University of Southampton Research Repository ePrints Soton Copyright © and Moral Rights for this thesis are retained by the author and/or other copyright owners. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder/s. The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given e.g. AUTHOR (year of submission) "Full thesis title", University of Southampton, name of the University School or Department, PhD Thesis, pagination http://eprints.soton.ac.uk UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON FACULTY OF ENGINEERING AND THE ENVIRONMENT Aeronautics, Astronautics and Computational Engineering Fractionated Satellites: A Systems Engineering Analysis by Benjamin Samuel Schwarz Thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy JULY 2014 i UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON ABSTRACT FACULTY OF ENGINEERING AND THE ENVIRONMENT Aeronautics, Astronautics and Computational Engineering Thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy FRACTIONATED SATELLITES: A SYSTEMS ENGINEERING ANALYSIS Benjamin Samuel Schwarz The current method of operating space-based assets involves the design and launch of large, monolithic spacecraft. These spacecraft are not responsive to failures or changes in mission requirements, as both require the launch of a completely new spacecraft. The concept of fractionated spacecraft was introduced in 2006 by the US Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) as a way of designing and operating space systems which is more responsive than current methods. The fractionated concept involves the decomposition of the traditional monolithic satellite into a number of free-flying spacecraft connected wirelessly. The free-flying satellites each carry a subset of the required subsystems and share their fractionated resources to achieve the mission objectives. Since 2006, studies of this concept have focused on analyses of the value and utility provided by fractionated spacecraft or on design studies of specific systems. This thesis addresses two key questions: Firstly, is fractionation a mission enabling technology? Secondly, can design rules and guidelines be developed for fractionated satellites to allow continuity of measurements to be maintained and launched mass minimised? The first question is addressed by studying a payload and system for measuring coastal salinity from space. This provides an initial opportunity to assess the fractionated concept from a systems engineering point of view. The second question is addressed by undertaking a more general analysis of fractionated architectures, building on the knowledge gained in development of the fractionated coastal salinity measurement system. A computer model was developed to simulate the lifetime of different fractionated architectures when subjected to subsystem failures. A local search algorithm was used to find fractionated architectures which gave the best compromise between mass launched versus the operational time over a 50 year lifetime. The results from the application of this model showed that architectures that are highly fractionated, containing several homogeneous satellites, best achieved this compromise. These findings provide a contrast to the heterogeneously fractionated architectures proposed by DARPA. When a fractionated architecture is first implemented, the technology required to fractionate all the spacecraft subsystems may not be available. Consequently, the key to the implementation of these first fractionated architectures will be to ensure that there is redundancy in the fractionated subsystems spread across the architecture. ii Table of contents Table of contents ............................................................................................................................... iii List of tables ........................................................................................................................................ v List of figures ...................................................................................................................................... vi DECLARATION OF AUTHORSHIP ..................................................................................................... x Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................................. xii Nomenclature .................................................................................................................................. xiii Acronyms ......................................................................................................................................... xvi 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1. What is a fractionated satellite? ......................................................................................... 1 1.1.1. Why use a fractionated approach? ............................................................................. 2 1.1.2. A fractionated response to failed spacecraft .............................................................. 3 1.1.3. Value ........................................................................................................................... 4 1.1.4. The Pleiades fractionated system ............................................................................... 6 1.2. Conclusions and research problem ..................................................................................... 6 1.2.1. The research problem ................................................................................................. 7 1.2.2. Structure of the thesis................................................................................................. 9 2. Fractionation: A mission enabling technology? ........................................................................ 10 2.1. Sea surface salinity and its measurement ........................................................................ 10 2.1.1. Why measure coastal salinity? .................................................................................. 10 2.1.2. Ocean salinity measurement by remote sensing ...................................................... 11 2.1.3. Aperture synthesis techniques for remote sensing .................................................. 14 2.1.4. Other ocean salinity measurement systems ............................................................. 20 2.1.5. Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 21 2.2. Design drivers and requirements ...................................................................................... 21 2.3. Method ............................................................................................................................. 22 2.3.1. Extending the Doppler Radiometer concept ............................................................ 23 2.4. Results ............................................................................................................................... 24 2.5. A fractionated coastal salinity measurement system ....................................................... 35 2.5.1. Requirements and system architecture .................................................................... 36 2.5.2. Summary and conclusions ........................................................................................ 47 3. Developing design principles for fractionated space systems .................................................. 51 3.1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 51 iii 3.2. Model structure ................................................................................................................ 53 3.3. The fractionation of spacecraft subsystems ..................................................................... 53 3.3.1. Communications ....................................................................................................... 54 3.3.2. On-board data handling ............................................................................................ 55 3.3.3. Power ........................................................................................................................ 56 3.3.4. Attitude determination and control system ............................................................. 56 3.3.5. Orbital control system .............................................................................................. 58 3.3.6. Mass and power values used in the model ............................................................... 58 3.4. Architecture evaluation .................................................................................................... 60 3.4.1. Fractionated architectures ........................................................................................ 60 3.4.2. Architecture simulation ............................................................................................ 62 3.4.3. Outputs from the architecture evaluation ...............................................................