E-Newsletter
Size Zero Satellites; are we setting a bad example?
07 September 2010
Everything is getting smaller these days and there is pressure to shed even more size to be stand out from the crowd. It used to be the case that 'big is better'; massive satellites, monster launch vehicles and 10s of kW of power. What has happened? Now everyone is getting excited about an extra 10th of a Watt on a satellite so small that you could pop it in your carry-on bag and take it through airport security. A miniature satellite is the 'must have' of 2010s. If a technical university doesn't have a satellite mission in progress, they are behind the times; postgrad, undergrad...even schools are feeling the need to have this ultimate accessory. The big satellite manufacturers are also trying to slim down their technology and approach to satellite engineering. What is driving this craze?Well, it is now possible for tiny spacecraft to provide a respectable amount of 'usefulness' to users of space. It is also partly, but not entirely, about a practical means of educating students and recent graduates in what it takes to put together a successful space mission.
The most commonly used miniature spacecraft standard is the 'CubeSat'. CubeSats are currently being used to gather much needed science data to help us better understand our planet; they are also being used by the military to provide something called 'Operationally Responsive Space' (which to you and me means the ability to get a satellite into space and doing its thing quicker than you can say 'plug-n-play satellites').
CubeSat technology is moving along at ferocious pace and you only need to have a look at the number of CubeSat based papers at this year's Small Satellite Conference in Utah (http://www.smallsat.org/) to see the number of technology developments in progress by Universities and Small to medium Sized Enterprises (SMEs) from all over the World. The increasing performance capability of these tiny spacecraft is going to continue to enable more applications and missions. What's more, it's all about miniaturization (which is a characteristic transferable to all sizes of spacecraft); it's about the engineering challenge of cramming all of that technology into a tiny box; and, let's not forget, it's also about having some fun along the way.
So, therein lies the craze that is CubeSats.
- If you are a technical University and aren't building your own CubeSat; why not? 95% of the objectives of a student built mission is achieved before launch - it is guaranteed mission success! And it'll cost you less than decent piece of lab equipment.
- If you are an SME or budding space entrepreneur, CubeSats offer the opportunity to take a different approach to satellite systems and payloads due to their risk model.
- Big satellite boys and girls; the world still needs your super-sized satellites on super-sized budgets. Why not work with SMEs to develop their processes and technologies to the point where it becomes useful for your future needs? I think both parties would benefit greatly from this type of partnership.
Does my attitude control system look big in this solar panel? Satellites come in all shapes and sizes; be proud of your big bits if you have them, and remember that it's what's inside that matters...
- Comments (5) Commenting is now closed.
- 2. At Mon Sep 13 22:05:13 +0100 2010 Craig Clark wrote:
Blantant self advertising, but seeing as your a 'CubeSat Enthusiast' and I like your forum, I'll let it go. While we are on the subject, did you know that there is also a CubeSat group on Linkedin? http://www.linkedin.com/groups?mostPopular=&gid=2816605? 160 users and counting...
- 3. At Wed Sep 15 21:31:37 +0100 2010 Cubesat Enthusiast wrote:
I will take a look at your CubeSat group.
I am interested in building a solar panel simulator to use it as a triple junction photovoltaic element because I do not have money now to buy that kind of expensive solar cell.
- 4. At Fri Sep 17 16:12:36 +0100 2010 Craig Clark wrote:
Hi Cubesat Enthusiast, Your need to simulate the solar panel is dependent on what the power system interface looks like. If you want to send me your power system topology, I can have a look at it and give some advice if you want? All the best, Craig.
- 5. At Sat Sep 18 17:34:00 +0100 2010 Cubesat Enthusiast wrote:
Unfortunately, I do not have any power system interface, I do not have any topology. I just want to experiment with various loads (they could be anything: batteries, power regulators, coils, resistors, radio transmitters, etc.) directly or indirectly connected to some solar panels that rotates in space. Because I do not have the photovoltaic cells, my intention is to build an electronic device that behaves exactly as a triple junction spinning solar cell no matter what load connects to it.
This is something that imitates the current-voltage diagram of a real solar cell that moves in space about a rotation axis.
A microprocessor controlled electronic board that is able to simulate 12 triple junction solar cells as they spin in space together with the cubesat. could be helpful for people wanting to test all the electronic equipments inside their satellite without expensive cells that spins in front of powerful lamps, and so on. The main idea is that one could design his satellite without possessing the solar cells (with virtual simulated panels). You buy them when everything is ready.
Look at this cubesat ( http://cubesat.ifastnet.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=54 ) made in Vietnam. It is quite clear they did not have money for triple junctions solar cells and built their picosat using cheap photovoltaic elements despite the fact that at some point in the future they will have to replace them with triple junction cells.
A discussion forum for cubesat enthusiasts:
http://www.cubesat.ifastnet.com/forum