Dr. Aprille Ericsson Eric Stoneking June 28, 2001 SuperNova/ Acceleration Probe (SNAP) Attitude Control Systems.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Israeli Universal Spacecraft Bus Characteristics and Design Trade-Offs
Advertisements

Regulation of Magnetically Actuated Satellites using Model Predictive Control with Disturbance Modelling Mark Wood (Ph.D. Student) Wen-Hua Chen (Senior.
Rodger Farley p1 Super Nova/Acceleration Probe 16 November 2001 Mechanical Mechanical Overview Rodger Farley Mick Correia Judy Brannen 16 November 2001.
Coasting Phase Propellant Management for Upper Stages Philipp Behruzi Hans Strauch Francesco de Rose.
Maxwell’s Equations and Electromagnetic Waves
Loop Shaping Professor Walter W. Olson
SNAP Mechanical Overview
System identification of the brake setup in the TU Delft Vehicle Test Lab (VTL) Jean-Paul Busselaar MSc. thesis.
Frank Stocklin Ron Vento Leslie Ambrose June 28,2001 SUPERNOVA/ACCELERATION PROBE (SNAP) Data Systems.
Kedrick Black1 ECE 5320 Mechatronics Assignment #1 Torque Coils/Rods and Reaction Wheels Kedrick Black.
Attitude Determination and Control
Karla Vega University of California, Berkeley Attitude Determination and Control 6/9/2015.
Introduction to Attitude Control Systems
MAXIM Power Subsystem Diane Yun Vickie Moran NASA/GSFC Code (IMDC) 8/19/99.
Feasibility of Demonstrating PPT’s on FalconSAT-3 C1C Andrea Johnson United States Air Force Academy.
Attitude & Orbit Control Subsystem 26 April 2007.
Page 1HMI Team Meeting – January 26, 2005 HMI Mission Operations Rock Bush HMI Stanford Program Manager Stanford University
Josephine San Dave Olney 18 August, July 1999NASA/GSFC/IMDC2  Appears to be Feasible  Requirements  Coarse Pointing baselined on NGST  Future.
Final Version Bob G. Beaman May 13-17, 2002 Micro-Arcsecond Imaging Mission, Pathfinder (MAXIM-PF) Electrical Power System (EPS)
N A S A G O D D A R D S P A C E F L I G H T C E N T E R I n s t r u m e n t S y n t h e s i s a n d A n a l y s i s L a b o r a t o r y Super Star Tracker.
Work Let us examine the work done by a torque applied to a system. This is a small amount of the total work done by a torque to move an object a small.
Marco Concha Charles Petruzzo June 28, 2001 SuperNova/ Acceleration Probe (SNAP) Flight Dynamics.
Final Version Wes Ousley Dan Nguyen May 13-17, 2002 Micro-Arcsecond Imaging Mission, Pathfinder (MAXIM-PF) Thermal.
Integrated Orbit and Attitude Control for a Nanosatellite with Power Constraints Bo Naasz Matthew Berry Hye-Young Kim Chris Hall 13th Annual AAS/AIAA Space.
Student Satellite Project University of Arizona Team Goals Design, Fabricate, and Analyze a Structure that will Support the Payload –Space Allocation of.
1 NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center 2005/4/14 LRO/CRaTER Technical Interchange Meeting LRO Mechanical Systems Giulio Rosanova / /
1 Formation Flying Shunsuke Hirayama Tsutomu Hasegawa Aziatun Burhan Masao Shimada Tomo Sugano Rachel Winters Matt Whitten Kyle Tholen Matt Mueller Shelby.
Bob G. Beaman June 28, 2001 Electrical Power System SuperNova / Acceleration Probe (SNAP)
NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center LRO Integration and Test Joanne Baker GSFC Code 568 August 16-17, 2005.
Attitude Determination and Control System
Attitude Determination and Control System (ADCS)
Satellites and Launch Vehicles. “Gee Whiz” Facts Number of satellites currently in orbit is over 900 Satellites orbit at altitudes from 100 miles (Low.
Final Version Micro-Arcsecond X-ray Imaging Mission Pathfinder (MAXIM-PF) Eric Stoneking Paul Mason May 17, 2002 ACS.
1 SAE Aerospace Control and Guidance Systems, 2006 Lake Tahoe, NV 1-3 March 2006 Tye Brady The Inertial Stellar Compass (ISC) Tye Brady.
1 Solar-B Data Co-Alignment Plan T.Shimizu (NAOJ) Solar-B MO&DA Working Group Solar-B 4 th Science
20a - 1 NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center Attitude Control System (ACS) Eric Holmes, Code 591 Joe Garrick, Code 595 Jim Simpson, Code 596 NASA/GSFC August.
EXTROVERTSpace Propulsion 02 1 Thrust, Rocket Equation, Specific Impulse, Mass Ratio.
MG 1/10/01 1 PCS SMOV-3B Review Objectives Overview Activity Descriptions Requirements.
Dynamics Modeling and First Design of Drag-Free Controller for ASTROD I Hongyin Li, W.-T. Ni Purple Mountain Observatory, Chinese Academy of Sciences S.
Mechanical SuperNova/Acceleration Probe SNAP Study Dave Peters George Roach June 28, a man who's willing to make a decision in the first place can.
Effect of Structure Flexibility on Attitude Dynamics of Modernizated Microsatellite.
NIRSpec Operations Concept Michael Regan(STScI), Jeff Valenti (STScI) Wolfram Freduling(ECF), Harald Kuntschner(ECF), Robert Fosbury (ECF)
Karman filter and attitude estimation Lin Zhong ELEC424, Fall 2010.
Professor Walter W. Olson Department of Mechanical, Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering University of Toledo Loop Shaping.
1 Weekly Summary Asteroid Sample Return Spring Semester March 5, 2008 Ashley Chipman.
Competition Sensitive Dennis Asato June 28, 2001 XSuperNova / Acceleration Probe (SNAP) Propulsion.
SPHERES Reconfigurable Control Allocation for Autonomous Assembly Swati Mohan, David W. Miller MIT Space Systems Laboratory AIAA Guidance, Navigation,
Henry Heetderks Space Sciences Laboratory, UCB
ADCS Review – Attitude Determination Prof. Der-Ming Ma, Ph.D. Dept. of Aerospace Engineering Tamkang University.
Final Version Dick Bolt Code 302 May 13-17, 2002 Micro-Arcsecond Imaging Mission, Pathfinder (MAXIM-PF) Mission Success.
Ship Computer Aided Design Displacement and Weight.
Competition Sensitive Gabe Karpati June 28, 2001 SuperNova / Acceleration Probe (SNAP) System Overview.
Final Version Kequan Luu May 13-17, 2002 Micro-Arcsecond Imaging Mission, Pathfinder (MAXIM-PF) Flight Software.
John Martin April 5, 2001 SuperNova/ Acceleration Probe (SNAP) Introduction.
20c - 1 NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center Propulsion Chuck Zakrwski NASA/GSFC Code 597 August 16-17, 2005.
Final Version Gary Davis Robert Estes Scott Glubke Propulsion May 13-17, 2002 Micro Arcsecond X-ray Imaging Mission, Pathfinder (MAXIM-PF)
Wes Ousley June 28, 2001 SuperNova/ Acceleration Probe (SNAP) Thermal.
Spacecraft Systems Henry Heetderks Space Sciences Laboratory, UCB.
Jan 2008 LMSSC - 1 SWEA Plume Impingements Mars Atmosphere and Volatile EvolutioN (MAVEN) Mission.
Solar Sail Department of Aerospace Engineering and Mechanics AEM 4332W – Spacecraft Design Spring 2007.
Preliminary Platform Design for KuaFu-A
Technical Resource Allocations
Image Stabilization System (ISS)
SDO Flight Dynamics Subsystem
Henry Heetderks Space Sciences Laboratory, UCB
Micro-Arcsecond X-ray Imaging Mission Pathfinder (MAXIM-PF)
Launch and On-orbit Checkout
Attitude Determination and Control Preliminary Design Review
Attitude Determination Overview
Main information on the «WORLD SPACE OBSERVATORY» project
Presentation transcript:

Dr. Aprille Ericsson Eric Stoneking June 28, 2001 SuperNova/ Acceleration Probe (SNAP) Attitude Control Systems

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center ACS Page 2  Will meet the requirements with some modifications:  ACS can acquire the target within the instrument FOV.  The instrument will be used as the fine pointing sensor.  Tip Off and Solar Pressure Momentum  Wheel sizing and Wheel location  Isolation Package  Reviewed full labor cost  Future studies/trades recommendation  Detailed jitter analysis and fuel analysis needs to be performed. ACS Overview

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center ACS Page 3  Pointing Accuracy  Yaw & Pitch : 1 arc-sec (1  )  Boresight Roll:100 arc-sec (1  )  Attitude Knowledge  Yaw & Pitch :0.02 arc-sec (1  )  Boresight Roll:2 arc-sec (1  )  Jitter/Stability -Stellar (over 200 sec)  Yaw & Pitch :0.02 arc-sec (1  )  Boresight Roll:2 arc-sec (1  )  Sun Avoidance  Earth Avoidance  Moon Avoidance ACS Driving Requirements

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center ACS Page 4  Orbit:19x57 Re-baseline  Inclination:65º  Coordinates: Roll (Z) axis, instrument boresight axis Pitch (Y) axis, is sun pointing Yaw (X) axis, YxZ=X velocity vector is moving  Inertia (kg-m 2 )[3600, 3300, 2100]  Effective Area:20.6 m 2  Tip off rate: Sea Launch & Delta III - 0.6º/sec  Slew 180 degrees in one hour including settling  6 degree/minute slew rate  30 minutes for settling with a 0.5 Hz bandwidth controller ACS Driving Assumptions

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center ACS Page 5 ACS Selected Configuration & Rationale  Control mode recommendation  Design Approach for science mode  Updated component recommendation (*)  Solar torque assessment (*)  Wheel sizing (*)  Isolation package (*)  Jitter analysis

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center ACS Page 6 ACS Control Mode Recommendation  Science mode -  Three axis stabilized  Stellar pointed  Instrument shielded from sun  Use wheels to slew into position  Rate null/Sun acquisition -  Null the rate and point solar array normal to the sun  Use propulsion to damp the tip off rate and slew with wheel  Acquisition time is less than one hour, assuming 0.6 deg/sec tip off rate and 180 degree away from the sun  Safehold mode -  Use CSS and wheel to point solar array normal to the sun, similar to sun acquisition

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center ACS Page 7 ACS Control Mode Recommendation continued  Eclipse mode -  Perform Delta H mode prior to eclipse period  Use Star Tracker, IRU and wheels to maintain position  Delta H mode -  Momentum unloading once or twice a day  Use thrusters to dump momentum and use wheels to slew into position  Delta V mode -  Use wheels to slew to burn position, perform delta V, then perform Delta H

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center ACS Page 8 ACS Design Approach for Science Mode  Reaction wheels are used as control actuators, and for 180 degree slew (four wheels with the apex of the pyramid along roll axis)  Star Tracker and gyro are used as attitude sensors  Use Stellar Instrument guide signal as feed forward information to correct the steady state position error  Thrusters are used for wheel momentum unloading

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center ACS Page 9 ACS Component Recommendation

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center ACS Page 10 ACS Solar Torque Assessment Assumptions  Solar force equations from Wertz  Sun angle varies only with s/c pitch axis but assumed worse case of 90°  The radiant energy is either reflected or absorbed  Sunshield is a flat, specular surface  Net Solar Torque is along roll axis (Note: only considered a normal force contribution)  CG offset: 1.5 m  Sun exposed Area: 20.4 m 2  Total momentum accumulated every day (worse case): 19.1 Nms  Total propellant mass required for momentum unloading per year: 3.5 kg

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center ACS Page 11 ACS Solar Torque Assessment

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center ACS Page 12 ACS Wheel Sizing Criteria  Wheel torque capability is not an issue  Small solar torque, worse case is 2.22e-4 Nm  Slew 6°/minute requires torque of Nm  Wheel momentum capability is an issue  Total momentum accumulated with 1 slew per day is 25.4 Nms  Need to bias speed at least a decade above the lowest structure mode (1 Hz) to avoid structural mode excitation  Need to have enough margins to avoid wheel saturation and zero crossing  Wheel power usage and wheel jitter are also an issue

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center ACS Page 13 ACS Vibration Isolation Package Consideration  Active just too expensive and involved  Passive, no power required  Lockheed Martin Eureka Isolation System  Weight: 10 Kg  Heritage: STRV-2 spacecraft in the fall of 1997  TRW Chandra Isolation Package  Weight: 5 Kg  No Heritage; Specific design for NGST/NEXUS  Lord Isolators (4)  Weight: 0.45 kg  Heritage associated with launch effects: OV-3, VCL, QuickTOMS  Should be placed under wheel assembly

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center ACS Page 14 ACS Component Placement  Wheels shall be located as close to the center of mass as possible to reduce wheel induced jitter  Four wheel option shall be in pyramid configuration with the apex of pyramid along the roll axis  Star tracker’s boresight shall be perpendicular to the instrument boresight  Gyro shall be mounted on the tracker optical bench  Vibration isolation package should be placed under wheel assembly

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center ACS Page 15 ACS Requirements Imposed On Other Sub-Systems  Lowest structural mode shall be 5 Hz, one decade higher than the controller bandwidth  Wheels and Propellant tank shall be as close to center-of- mass as possible  The product of area and cpcg offset shall not exceed 40 m 3 (based on 20.4 m 2 area and 1.5 m cpcg offset)

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center ACS Page 16 ACS Technologies Required  New Generation Integrated Wheel  Impact on design  Assumed Dynamic & Static Imbalance disturbance torques and forces are based on the Triana wheel  Larger wheel may have somewhat higher disturbances  Alternative / Ithaco B-wheel  Higher Power Consumption  Higher disturbances  Feedback to technology developer  Jitter Requirements  Mass Target  Power Target  Momentum & Torque Requirements

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center ACS Page 17 ACS Risk Assessment  Most of the hardware will be flight qualified, the risk of hardware failure is low  Wheels will be modified technology  Isolators do not have heritage for this application  Three axis stabilized spacecraft have been done so often that the risk of control failure is very low  Reliance on instrument star guide data adds complexity to mission but can be done

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center ACS Page 18 ACS Issues and Concerns  Jitter  Isolate fundamental wheel frequency through detailed analysis from manufacturer  Must tune isolator - type, size and interface  Flexible mode Analysis  Require extensive analysis to avoid control/structure resonance  cpcg-cg offset  Smaller offset will minimize thruster firing frequency and propellant required for momentum unloading  Offset will migrate with mission life, will get better with fuel depletion  Fuel slosh Disturbance Analysis  Minimize fuel tank Cg offset  3  jitter values  Use current Star tracker with a very accurate Kalman Filter  Augment Star Tracker data with instrument data for fine pointing  May need replace gyro with SKIRU-DII  Use of Instrument guide data  Possible mitigation by use of more sophisticated focal plane-sensors  Non-white and non-bias errors must be carefully accounted

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center ACS Page 19 ACS Labor Cost Note: Estimated cost derived from existing programs, such as MAP.

SNAP, June 25-28, 2001 Goddard Space Flight Center ACS Page 20 Attitude Determination & Control Subsystem Summary  Technology Readiness Level: Bus=TRL9 except EVD & wheel=TRL7  Type of Materials Used: Wheel - stainless steel  Mass (kg.): 73 kg  Orbit Average Power consumption (W): W for average  Primary Sensors: Star Tracker, IRU, DSS, CSS  Stabilization Type: 3-axis stabilized  Flight Heritage: wheels-Triana, guide telescope-Trace & Nexus  Complexity: Middle  Risk: (Ease of fallback; Can we use another technology/process and not sacrifice performance?) Yes, modified explorer wheels