Utilizing Fractionated Space Mission Design and Small Satellites for a Next Generation Gamma Ray Burst Observatory Rashied B. Amini Washington University in Saint Louis April 30, 2008 Abstract Since the discovery of Gamma Ray Bursts (GRBs) by the Vela satellite, the field of GRB astronomy has been rapidly evolving in order to explain the most catastrophic event in the universe. Missions over the last two decades have pinpointed GRBs as extragalactic sources as well as shed insight on their nature. NASA’s recent Swift mission provides a platform for multiwavelength analysis of GRBs and their afterglow as well as transmitting GRB position data to other observatories. A future mission can compliment Swift’s array of multiwavelength instrumentation as well as providing more rapid, accurate GRB position data. A fractionated, small satellite mission can utilize the scale of small satellites to rapidly slew to a GRB target and then use stereoscopic observation and short baselines to further pinpoint the GRB position. A frac- tionated mission design places various scientific instrumentation as the primary payload on each individual satellite, providing robust performance and a greater field of view by decentralization. Additionally, future space interferometry missions will employ formation flying and fractionated design. A fractionated, small satellite mission will provide a cost effective proof of concept and valuable data to the scientific community. 1 Introduction formation of four small satellites with distributed ob- serving, communication, and computing capabilities. The past two decades have seen a tremendous surge This approach would bypass many issues hindering of on-orbit Gamma Ray Burst (GRB) observatories. recent missions. A very wide formation would over- Well over ten space science and space exploration mis- come earth limb constraints and allow an all-sky field sions hosted GRB detecting instruments to observe of view, and by using several satellites, observation- and later localize GRBs in the sky. However, with killing error modes would be unlikely. Moreover con- little exception, these spacecraft consisted of large trol moment gyroscopes (CMGs) can be utilized in spacecraft with other missions which may interfere attitude control to quickly slew to detected GRBs to with GRB observation. Recently several notable mis- more quickly provide observation and precise local- sions, Swift and Integral, have made great contribu- ization. tions with their observations of GRBs at high red- shifts and their quick localization of GRBs. Despite this progress, dependence on a single, large mono- 2 Background lithic spacecraft has limited the opportunity to ob- serve many GRBs. Earth limb constraints, errors In the early 1960s, the United States was concerned modes, and lack of an all-sky field of view hamper about the Soviet Unions advances in nuclear weapons these missions’ ability to quickly locate and observe and ballistic missile technology. Fortunately, this fear GRBs. was mutual and both sides agreed to ban all nuclear An alternative approach would consist of using a testing in space through the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty of 1963. Following the agreement, the Amer- 0Advised by Dr. Henric Krawczynski and Dr. Michael ican Vela satellite was deployed in haste to monitor Swartwout Soviet compliance. The Vela satellites were not met 1 with radiation from Soviet nuclear testing but inex- position; next, they must transmit the localized co- plicable blips coming from outer space In a paper ordinates to other observatories for subsequent ob- published in 1973, Dr. Ray Klebesadel explained the servation of the GRB prompt emission and its after- concept of a GRBs which were serendipitously dis- glow. Additionally, specialized spacecraft may follow covered by Vela. up with additional instrumentation for its own obser- Shortly thereafter, GRBs were confirmed as pow- vation. In the case of Swift, the spacecraft follows up erful, extragalactic sources and became the subject with observation in X-rays, UV, and optical regimes. of detailed study due to the insight they may shed Over the past decade numerous missions have into cosmology, particle physics, and gravitational sought to detect GRBs, though only recent missions physics. have been designed expressly for that purpose. Fol- lowing the Vela satellites, the Compton Gamma Ray 2.1 Gamma Ray Bursts Observatory (CGRO)[1]; launched in 1991 and de- orbited in 2000, was the next satellite mission which GRBs are the most powerful events in the universe; had instrumentation to detect GRBs. The Burst And their short life, ranging from fractions of a second to Transient Source Experiment (BATSE) [2], an in- about a minute, blots out the entire galaxies where strument on-board CGRO, consisted of eight panels they are located. Due to their vast amounts of energy, of NaI scintillator to detect X-rays in the ∼ 10keV brief nature, and vast distances (generally Z ∼ 2.0), range. While BATSE was able to produce a skymap it is difficult to capture data to confirm existing GRB of GRBs over the period of its mission, its large size models. On the other hand, these models need to and lack of precise GRB detectors precluded its abil- be tested due to broad assumptions required to sate ity to produce consistent, quick, and accurate GRB three different fields of physics relevant in modeling localizations. a GRB: astrophysics, general relativity, and particle Several other missions existed in parallel with physics. CGRO such as the Italian BeppoSax[3] and the High There are two types of GRBs: long and short. Energy Transient Explorer (HETE-II)[4]. These mis- Short GRBs are believed to be created by the col- sions, as well as several deep space missions which lapse of a neutron star binary system; they last from were fitted with GRB detecting instruments, formed milliseconds to seconds long. They occur as smaller the second incarnation of the Interplanetary Network redshifts and are less beamed, with a greater spread (IPN)[5][6], which used timing and location informa- in their collimated jets as compared to long GRBs. tion from all observing satellites to localize GRBs us- Long GRBs are modeled by the Collapsar theory, ing multilateralation. Due to the time distances be- or the implosion of a star of M ≥ 30M into a tween spacecraft, IPN localization calculations were ⊙ black hole; these bursts last upwards of a minute and done well after the GRB; additionally, uncertainty in occur at greater redshifts when larger, Population spacecraft positioning resulted in systematic errors. III stars existed. For both models, internal shocks Recently, there have been two outstanding mis- within the stellar media provide the energy to create sions: NASA’s Swift [7] and ESA’s Integral [8]. Both prompt GRB emission. Each GRB produces a very have been able to localize GRBs to arcminutes and distinct light curve, which is traditionally binned in observe weak GRBs at high redshifts; however, they events/time bin. With accurate timing information, are still limited by their large size and lack of field events can be time logged as well. of view. Swift’s use of a large Cadmium Zinc Tel- Following a GRB, afterglow emission resulting luride (CZT) array with a coded mask aperture, a from secondary shocks in the plasma outflow from large structure which partially ’shades’ the CCD ar- the burst emits radiation in all but -ray electromag- ray from GRB radiation. This method provides pre- netic regimes. For all but a few GRBs, afterglow is cise pointing data as shown in Figure 1, provides a the only studied emission from GRBs. Its spectrum 2sr field of view, providing only a 15% view of the provides valuable information on GRB outflow and entire sky[7]. particle interactions within the collimated jets. Fortunately, instrumentation for GRB detection is relatively small, making small satellites a prime can- 2.2 Recent GRB Observation Mis- didate for GRB observation. To this end, several re- sions cent GRB missions have been flown with small satel- lites: HETE-II and Agile[9]. Both hosted a variety The requirements for modern GRB are two-fold. of instrumentation and were able to localize GRBs Satellites must first detect GRBs and localize their within 10’. Moreover, Tsubame [10], currently in 2 quirements. Additionally, fractionation will allow for smaller satellites which can slew much faster to pro- vide observation of prompt afterglow emission. Fi- nally, typical error modes, such as earth limb con- straint and faulty or uncalibrated instrumentation can be entirely avoided. Networking, distributed communications, and dis- tributed processing would allow crosslinking to opti- mize the formation’s GRB localization in real time using multiple observations and IPN methods made possible by GPS timing and position data. Moreover, a larger formation would create a larger footprint on earth which can enable direct downlinking of coor- Figure 1: A coded mask aperture functions by oc- dinates to the Gamma Ray Burst Coordination Net- culting incoming flux, producing a projection of the work (GCN) [14] without routing through TDRSS. mask onto the CCD medium. The shift and strength of each projection corresponds to a different angle of incidence[11] 2.4 Scientific and Technical Opportu- nity development by Tokyo Institute of Technology, is a nanosatellite that uses control moment gyroscopes (CMGs) for rapid slewing. The current focus for GRB observation missions is to use a small field of view to observe a small number of GRBs to an accuracy of several arcminutes. This is 2.3 Fractionation in contrast to the methodology behind CGRO, which In contrast to traditional, monolithic satellite de- was to have a near all-sky field of view (4πsr) with sign, fractionated satellite design distributes on-orbit accuracies on the order of degrees. Scientifically, the tasks over several spacecraft to create a decentralized next generation GRB mission should provide an all- method of accomplishing mission tasks. The F6 Pro- sky field of view and arcminute accuracies.