of governments and traditional major contractors. • Commercially motivated, not political or socioeconomically • Private rather than governmental finance • Faster, Better, Cheaper ∵ Commercial ∴ Microspace «Big Space» Systems Engineering Global Navigation Satellite System 30x 700 kg satellites Engineering Reviewing Testing 1999 initial contract 18 years 2017 IOC Microspace Philosophy Reduce the development, platform, launch, and operations costs of useful satellite systems • Streamline large procurement processes to an “appropriate” level • Replace expensive space grade parts with industrial grade parts (COTS) • Heavy on‐board redundancy is replaced by multi‐platform redundancy • Extensive component and sub‐component test campaigns are replaced by integrated system test • Accepting the technical limitations, lifetime and risk associated with this design philosophy A 700 kg mission and acquisition program doesn’t scale to a 7 kg satellite! Microspace Systems Enginering 0/ A B C D E F ? Mission/ MD RFI MRR Function 1. 2. ITT PDR Engineering Requirements &Architecture 3. 4. Reviewing CDR Design FRR Testing Production Launch Exploitation Disposal Baselines Design to Build to As Built Streamline large procurement 2008 initial contract 2 years 2010 IOC processes to an “appropriate” level Phase 0 Phase A Produce a broad spectrum of ideas Determine the feasibility of proposed • Define User Group, mission needs, goals & system objectives • Perform trade studies to compare mission • Study range of mission concepts that contribute to goals and objectives concept options • Develop 1. Draft Mission Requirements • Draft 2. Project Development Plan Document, operations concept, and potential technology needs • Draft requirements to the subsystem level • Show that at least one mission concept • Define preliminary ICDs can work with feasibility study • Define mass, link, performance, data, power, thermal budgets, EMC Exit‐ Mission Definition (MD): select a baseline Concept of Operations . Mission Requirements Exit‐ Finalized MRD ready to start aquiring. Review (MRR) defines preliminary mission requirements captured in the Mission Requirements Document (MRD) Phase B Phase C Define the project in enough detail to Critical design of the system (and establish an initial baseline capable of its associated subsystems, meeting mission needs including operations systems) to meet requirements • Define and evaluate system architecture and preliminary design details to meet • Demonstrate that the detailed mission requirements system design meets requirements • Intention to Tender (ITT): Release project to procurement bids • Establish the ”build‐to” baseline • Evaluate and select contract bids • Begin fabrication of test and flight article components Exit‐ Preliminary Design Review (PDR): Exit‐ Critical Design Review (CDR) Review requirements, design and Review design drawings and test plans, operations to establish the “design‐to” decision to build flight design baseline. Freeze interfaces with final ICDs Phase D Phase E Build, integrate, and test the Implement the Mission Operations subsystems while developing Plan developed in earlier phases confidence that it will meet systems requirements • Launch the certified system • Perform Early Operations and Checkout to define In‐orbit performance to establish the • Perform assembly, integration, and operational “as‐deployed” baseline test • Conduct mission operations • Verify system meets requirements Exit‐ Complete Flight Readiness Review (FRR): Review system Phase F preparedness for launch and establishes the “as‐built” baseline Disposal of the system in a responsible manner. Orbital debris! Microspace and Reliability • Replace expensive space grade parts with industrial grade parts (COTS) • Heavy on‐board redundancy is replaced by multi‐platform redundancy 1.0 0.9 What kills satellites? 0.8 • People/ lack thereof 0.7 0.6 • Cost 0.5 99, 999 % • Politics Reliability 0.4 99, 995% • 0.3 99, 990% Failed Components 0.2 0.1 0.0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 Part Count Big Space vs. Microspace Failures Genisis 2004, mis‐mounted accelerometer Mars Climate Orbiter 1998‐1999, thruster units control Failure rate of microspace missions (2014) 45% for academia 77% for industry ☠ NOAA‐N Prime 2004, process control All satellites average 5‐10% ☠ ☠ Starlink 3 DOA ♀ Project Development Structure Support ‐Procurement User Group Project Manager ‐ Project Control ‐ Technical expertise Project Development Plan Mission Mission Manager System Manager System Satellite Manager Requirements Requirements Document Document Platform Prime Mission Data Launch Provider Processing Provider Contractor S/C Ops. Contractor Payload Prime Contractor Ground Segment Contractor AISSat‐1 Example Phase 0 • Define User Group, mission needs, goals and objectives Coastal Authority has responsibility for monitoring ship traffic in Norwegian waters • Mission concepts study Coastal antennas have limited range, AIS messages can be collected from space • Define operations concept, and technology needs • Simple, fly only an AIS receiver • Limit scope to the Arctic Accept Microspace Philosophy limitations 15 Phase A/B • Develop Mission Architecture • Leverage existing bus • Author MRD • Define sub‐system req’s • No death‐modes • ITT / award contract (6 months) • Close dialogue with payload developer, Bus provider and user from KO Replace expensive space grade parts with industrial grade parts (COTS) 16 Phase C/D • CDR Minimal documentation • Production, COTS bus Interface • N Tests performed at high levels EMC Vibe TVAC ⏱ 1,000 hrs Extensive component and sub‐component test campaigns are replaced by integrated system tests Phase E • Everyone forgets Ops, and the budget for it • Microspace satellites require less ”hands‐on” • Automation? Heavy on‐board redundancy is replaced by multi‐platform redundancy What is Next? NorSat‐TD NorSat‐4 Thruster VDES Antenna NorSat‐3 Useful Links and Referance Materials • Improving Mission Success of Cubesats https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/improving_mission_success_of_cubesats_‐ _tor‐2017‐01689.pdf • QB50 Lessons Learned https://www.colorado.edu/event/ippw2018/sites/default/files/attached‐files/21_‐ _qb50_ippw_2018_v1.pdf • DoD Perspective on CubeSats https://sites.nationalacademies.org/cs/groups/ssbsite/documents/webpage/ssb_166652.pdf • NASA State of the Art of Small Spacecraft Technology https://sst‐soa.arc.nasa.gov Summary (scope creep warning) • Space and Systems Engineering • A Few Words on “New Space” • Microspace Philosophy and «Big Space» • Microspace Project Structure and Phases • Reliabiliy • Failures • Application to AIS satellite system • What’s Next? • Useful References Thank you!.