07-08 Galli

University of Li`
ege
Faculty of Applied Sciences
Civil Electromechanical Aerospace Engineering
Mission Design for the CubeSat

OUFTI-1
Supervisor: Professor Pierre Rochus
Author: Stefania Galli
Academic Year 2007-2008
Space is probably the main symbol of technological progress in the modern

society.
Many daily activities imply the interaction with this environment that only few
judge able to supply so many resources. Actually, despite to its guise of modernity, the space conquest began many years ago when the planets motion was
studied more in details and the Keplers laws were formulated at the beginning
of XVII century. The climb to the peak was accelerated by one of the most genial personality of the history of physics, Isaac Newton. Forced to interrupt its
university studies because of an epidemic disease in England, he moved to the
countryside where he began studying the motion of celestial bodies. Quickly he
modeled the celestial mechanics as no one had never done before and he identified the gravitational force and the expressions of all the possible trajectories that
a body can follow in space. In all his studies, he used only one hypothesis that
he was not able to justify: the gravitational potential of a point is equal to that
of a sphere having the same mass and uniformly distributed density. Because
of that, he left behind for many years one of the most important results of the
history of physics.
All around the world only few people are able to design space missions. The
few lucky who can, every time they do it, use as starting point the results of an
university student lived 400 years ago.
Abstract
OUFTI-1 is the first satellite of the University of Liège, Belgium, and the first
nanosatellite ever made in Belgium. It is developed within the framework of a
long-term program called LEODIUM Project, whose goal is to provide handson experience to aerospace students in cooperation with the space industries
of the region of Liège. It is the first satellite ever equipped with a recently
developed amateur radio digital-communication technology: the D-STAR protocol. This system represents both the satellites communication system and
its payload. The mission target is in fact, on the one hand, to give a space
repeater to the amateur radio community and, on the other hand, to test this
new technology into space in order to use it on the future nanosatellites foreseen
by the LEODIUM Project, satellites that will have different payloads. It will be
hopefully launched with the new European launcher Vega and placed in elliptic
orbit around the earth.
Keywords: OUFTI-1, CubeSat, LEODIUM, D-STAR, amateur radio.
CONTENTS
1 Introduction
13
2 The LEODIUM Project
15
3 The Flight Opportunity
17
4 The CubeSat OUFTI-1

4.1 The CubeSat concept . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.1.1 Amateur Radio and D-STAR system . . . . . . . . . . .
19
20
22
5 Mission Analysis
5.1 The Vega Launcher . . . . . . . . .
5.1.1 Typical Mission Profile . . .
5.1.2 Performances . . . . . . . .
5.1.3 Launch Campaign . . . . .
5.1.4 The Vega Maiden Flight . .
5.2 The orbit . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.2.1 Orbital mechanics . . . . . .
5.2.2 The orbit of OUFTI-1 . . .
5.3 Orbit perturbations . . . . . . . . .
5.3.1 The earths oblateness . . .
5.3.2 The atmospheric drag . . .
5.3.3 The solar radiation pressure
5.3.4 Orbital parameters variation
5.4 The launch window . . . . . . . . .
5.5 Earth coverage . . . . . . . . . . .
5.6 Communication time . . . . . . . .
5.7 The radiation environment . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
25
26
27
28
28
32
33
33
37
40
40
41
43
44
50
50
52
54
6 Structure and deployment

6.1 Pumpkin structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.2 ISIS structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.3 Deployment System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
57
58
59
61
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7 Attitude Control System

7.1 Inertia properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7.2 Disturbing torques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7.3 Attitude control hardware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
63
64
66
71
8 Power system
8.1 Eclipses duration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8.2 Configuration and solar cells . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8.3 Power produced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8.3.1 Elliptic orbit with starting orbital elements . . . . . . . .
8.3.2 Elliptic orbit with orbital elements after one year mission
and circular orbit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8.3.3 Parametric study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8.4 Battery and operating modes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
73
74
77
79
79
9 Thermal-control system
9.1 Passive thermal-control . . . . . . . .
9.2 Analytic temperature determination .
9.3 Nodes model . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
9.3.1 Representation . . . . . . . .
9.3.2 Equivalent resistances . . . .
9.3.3 Hot and cold case . . . . . . .
9.4 Thermal results for OUFTI-1 . . . .
85
86
87
88
88
89
93
93
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
81
82
84
10 Communication system
97
10.1 Communication hardware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
10.2 Link budget . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
10.3 Backup telemetry and ground station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
11 Tests
105
11.1 Test philosophy and facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
11.2 Mechanical tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
11.3 Environmental tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
12 Future Developments
111
12.1 Possible payloads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
13 Conclusions
115
References
119
LIST OF FIGURES
4.1
A typical 1-unit CubeSat structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
21
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
5.6
5.7
5.8
5.9
5.10
5.11
5.12
5.13
5.14
5.15
5.16
5.17
5.18
5.19
5.20
5.21
5.22
5.23
5.24
5.25
5.26
5.27
5.28
5.29
Vega launcher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Vega typical mission profile: altitude . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Vega typical mission profile: relative speed . . . . . . . . . . .
Vega performances: payload mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Vega: spacecraft preparation and checkout phase . . . . . . .
Vega: spacecraft hazardous operations phase . . . . . . . . . .
Vega: combined operations phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Orbital Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Eccentric and mean anomalies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
OUFTI-1 orbit representation for 12 hours orbit(STK) . . . .
OUFTI-1: orbits tridimentional view. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
OUFTI-1 orbit: true, eccentric and mean anomaly . . . . . . .
Earth oblateness and not uniform mass effect . . . . . . . . .
Aerodynamic drag acceleration for the first day mission. . . .
Solar pressure acceleration for the first day mission . . . . . .
Orbit variation over a year. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Semi-major axis variation over a year. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Eccentricity variation over a year. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Perigee and apogee altitude variation over a year. . . . . . . .
Inclination variation over a year. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Right ascension of ascending node variation over a year . . . .
Argument of perigee variation over a year . . . . . . . . . . .
Evolution altitude until the end of life for the elliptic orbit . .
Evolution of altitude until the end of life for the circular orbit
Field of view . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Worst case for communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Best case for communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Radiation dose for the OUFTI-1 elliptical orbit . . . . . . . .
Radiation dose for the OUFTI-1 circular orbit . . . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
26
27
27
28
29
30
31
34
36
37
38
39
41
42
44
45
45
46
46
47
47
48
48
49
51
53
53
55
55
6.1
CubeSat-Kit structure skeletonized and solid-walls . . . . . . . .
58
6.2
6.3
ISIS structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
P-POD: deployment system for three CubeSats . . . . . . . . .
60
62
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
Example of OUFTI-1 configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Gravity gradient couple in case of non updated configuration
Aerodynamic couple in case of non updated configuration . .
Gravity gradient couple in case of updated configuration . .
Gravity gradient couple in case of updated configuration . .
.
.
.
.
.
64
68
69
70
70
Reference sistems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Sun rays direction on the ecliptic plane . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Sun rays direction projected on the orbit plane. . . . . . . . . .
Eclipse duration as a function of earth anomaly . . . . . . . . .
Total power produced: simulation over one year orbit. . . . . . .
Integrated power: simulation over one year orbit . . . . . . . . .
Total power and integrated power for the orbital parameters after
one year mission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8.8 Total power and integrated power for the circular orbit with =
0 and = 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8.9 Total power and integrated power for = 90 and = 0 . . . .
8.10 Total power and integrated power for = 0 and = 90 . . . .
8.11 Total power and integrated power for = 90 and = 90 . . .
74
75
76
77
80
80
82
83
83
83
9.1
9.2
9.3
9.4
89
90
91
94
.
.
.
.
.
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6
8.7
Nodes model for thermal analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Equilibrium for radiative heat exchange . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Radiative equivalent resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Typical Thermal Excel layout: operating case whit black coating
81
10.1 Communication system block diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98

10.2 Detailed link budget for the satellite at the apogee, 5 elevation 102
10.3 Downlink link budget . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
11.1 Qualification level test for sinus vibrations . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
11.2 Qualification level for random vibrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
11.3 Shock Response Spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
10
LIST OF TABLES
5.1
Comparison between the two possible orbits . . . . . . . . . . .
39
6.1
6.2
CubeSat Kit mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

ISIS structure mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
59
60
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
Solar cells mechanical properties . . . . . . . .

Solar cells electrical and thermal properties . .
Elliptic orbit with orbital parameters after one
Operating modes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . .
. . .
year
. . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
78
78
81
84
9.1
9.2
9.3
9.4
Surface thermal properties

Equilibrium temperatures
Structure properties . . . .
Temperatures . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
87
87
92
94
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
10.1 Communication system parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

10.2 Link budget at 1200 Km altitude, 5 elevation . . . . . . . . . . 101
11.1 Thermal vacuum qualification test for the PFM. . . . . . . . . . 110
11.2 Thermal cycling qualification test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
11
CHAPTER
1
INTRODUCTION
This work represents the feasibility study for the CubeSat OUFTI-1, the first
step of the LEODIUM Project of the University of Liège, Belgium.
The goals of the project are soon introduced, as well as an explanation of the
OUFTI-1 mission, including the concepts of CubeSat and amateur radio. Then
a description of all the satellite subsystems is treated, with the attention concentrated on the mission analysis. For each subsystem an analysis of the operational
conditions is carried out and the foreseen solutions are presented.
We start with the mission analysis as it is the subsystem that mainly influences
all the others. We pass then to the structure and deployment system, that are
commercial off-the-shelf elements, and to the attitude control system, which is
the most controversial subsystem for the OUFTI-1 satellite project. Then a
study on the power produced in orbit is carried out to determine if we have
enough power to supply our satellite. Afterward the thermal system is introduced and the solutions to control the satellite temperature are presented. The
last subsystem is the communication system which is especially important as
it also represents the CubeSat payload: with a link budget we find out if the
satellite has enough power to communicate with the earth.
At the end, the tests philosophy is explained and a choice of possible payloads
for the future missions of LEODIUM Project is introduced.
13
CHAPTER
2
THE LEODIUM PROJECT
The LEODIUM Project is a project involving the University of Liège and Liège
Espace, a consortium of space industries and research centers in the Liège region
with the goal of increase the cooperation between the members and to promote
the space activity.
LEODIUM is the Latin name of Liège and stands for Lancement En Orbite
de Demonstations Innovantes dune Universite Multidisciplinaire (Launch into
Orbit of Innovative Demonstrations of a Multidisciplinary University). The
project started in 2005 when Mr. Pierre Rochus, president of Liège Espace and
Deputy General Manager for Space Instrumentation of the Liège Space Center,
was charged with the training of students to the design of miniaturized satellites.
Some possible scenarios to involve students in the design of a space mission were
foreseen and each one had its advantages and drawbacks:
Design of a CubeSat or of a Nanosatellite: quick and relatively simple but
with a scientific payload not really efficient due to the low mass and power
available.
Design of a Microsatellite: very interesting on the scientific point of view
but requiring much more time and economical resources.
Participation to the design of a space instrument among a professional
team: interesting mission but less possibility to actively participate.
The project started with the participation in the Student Space Exploration and
Technology Initiative (SSETI) of the European Space Agency: the University
of Liège took part in the European Student Earth Orbiter (ESEO) designing
15
CHAPTER 2
the solar panels deployment system and in the European Student Moon Orbiter
(ESMO) developing the Narrow Angle Camera (NAC).
The project of a nanosatellite was instead in a kind of stall until September
2007 when Mr. Luc Halbach, sales manager of Spacebel, proposed the design
of a CubeSat for amateur radio, equipped with a new digital technology: the
D-STAR system. In less than one month, a team of students and professors was
grouped and the design of the first CubeSat of the University of Liège started. It
was called OUFTI-1 which is a typical expression of the city of Liège and which
stands for Orbiting Utility For Telecommunication Innovation. The project went
on and the idea of launching many CubeSats carrying scientific experiments
became more and more concrete: now the University of Liège has the ambitious
program of developing a series of CubeSats to give students hands-on experience
with all the phases of the design and operation of a complete satellite system.
A CubeSat is in fact the best mean to accomplish this educational mission: its
design goes on just like a traditional space mission but, being the developments
time much shorter, it gives students the opportunity of participating to all the
mission phases from the feasibility study to the launch.
At the same time, the LEODIUM project will allow the space qualification of
some recently-developed technologies and some scientific experiments on-board
of the futures CubeSats. In chapter 12, a more detailed description of the
possible payloads will be presented.
Concerning OUFTI-1, its main goal is to demonstrate the feasibility of using the
amateur radio D-STAR digital communication protocol to communicate with,
and through, a CubeSat: it will be in fact the first satellite ever to use this kind
of technology. If it works and its successfully space-tested, it will be the main
communication system for all the next CubeSats of the Liège University.
Galli Stefania
16
University of Liège
CHAPTER
3
THE FLIGHT OPPORTUNITY
The Education Office of the European Space Agency (ESA), in cooperation

with the Directorate of Legal Affairs and External Relations and the Vega Programme Office in the Directorate of Launchers, issued a first Announcement
Opportunity on 9 October 2007 offering a free launch on the Vega maiden flight
for six CubeSats. In the meantime, the Vega Maiden Flight CubeSat Workshop
was held at the European Space Research and Technology Center (ESTEC): the
University of Liège participated presenting the LEODIUM Project [RD1]. On
15 February 2008, the ESA published a call for proposal for CubeSat on-board
of Vega [RD2] and on 17 mars 2008 the proposal was submitted to the ESA
[RD3].
Up to know, we are still waiting for an hopefully positive answer.
17
CHAPTER
4
THE CUBESAT OUFTI-1
OUFTI-1 is a CubeSat representing the first step of the LEODIUM Project:

its also the first satellite of the University of Liège and the first Picosatellite
ever made in Belgium. Its an amateur radio satellite exploiting the digitalcommunication D-STAR protocol and its not going to carry any scientific payload but it will mainly be used as a test for the D-STAR system into space: it
can be viewed as a bare-bone repeater in space.
Furthermore, the OUFTI-1 bus could be used in the future as standard platform for the next CubeSats of the University of Liège. As they will have some
scientific experiments on-board, the use of an already tested platform will allow
to concentrate the effort on the payload and on the mission analysis in order
to reach the target in the best way as possible. Moreover, once the scientific
mission will have finished, the CubeSat will be used by the amateur radio community: in return, we can communicate with the ground station trough the
frequency bandwidth reserved for the amateur radio communications.
The main constraint for this mission is the time line: the launch is in fact
scheduled for December 2008 and the project started in November 2007. Even
if two years are considered sufficient for the design and operation of a CubeSat
mission, we need to optimize the time and to proceed as quickly as possible.
For this reason we assumed the principle of KISS, Keep It Simple and Stupid.
We are in fact convinced that between two possible solutions that guarantee the
same final result, the most convenient is the simplest: guided by this idea, all
the choices are taken in order to simplify the design.
Before proceeding with the satellite description, an introduction to the CubeSat
concept and to the D-STAR system is presented.
19
CHAPTER 4
4.1
The CubeSat concept
During the last years, a complex process is taking place in the space industry: on
the one hand, there is a growing tendency for satellite to become larger, on the
other hand, many miniaturized satellites are designed. In fact, from the huge
spacecraft of Hubble Space Telescope launched in 1990 which weighed more
than 11 tons, there is an actual trend to reduce at most the size of the satellite:
this reduces not only the costs connected to the launch but also those directly
implied in the design and construction of the spacecraft. The miniaturized
satellite can be classified according to their wet mass (including fuel) :
Minisatellite: wet mass between 100 Kg and 500 Kg. They are usually
simple but they use the same technology as the bigger satellites and they
are often equipped with rockets for propulsion and attitude control.
Microsatellite: wet mass between 10 Kg and 100 Kg. The miniaturization
process begins to be important but sometimes they still use some kind of
propulsion.
Nanosatellite: wet mass between 1 Kg and 10 Kg. Every component has
to be reduced in terms of mass and volume and no kind of propulsion is
usually foreseen. They can be launched piggyback, using excess capability on larger launch vehicle.
Picosatellite: wet mass between 0.1 Kg et 1 Kg. The miniaturization
process is maximum and many new technologies have to be used in order
to accomplish the requirements. They are launched piggyback with some
peculiar deployment system.
These miniaturized satellites go toward many technical challenges, especially
concerning the attitude control and the electronic equipment, including the
communication system: they need indeed to use more up-to-date technology,
which often needs to be carefully tested and modified in order to be space hardened and resistant to the outer space environment.
The CubeSat design is an example of a Picosatellite with dimensions of
10x10x10 cm and typically using commercial off-the-shelf electronic components. The concept was originally developed by the California Polytechnic State
University and by the Stanford University, with Professor Robert Twiggs, and
afterward it widely circulates among the academic world . At the moment, over
60 University, high schools and industries are involved in the development of
CubeSats. Some of them are designing double and triple CubeSats: they can fit
in the traditional deployment system but they can have more mass and volume.
As a matter of fact, a CubeSat represents the best way to give some experience
Galli Stefania
20
CHAPTER 4. THE CUBESAT OUFTI-1
Figure 4.1: A typical 1-unit CubeSat structure

to students during their education: it can fit into the universitys budget and it
can be designed, tested and launched in two year, allowing student to participate to all the missions phases.
Until some years ago, the most complex achievement for a CubeSat was to obtain a launch as the providers were often distrustful of a small satellite designed
by students which was launched inside the same fairing as a much more expensive mission and which risked to damage the main satellite. More recently,
thanks to the great success of CubeSat project among the universities all around
the world, some safe interfaces for CubeSats have been developed and the launch
providers are definitely favorable to use the free space to set into orbit this kind
of Picosatellite. In fact, all the main launchers dispose now of a special interface
for the piggyback launches. In order to fit into the deployment system and to
guarantee the preservation not only of the main satellite but also of the other
CubeSat, the structure has to fulfills many requirements as explained in [AD4].
The key requirement for a CubeSat are here summarized:
its dimensions must be 10x10x10 cm
it may not exceed 1 Kg mass
its center of mass must be within 2 cm of its geometric center
the CubeSat must not present any danger to neighboring CubeSats, to the
launch vehicle or to the primary payload: all parts must remain attached
during launch, ejection and operation and no pyrotechnics are allowed
whenever possible, the use of NASA or ESA approved material is recommended: this allow a reduction of out-gassing and contamination.
rails have to be anodized to prevent cold-welding and provide electrical
isolation between the CubeSat and the deployment system. They also
Galli Stefania
21
CHAPTER 4
have to be smooth and their edges rounded

the use of Aluminium 7075 or 6061-T6 is suggested for the main structure.
If others materials are used, the thermal expansion must be similar to that
of the deployment system material (Aluminium 7075-T73) and approved.
This prevents the CubeSat to conk out because of an excessive thermal
dilatation.
no electronic device may be active during launch. Rechargeable batteries
have to be discharged or the CubeSat must be fully deactivated
at least one deployment switch is required
antennas can be deployed only 15 minutes after ejection into orbit while
booms and solar panels after 30 minutes
it has to undergo qualification and acceptance testing according to the
specifications of the launcher: at least random vibration testing at a level
higher than the published launch vehicle envelope and thermal vacuum
testing. Each CubeSat has to survive qualification testing for the specific
launcher. Acceptance testing will also be performed after the integration
into the deployment system.
4.1.1
Amateur Radio and D-STAR system
Before proceeding with the description of OUFTI-1, a brief introduction of the

satellites payload, represented by its communications system, is necessary.
D-STAR, which stands for Digital Smart Technology for Amateur Radio, is
an open ham radio protocol recently developed by the Japan Amateur Radio
League (JARL). Its main features are the simultaneous transmission of voice
and data, the complete routing capacity (including roaming), the cross-band
capability and the possibility of passing through the internet.
It works over three possible frequencies and data rates:
144 MHz ( 2m, VHF ), 4.8 Kbit/s
440 MHz ( 70 cm, UHF ), 4.8 Kbit/s
1.2 GHz ( 23 cm, SHF ), 4.8 Kbit/s or 128 Kbit/s
Presently, in Europe only the first two frequencies are available.
The D-STAR technology is in fact really developed in the United States, where
many repeaters are operational, but its quickly extending in Europe: the first
repeater in Belgium is at the University of Liège and it has been installed within
the OUFTI-1 project.
Galli Stefania
22
CHAPTER 4. THE CUBESAT OUFTI-1
The idea of using a satellite for amateur radio communication is not new: the
first ham radio satellite OSCAR-1 has been launched in 1961 and OSCAR-7,
launched in 1974, is still operational. Many satellites for radio amateurs are
in low earth orbit and guarantee the communications all around the world:
even on the International Space Station (ISS) there is a amateur radio station
and a new one has been recently added on the Columbus module. The reason
is simple: in normal atmospheric conditions the zone of visibility of a radio
repeater is around 50 Km, while the footprint of a satellite is much wider (order
of thousands Km): a satellite allows in this way the communication between two
users far away from each other and, even more important, it offers a repeater
to those who are to far away from any ground repeaters to have a traditional
air link.
As a drawback, both the two users have to be in the satellite footprint and the
time for communicate could be short.
During the last months, OUFTI-1 has been presented to the amateur radio
community and to other CubeSats developers [RD4] and it has been greeted
enthusiastically.
Galli Stefania
23
CHAPTER
5
MISSION ANALYSIS
The mission analysis is the process of quantifying the system parameters and
the resulting performance: its main goal is to analyse whether the mission meets
the requirements or not.
The first step is therefore to define the mission requirements. In this case, due to
the absence of a scientific payload, the only real requirement is to guarantee to
the amateur radio operators a sufficient communication time with a convenient
quality. Being the amateur radio operators common all around the world, we
chose as main criteria a passing time over Belgium as longer as possible: this
favor the Belgian amateur radio operators, which seems logical as the CubeSat
is Belgian, but guarantees also a sufficient passing time of the spacecraft in view
of the ground station in Liège. Concerning the lifetime, the goal is to ensure
enough operating time to successfully test the D-STAR system but, also in this
case, we are not able to quantify it.
The reason of this lack of mission requirements is simple: on the one hand,
the ESA offers free launch on board the Vega launcher but it imposes the orbit
and, on the other hand, a CubeSat needs to meet some requirements in terms
of mass, size, shape and pyrotechnics.
We cannot therefore neither choose an orbit that guarantees a longer lifetime
and a sufficient passing time over Belgium, nor add any kind of propulsion, nor
adopt any peculiar shape of the structure. The only thing that we can do, is
to use the available mass and size as good as possible, in order to screen the
sensible equipments from the radiation, and to choose omnidirectional antennas
to communicate as long as possible with the small amount of power produced
in orbit.
25
CHAPTER 5
5.1
The Vega Launcher
Vega, Vettore Europeo di Generazione Avanzata, is the new European small

launcher. It has been designed as a single body launcher with three solid
propulsion stages and an additional liquid propulsion restartable upper module, AVUM, used for attitude and orbit control and for satellite release. Unlike
most small launchers, Vega will be able to place multiple payloads into orbit.
Its development started in 1998 and the first flight was initially expected in
2007 from the Guyana Space Center, CSG, but different reasons causes some
delays and, up to know, it is scheduled for the December 2008.
It is funded by Belgium, France, Italy, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and The
Netherlands.
Vega is 30 m high, has a maximum diameter of 3 m and weights 137 tons at
lift-off. As shown in fig.5.1, it has three sections: the Lower Composite, the
Upper Composite known as AVUM and the Payload Composite.
Figure 5.1: Vega launcher

Galli Stefania
26
CHAPTER 5. MISSION ANALYSIS
5.1.1
Typical Mission Profile
A typical mission profile consists of three phases:

Phase I: Ascent of the first three stages of the launch vehicle into the low
elliptic trajectory (sub-orbital profile)
Phase II: Payload and upper stage transfer to the initial parking orbit
by first AVUM burn, orbital passive flight and orbital manoeuvres of the
AVUM stage for payload delivery to final orbit
Phase III: AVUM deorbitation or orbit disposal manoeuvres.
Figure 5.2: Vega typical mission profile: altitude as a function of time after lift
off.
Figure 5.3: Vega typical mission profile: relative speed as a function of time
after lift off.
Galli Stefania
27
CHAPTER 5
Typically, the AVUM burns three times: the first to place the satellite and
himself into an elliptical orbit with the apogee at the target altitude, the second
to raise the perigee to the required value or for orbit circularization and the
third for deorbiting himself. Jettisoning of the payload fairing can take place at
different times, depending on the aero-thermal flux requirements on the payload,
but normally it happens between 200 and 260 seconds from lift-off.
5.1.2
Performances
Vega is designed to launch a wide range of missions and payload configuration:

in particular, it can place in to orbit masses ranging from 300 to 2500 Kg into
a variety of orbit, from equatorial, to sun synchronous and polar. Its performances are shown in figure 5.4.
Figure 5.4: Vega performances: payload mass as a function of orbit inclination

and altitude required.
Vega can also operate the launch of multiple payloads.
5.1.3
Launch Campaign
The spacecraft launch campaign formally begins with the delivery in CSG of the
spacecraft and its associated Ground Support Equipments (GSE), and concludes
with GSE shipment after launch. It cannot exceed 30 days: 27 days before
launch and 3 days after it.
A typical launch campaign can be divided in three parts:
1. Spacecraft autonomous preparation
It includes all the operations conducted from the spacecraft arrival to the
CSG up to the readiness for integration with the launch vehicle.
Galli Stefania
28
It can be divided in two parts: the spacecraft preparation and checkout including the assembly and functional test, the verification of the interface
with the launch vehicle and the battery charging (fig. 5.5) and the spacecraft hazardous operations including the filling of satellites tanks with
fuels (fig. 5.6).
Figure 5.5: Vega: spacecraft preparation and checkout phase
Galli Stefania
29
CHAPTER 5
Figure 5.6: Vega: spacecraft hazardous operations phase

2. Combined operations
It includes the spacecraft integration on the adapter and installation inside
the fairing, the verification procedures and the transfer to the launch pad.
Galli Stefania
30
Figure 5.7: Vega: combined operations phase

3. Launch countdown
It covers the last launch preparation sequence up to the lift-off.
Galli Stefania
31
CHAPTER 5
5.1.4
The Vega Maiden Flight
The Vega maiden flight is targeted officially targeted for December 2008: the
primary scientific payload is the LAser RElativity Satellite (LARES). Its an
italian satellite, designed by the Italian Space Agency (ASI) in cooperation with
the University of Rome testing a prediction following from the Einsteins theory
of General Relativity, the so-called frame-dragging or Lense-Thirring effect.
Its basically a solid sphere maid of Tungsten with a diameter of 376 mm and
a mass of 400 Kg. The surface is covered by 92 Corner Cube Reflectors (CCR)
which, hit by laser beams sent from earth, will reflect them allowing an accurate
orbit determination. Correcting for a number of effects, most importantly the
deviation of the earth gravitational field from an ideal sphere, yields the framedragging effect. To achieve its scientific objectives, LARES needs to be injected
into a circular orbit at 1200 Km altitude with an inclination of 71 .
Furthermore, an adaptation of the Upper Composite test dummy used during
mechanical test campaign will be the main passenger on the Vega maiden flight:
it will measure the actual launch loads experienced by a typical payload in order
to correlate them with the numerical models used during the launchers design
phase.
Besides, an educational payload of six CubeSat, placed into two Picosatellite
Orbital Deployers (POD), will be accommodated into the fairing. They will
be released in a 1200x350 Km elliptical orbit thanks to the AVUM multi-burn
facility. A manoeuvre into a circular orbit at 350 Km altitude is also under
study. Both these two orbit guarantees a lifetime much less than 25 years,
compliant with the international requirement related to space debris.
Galli Stefania
32
5.2
The orbit
The choice of the orbit is an important step in every space mission as it strongly
influences the final performances. Its usually driven by the missions requirements and therefore its specific for each satellite. In this case, as the CubeSats
are secondary payloads on the Vega maiden flight, we couldnt set anyway the
orbit parameter as they are determined by its main payload, the LARES experiment.
As above-mentioned, the foreseen orbit is elliptical with a perigee at 350 Km
altitude, an apogee at 1200 Km and an inclination of 71 . Concerning the argument of perigee and the right ascension of ascending node, any input hasnt been
assigned yet. As the LARES satellite will be placed into a circular orbit, the
argument of perigee is the only parameters that can be influenced by the CubeSat requirements. Considering that all the CubeSats are european and that
they necessary have their main ground stations in the northern hemisphere, we
expect and hope to have the apogee over the northern hemisphere: in this case,
we could have the longest time to use OUFTI-1 as amateur radio repeater over
Europe and to communicate with our ground station. As shown in paragraph
5.3.4, the argument of perigee is changing during the satellite lifetime but, as
the D-STAR system has never been used into space and as we still dont know
how long it will able to work before breaking down, we strongly hope that it
will be in a convenient position at the beginning.
Concerning the possibility of a circular orbit at 350 Km altitude, its not the
best solution for OUFTI-1 and , more in general, for the CubeSats: on the
one hand, the communication time with the ground stations is short, even if
its better than for the case of elliptic orbit with the perigee over the northern
hemisphere, and, on the other hand, the lifetime is extremely brief.
Anyway, as the most probable orbit is the elliptic one, we will perform the
analysis basing on it, which also represent the more general case.
Before describing the OUFTI-1 orbit, we proceed with a recall of orbital mechanics.
5.2.1
Orbital mechanics
The orbital mechanics studies the motion of a spacecraft on a specific trajectory,

called orbit, basing on the Newtons laws of motion and of universal gravitation.
Directly from them, come the three Keplers laws of planetary motion:
- The orbit of every planet is an ellipse with the sun at one of the foci.
- The line joining a planet and the sun sweeps out equal areas during equal
intervals of time as the planet travels around its orbit.
Galli Stefania
33
CHAPTER 5
- The squares of the orbital period of planets are directly proportional to

the cube of the semi-major axes of their orbit.
The same laws can be applied to the motion of a satellite around a planet.
In orbital mechanics, the spacecraft and the central body are considered as
points with mass but without dimensions. As to describe the position and the
speed of a point in a tridimensional space we need six parameters, to completely
characterize the motion of the satellite over an orbit we need the six so-called
orbital elements: the semi-major axis a, the eccentricity e, the true anomaly
or , the inclination i, the longitude or right ascension of ascending node
or RAAN and the argument of perigee . As shown in fig.5.8, the first
two describe the orbit shape and the last three the position of the orbit plane
respect to the earth. The true anomaly, sometimes substituted by the time since
perigee passage, introduces the position of the satellite on the orbit starting from
the perigee: ita the only parameter that varies along the orbit as long as we
maintain the hypothesis of ideal motion.
Figure 5.8: Orbital Parameters

The motion is in fact considered to be ideal and determined only by the
gravity force between the masses and the fictitious centrifugal force, without
any perturbation as the aerodynamic drag and the presence of others bodies.
Starting from the Newtons laws and from the gravitational laws, we can defines the orbital elements and some other parameters that can be useful for the
continuation.
We place ourself on the orbit plane and we call rp and ra the radius respectively of perigee and apogee and the earth gravitational constant. We define
then the following parameters that remain constant:
Galli Stefania
34
the semi-major axis:

a=
rp + ra
2
(5.1)
e=
ra r p
ra + r p
(5.2)
the eccentricity:
the angular momentum and its magnitude:
h=rv
h = |h| = rvcos()
(5.3)
where r is the radius, v the speed and the flight angle.

the orbit parameter which represents the radius of the circular orbit having
the same angular momentum:
h2
= rc
p = a 1 e2 =
(5.4)
the speed on the circular orbit having the same angular momentum:
vc =
(5.5)
the energy
v2
E= =
2a
2
r
(5.6)
where v and r are the magnitude of speed and the radius.

the period
s
T = 2
a3
(5.7)
Introducing the true anomaly we can identify the radius on each orbit
point:
r=
Galli Stefania
p
1 + ecos()
35
(5.8)
CHAPTER 5
Hence, the perigee and apogee radius can be expressed as:

rp = r ( = 0) =
p
= a (1 e)
1+e
(5.9)
rp = r ( = ) =
p
= a (1 + e)
1e
(5.10)
We would also like to find a connection between the time and the true anomaly in order to know the necessary time to go from a point to another: if this is
extremely simple for a circular orbit where the speed is constant, for an elliptic
orbit its a bit more complicate.
To solve this, Kepler introduced the quantity M, called mean anomaly, which
represents the fraction of an orbit period which has elapsed since perigee, expressed as an angle:
M M0 = n (t t0 )
(5.11)
where n, called mean motion, is the average angular velocity.

But this method gives only an average position and velocity. To have a more
precise value, we need to define the eccentric anomaly E. Shown in fig.5.9,
its the angle between the direction of perigee and the current position of the
satellite projected onto the ellipses circumscribing circle perpendicularly to the
major axis, measured at the center of the ellipse.
Figure 5.9: Eccentric and mean anomalies.

It can be connected to the true anomaly with the relation:
r

1+e
E
tan
=
tan
2
1e
2
(5.12)
Once the eccentric anomaly is know, the time comes from the following time
law:
Galli Stefania
36
s
t t0 =
5.2.2
a3
(E esin (E))
(5.13)
The orbit of OUFTI-1
For the orbital analysis, we used some home-maid Matlab programs and the
STK software.
As above mentioned, the following parameters are assigned:
Perigee altitude: rp =350 Km
Apogee altitude: ra =1200 Km
Inclination : i=71
In order to have an idea of the orbit, we represented its ground track in
fig.5.10 and a tridimentional view in figure 5.11.
Figure 5.10: OUFTI-1 orbit representation for 12 hours orbit(STK)
Galli Stefania
37
CHAPTER 5
Figure 5.11: OUFTI-1: orbits tridimentional view. Optimum case: the subsatellite point at apogee is at the same latitude as Liège.
Given a perigee of 350 Km and an apogee of 1200 Km altitude, we calculated
all the above mentioned parameters:
semi-major axis: a = 7153.14Km
eccentricity: e = 0.0594
2
angular momentum: h = 5.33 104 Km

s
orbit parameter: p = 7127.7Km
2
energy: E = 27.8 Km
s2
period: T = 6020.8s = 100.35min

perigee speed: vp = 7.922 Km
s
apogee speed: va = 7.034 Km
s
rev
mean motion: n = 14.35 day
Galli Stefania
38
In figure 5.12 the true, eccentric and mean anomaly are represented: as the
orbit is elliptic, they have different evolutions.
Figure 5.12: OUFTI-1 orbit: true, eccentric and mean anomaly as a function
of time over a period
Just to have an idea of the possible circular orbit at 350 Km altitude, a
comparison is reported in table 5.1.
Table 5.1: Comparison between the two possible orbits
350x1200 Km 350x350 Km
Semi-major axis a (Km)
7153.14
6728.14
Eccentricity
0.0594
0
2e
Km
Energy E s2
-27.8
-29.6

Perigee speed vp Km
7.922
7.697
s
Apogee spped va Km
7.034
7.697
s
Period T (min)
100.35
91.53
The most important difference between the two orbit is the speed: in fact,
in order to have a good communication, we would like to have a satellite passing
over the ground station as slowly as possible. This reduces in fact the doppler
effect and, even more important, increases the time during which the satellite
is in the the ground stations field of view.
As the link budget guarantees a sufficient signal-to-noise level at 1200 Km altitude(see chapter 10), we prefer the elliptic orbit with the apogee over the
northern hemisphere at the missions beginning.
Galli Stefania
39
CHAPTER 5
5.3
Orbit perturbations
The Keplerian orbit, considering only the earth gravitational force and the
satellite fictitious centrifugal force, provides an excellent reference but, for a
more accurate study, we need to take into account some minor effects that
make deviate the nominal orbit.
We classify these variations of orbital elements in three main categories:
the secular variations: they are a linear variation of the element. Their
effect cumulates in time and therefore they are the cause of changing shape
and orientation of the orbit.
the long-period variations: they are those with a period greater than the
orbital period.
the short-period variations: they have a period less than the orbital period.
They can usually be neglected.
In the sequel, three main effects will be considered: the earths oblateness, the
atmospheric drag and the solar radiation pressure.
5.3.1
The earths oblateness
The gravitational potential in the Keplerian theory corresponds to that of an

uniform sphere or, equivalently, to that of a punctual mass:
V =
(5.14)
Unluckily, the earth isnt a perfect sphere and its mass isnt uniformly distributed: therefore some secondary effects are produced. To take them into
account, a more accurate model is necessary. We introduce, besides the radial
coordinate r representing the distance from the center of the earth, the latitude and the longitude . The complete expression of the earth gavitational
potential becomes:
( X
" n
#)

n
X
Re n
Re
V (r, , ) =
n=2
Jn Pn sin () +
m=1
(Cnm cos (m) Smn sin (m)) Pnm sin ()
The coefficient Cnm et Snm are constant while Pnm sin () are the associated
Legendre functions.
The gravitational potential can be so expressed as a sum of infinite terms that
can be classified into three groups (fig.5.13):
if m = 0 the potential depends only on the latitude. This effect, called
zonal harmonics, takes into account the earth oblateness. Often we calls
Cm0 = Jm .
Galli Stefania
40
if m = n the potential depends only on longitude. This effect, called

sectorial harmonics, is used to consider the difference in density between
the oceans and the continents. They are also called Cmm = Jmm
if m 6= n and m 6= 0 the potential depends both on latitude and longitude.
This effect, called tesseral harmonics, is used to take into account great
mass concentration (Ex. the Himalaya).
Figure 5.13: Earth oblateness and not uniform mass effect: zonal harmonics
(left), sectorial harmonics (middle) and tesseral harmonics (right)
The most important effect is the J2 : all the others are usually neglected with
the exception of the J22 effect that needs to be considered for geostationary orbit.
In OUFTI-1 case, the only harmonic considered is J2 : its principal effects
are the secular motions of the ascending node and of the perigee.
The motion of the ascending node and therefore the variation of its right ascension occurs because of the added attraction of earths equatorial bulge, which
introduces a force components toward the equator. The resultant acceleration
causes the satellite to reach the equator before the crossing point for a spherical
earth. The secular nodal variation of can be numerically evaluated with the
formula:
35
Re
deg
9.9639
(5.15)
cos(i)
=
2
day
a
(1 e2 )
The secular motion of perigee occurs because the force is no longer proportional to the inverse square radius and the orbit is consequently no longer a
closed ellipse. It can be expressed as:
9.9639
=
(1 e2 )2
5.3.2
Re
a
35

5 2
2 sin (i)
2
deg
day
(5.16)
The atmospheric drag
For low earth orbit, the effect of the residual atmosphere is often the main
perturbation. Drag acts in the opposite direction of the velocity vector and
Galli Stefania
41
CHAPTER 5
removes energy from the orbit. As a consequence, the semi-major axis is reduced
and the orbit leans towards becoming circular. In case of elliptic orbit, the drag
acts mainly at the perigee but its effect is a reduction in altitude of the apogee.
It generates therefore a force and the acceleration tangent to the orbit trajectory:
ScD
1
D = v 2
2
m
m
s2
(5.17)
where is the atmosphere density, v the speed with respect to the atmosphere, S the satellite cross-sectional area, cD the drag coefficient and m
the mass. The term cDmA is called ballistic coefficient and is often considered
constant for a satellite. For small satellites this coefficient is small and therefore the acceleration is bigger: the situation is therefor particularly critical for
nanosatellites.
Drag cause a variation of the semi-major axis and of the eccentricity. It has
also an effect on the argument of perigee but unimportant with respect to the
effect of the earth oblateness.
For our simulation we consider the cross-sectional area as the surface of a cube
face and cD = 2.2.
The atmosphere density varies depending on the solar activity which has a cycle
of 11 years: as the solar minimum is happened in 2006, we used a mean density
value.
Figure 5.14: Aerodynamic drag acceleration for the first day mission.
Galli Stefania
42
5.3.3
The solar radiation pressure
Solar radiation pressure generates a force in all the direction and varies as a
function of sun, earth and satellite position. It makes vary periodically all the
orbital elements and its especially intense for small satellites at high altitude:
it needs to be considered for the OUFTI-1 orbit.
The following formulas are an approximation of the solar pressure acceleration
effect averaging the eclipses and the sunlight.
The perturbing acceleration of an earth satellite can be computed by means of
the following equation:
S
(5.18)
asum = 0.97 107 g (1 + R)
W
where R [1, 1] is the optical reflection constant (-1 if transparent body, 0 if
blackbody, 1 if mirror), g the gravitation acceleration at sea level, S the effective
satellite projected area and W the total weight.
We used R=0.6 to take into account the solar cells and the thermal coating:
this value is probably elevated but, not having precise details on the surfaces,
we preferred to overestimate the perturbing force.
Anyway, the solar perturbing force is much smaller than the atmospheric drag.
The direction of asun is perpendicular to the effective area and its normalized
components along the satellite orbit radius vector, perpendicular to it in the
orbit plane and along the orbit normal are:

i
cos2
Fr,sun = cos
cos ( )
2
2

i
sin2
sin2
cos ( + )
2
2
1
sin (i) sin () [cos ( ) cos ( )]
2

i
sin2
cos2
cos ( + )
2
2

i
m
cos2
sin2
cos ( )
2
2
s2

i
2
F,sun = cos
cos2
sin ( )
2
2

i
sin2
sin2
sin ( + )
2
2
1
sin (i) sin () [sin ( ) sin ( )]
2

i
sin2
cos2
sin ( + )
2
2

i
m
cos2
sin2
sin ( )
2
2
s2
2
Galli Stefania
43
(5.19)
CHAPTER 5
F,sun = sin (i) cos2

2
sin ( ) sin (i) sin2
cos (i) sin () sin ( )
m
s2

2
sin ( + )
where:
d = M JD 150195.5
epsilon = 23.44
M = 358 .48 + 0 .98560027d
= 279 .70 + 0 .9856473d + 1 .92sin(M )
MJD is the Modified Julian Date: Julian Date - 2400000.5.
As shown in figure 5.15 this acceleration is much less intense than the one caused
by the aerodynamic drag.
Figure 5.15: Solar pressure acceleration for the first day mission
5.3.4
Orbital parameters variation
The acceleration obtained above for the solar pressure and the atmosphere drag
can be used the quantify the variation of orbital elements:
a = 2a vft
2
r
e = v (e + cos ()) ft av sin () fn

(5.20)
i = hr cos ( ) f
1
2sin()
r
e =
ft + 2e + a sin () v fn ecos
(i)

r
sin (i) = sin ( ) f
h
Galli Stefania
44

where = . ft , fn , f are the acceleration respectively tangent and
normal to the orbit in the orbital plane and normal to the orbital plane.
This acceleration are the integrated in order to have the parameters variation.
The effect of earths oblateness on and is calculated and directly added.
The results for the OUFTI-1 orbit over one year obtained with Matlab and with
STK are here presented:
Figure 5.16: Orbit variation over a year.
Figure 5.17: Semi-major axis variation over a year.
Galli Stefania
45
CHAPTER 5
Figure 5.18: Eccentricity variation over a year.
Figure 5.19: Perigee and apogee altitude variation over a year.
Galli Stefania
46
Figure 5.20: Inclination variation over a year.
Figure 5.21: Right ascension of ascending node variation over a year
Galli Stefania
47
CHAPTER 5
Figure 5.22: Argument of perigee variation over a year

The Matlab results fit almost perfectly to those of STK: the small difference
probably comes from the fact that the density model of STK is more accurate
than the one developed for the Matlab routine.
As the apogee altitude strongly decreases, we would like to know when OUFTI-1
will definitely enter the atmosphere ending its life. In order to study the end of
life, we have used the software STK: it estimate a lifetime of 4.2 years or 22915
orbits. The evolution of the altitude of perigee and apogee are represented in
figure 5.23
Figure 5.23: Evolution of perigee and apogee altitude until the end of life for
the elliptic orbit
Galli Stefania
48
A four year lifetime is probably much more than operating lifetime of our
D-STAR payload. In fact, as explained in paragraph 5.7, the radiation environment in the foreseen orbit is pretty hard and we still do not know neither
the total radiation dose that can be tolerated nor the frequency of Single Event
Phenomena (SEP) in that orbit for a given electronic part.
Concerning the circular orbit at 350 Km altitude, the lifetime with the same
conditions (cD = 2.2 and cross-sectional area equivalent to a faces surface) we
have a lifetime of 54 days (867 orbits) and the evolution of the perigee and
apogee altitude is represented in figure 5.24
Figure 5.24: Evolution of perigee and apogee altitude until the end of life for
the circular orbit
Galli Stefania
49
CHAPTER 5
5.4
The launch window
The launch window represents the time gap useful to place the satellite in a
predetermined orbit from a specific launch site. As the orbital plane is fixed in
the inertial space, the exact launch instant is the time when the launch site on
the surface of the earth rotates through the orbital plane.
The launch is possible only if the latitude of the launch site is smaller than the
orbit inclination or equal to it: here comes the importance of having a spaceport
as near as possible to the equatorial line.
The time to launch depends on the right ascension of ascending node and on
the inclination required.
In the OUFTI-1 case, as it will be secondary payload on the launcher, we cannot
choose any of these parameters and therefore we cannot determine the launch
windows.
5.5
Earth coverage
Earth coverage refers to the surface that a spacecraft instrument or antenna can
see at one instant or over an extended period. The leading parameters are the
covered area and the rate at which new land comes into view as the spacecraft
moves. We can so identify four key parameters:
Footprint Area also called instantaneous Field Of View area(FOV): area
that an instrument can see at any instant
Instantaneous Access Area (IAA): all the area that an instrument could
potentially see at any instant if it were scanned through its normal range
of orientations
Area Coverage Rate (ACR): the rate at which the instrument is sensing
or accessing new land
Area Access Rate (AAR): the rate at which new land is coming into the
spacecrafts access area
For an omnidirectional antenna, the footprint corresponds to the access area,
as well the coverage rate to the access rate: for OUFTI-1 we need therefore to
calculate only two parameters.
We consider a minimal elevation of the spacecraft over the horizon of = 5 and
we proceed to the determination of the field of view and of the area coverage
rate. The notations are indicated in figure 5.25
The first step is to find out the angle : for a directional antenna or an
optical payload it represents the beam width and is therefore imposed. In case
of omnidirectional antenna, the directivity diagram has an angle with a loss of
Galli Stefania
50
Figure 5.25: Field of view (out of scale)

3dB in gain much bigger than the earth angular radius: we can therefore assume
that all the earth is in the access zone of the antenna. In this case depends
from the fact that a point on the earths surface can see the satellite only if it
is higher than 5 over the horizon.

(
56.9 (1200Km)
Re sin (90 + )
= asin
=
(5.21)
2
Re + h
70.8 (350Km)
Once is known, can be calculated:
= 180 (90 + ) =
2
28.1 (1200Km)
14.2 (350Km)
(5.22)
An approximated formula permits to calculate the footprint length, in this

case we have the footprint radius:
LF OV
= 111.319543 =
2
3128Km (1200Km)
1580Km (3500Km)
(5.23)
We would also like to know the footprint area, the area of the spherical cap:
(
F OV area = 2Re2 (1 sin (90 )) =
Galli Stefania
51
3.0 107 Km2 (1200Km)

(5.24)
7.8 106 Km2 (350Km)
CHAPTER 5
To conclude, we can say that with a footprints length of 3128 Km, OUFTI-1
can cover the entire western Europe at once. Anyway, also at 350 Km altitude
with a footprints length of 1580 Km, the satellite passing over Paris can keep in
contact an amateur radio operator in Lisbon with one in Stockholm. Concerning
the Area Coverage Rate, it depends on the instrument dwell time and for an
omnidirectional antenna it hasnt any meaning.
The Area Access Rate is estimated through the following formula:
(
2
(1200Km)
11660 Km
1.49 108 sin ()
s
=
AAR =
(5.25)
2
Km
T
6073 s (350Km)
5.6
Communication time
Directly connected to the earth coverage, we need to consider the communication time with the ground station in Liège. In fact, this is one of the driving
requirements for the OUFTI-1 design. We are dealing with an amateur radio
satellite: as the community of amateur radio in almost uniformly distributed
all around the world, we chose to favor the Belgian amateur radio operators.
In this way we also maximize the time available for communication with our
ground station in Liège.
But the same problem reappears in this case too: we cannot impose the orbital
parameters and specifically the argument of perigee and the right ascension on
ascending node. Hence we can only analyze the best and the worst situation
and verify if the time is enough to satisfy the mission requirements.
The worst case is represented in figure 5.6: as the perigee is over Belgium, the
speed of OUFTI-1 passing over the ground station is extremely high and the
time consequently really short.
In the worst case we have an access time of 30 min/day. It seems to be
sufficient but this time is not continuous: the maximum continuous access time
in the worst case is about 8 minutes.
The best case is instead when the apogee is over Belgium and its represented
in figure 5.6: in this case the time available for communication is much higher
as the satellite is passing slowly over the ground station.
In the best case we have an access time of 104 min/day with a maximum
continuous time of 17 minutes.
Galli Stefania
52
Figure 5.26: Worst case for communication: the white line represents the
satelites access to the ground station
Figure 5.27: Best case for communication: the white line represents the satelites
access to the ground station
Galli Stefania
53
CHAPTER 5
5.7
The radiation environment
The trajectory of charged particles of solar wind, electrons and protons, is modified by the interaction with the earth magnetic field: they remain trapped into
the so-called radiations belts, or Van-Allen belts. They are two belts where the
radiation environment is therefore extremely hard and the spacecrafts passing
through them needs to be protected. We can in fact identify two different belts:
the inner belt extending approximately between 1,000 and 15,000 Km. It
contains high concentrations of energetic protons with energies exceeding
100 MeV and electrons in the range of hundreds of kiloelectronvolts
the outer belt extending till 50,000 Km. It contains mainly energetic
electrons.
The belts altitude strongly depends also from the solar activity.
Anyway OUFTI-1 will have the apogee inside the inner belt and therefore some
cares have to be taken. Trapped particles in the radiation bells, as well as solar
flare protons and galactic cosmic rays, can cause in fact the so-called Single
Event Phenomena (SEP) within microelectronic devices. There are three different types of SEP: the Single-Event Upset, SEU, the Single-Event Latchup,
LEL, and the Single-Event Burnout, SEB. If the first case neither damages the
part nor interferes with its subsequent operation, the second one causes the part
to hang up and to no longer operate until the power to the device is turned off
and than back on. The most critical situation is the Single-Event Burnout: in
this case in fact the devices fails permanently.
In order to prevent these events, we need to blind somehow the sensible parts
but to do that we need to know the total radiation dose, which represent the
sum of the protons, electrons and bremsstrahlung dose produced by the interaction of electrons with the shielding material.
The estimation of the total dose has been done with the software SPENVIS,
SPace ENVironment Information System, a software developed by the Belgian
Institute for Space Astronomy and funded by the European Space Agency.
In figure 5.28 the radiation dose as a function of equivalent aluminium shielding
thickness is represented. The unit for the radiation dose is the rad which is
the amount that deposits 100 ergs (6.25 107 M eV ) per gram of target material.
These values have been calculated for the total mission duration with the hypothesis of solar maximum: they are therefore higher that the real values. The
analysis has been done for a finite slab with silicon as target material.
As expected, the radiation dose of protons and electrons is especially intense
but, already with 2 mm of shielding aluminium, it can be greatly reduced.
Once the value of total radiation dose that can be tolerated by the electronics
devices on board and the frequency of Single Event Phenomena (SEP) will be
Galli Stefania
54
Figure 5.28: Radiation dose for the OUFTI-1 elliptical orbit

known, a suitable shielding protection will be added.
The same analysis has been done for the circular orbit at 350 Km altitude.
The results are represented in figure 5.29: as in this case the satellite is far away
from the radiations bells, the dose is much smaller.
Figure 5.29: Radiation dose for the OUFTI-1 circular orbit
Galli Stefania
55
CHAPTER
6
STRUCTURE AND DEPLOYMENT
A CubeSat is a 10 cm cube with a mass up to 1 Kg: the structures shape is

compulsory and its mass has to be reduced at most. Furthermore, the OUFTI-1
schedule is really challenging as the foreseen development time varies between
two and two and an half year. For these reasons, we chose to buy an off the shelf
structure. If on the one hand developing our own structure would have helped
in reaching the educational goal which characterized the project, on the other
hand it would have required a great amount of time and resources not available
at the moment and the result would have probably been less successful.
As mentioned in paragraph 4.1, being a CubeSat impose some precise characteristics ( for more details see [AD4]). Furthermore, the European Space
Agency add in its Call for proposal [RD2] a precise requirements: two separation switches are compulsory on Vega.
There are actually on the market two CubeSat structure developers: Pumpkin
and ISIS. Both the two structures have their advantages and drawbacks that
will be exposed in the following paragraph. After an accurate analysis we chose
the structure of Pumpkin as it better fits our requirements not only in terms of
structure performances but also in terms of provided services.
Concerning the antennas deployment system, they have to be folded during
launch and deployed once in orbit. To this end, they will be wrapped around
contact points and maintained in this configuration using the deployment mechanism.
57
CHAPTER 6
6.1
Pumpkin structure
The structure developed by Pumpkin.Inc (San Francisco,CA,USA) is the main

part of the so-called CubeSat-Kit. They offer in fact a wide range of products
for CubeSat from hardware to software. At the moment, two of this structures
are flying on the CubeSats Libertad-1 (University Sergio Arboleda, Bogotà,
Colombia) and Delfi-C3 (TU Delft, The Netherlands). Concerning the last one,
its a 3-Unit structure.
The base configuration is composed by:
- Flight Model
- FM340 Flight Module
- Salvo Software and libraries
Furthermore a development board to test the CubeSat, a rechargeable electrical power system and an attitude determination and control system based on
reactions wheels, torque coil dampers and magnetometers are available.
Two kind of structure are actually available: skeletonized or solid-walls
(fig.6.1).
Figure 6.1: CubeSat-Kit structure skeletonized and solid-walls

The standard one is the skeletonized as it minimize the mass (see table 6.1).
The materials employed are two aluminium alloys: 5052-H32 for the chassis, the
cover plate and the base plate and 6061-T64 for all the machined components
(i.e. feet, spacers). The surfaces in contact with the launcher are hard anodyzed
to prevent galling and the other surfaces are gold alodyned to guarantee the
conductivity.
Galli Stefania
58
CHAPTER 6. STRUCTURE AND DEPLOYMENT

All the systems have an operating temperature between -40 C and +85 C.
The mass balance is reported in the following table:
Table 6.1: CubeSat Kit mass
Cover plate assembly
Base plate assembly
Main structure
Chassis screws (x4)
Total structure
Flight module
Total
Skeletonized Mass [g] Solid-Walls Mass [g]

37
49
50
62
71
132
2
2
166
251
50
50
216
301
The skeletonized structure results much lighter than the solid-walls one.
Even if the mass balance wont be the most critical problem for OUFTI-1 because there wont be any added payload and we are not planning to use any
attitude control, we chose the skeletonized structure. In fact, one of the goals of
the LEODIUM project is the development of a space platform that can be use
by the future CubeSats for scientific experiments: we have to make it as lighter
as possible in order to have a greater mass available for payloads and attitude
control in the next missions, even if it wouldnt be necessary for OUFTI-1.
The main advantages of this structure is that we are sure of its reliability as
two CubeSats are already flying with it: this is the key feature that make us
choose the CubeSat-Kit. The D-STAR system into space already represents in
fact a challenging technology demonstration, even if we havent any evidence
that it wont correctly works: adding a possible structure failure to the already
existing risks seemed us too much.
Certainly some budget considerations have been done too, but they have never
been the driving requirements.
6.2
ISIS structure
Since one and an half year, ISIS, Innovative Solution In Space (Delft, AL, The
Netherlands), has developed a CubeSat structure based on the experience gained
with the project of Delfi-C3. They also have some other products for CubeSats
and more in general for miniaturized satellites, as antennas and ground station
and they provide a launch service.
The structure is entirely made of an aluminium alloy 6061-T6 with the sideframes black hard anodised and the ribs and shear-panels black alodyned.
Galli Stefania
59
CHAPTER 6
Figure 6.2: ISIS structure

In table 6.2 the mass balance is reported: the primary structure is composed
by the chassis and the side frames, the secondary one by all the internal stacks
and spacers.
Table 6.2: ISIS structure mass
Mass [g]
Primary structure
171
Secondary structure
35
Total
206
The mass is much higher than in the previous case: 206 g versus 166 g. The
main reason is that the ISIS structure is completely solid-walls. If we consider
the solid-walls structure of Pumpkin we see that the ISIS one is lighter: this
probably comes from having used everywhere the same material with a better
ratio between density and mechanical properties.
Anyway, in our case this structure is not advantageous respect to the skeletonized one of CubeSat-Kit.
As said in the previous paragraph, the fact that the the ISIS structure has never
be sent into orbit make us decide to buy the Pumpkin structure.
Galli Stefania
60
CHAPTER 6. STRUCTURE AND DEPLOYMENT
6.3
Deployment System
The deployment system is designed to provide a standard secondary payload

interface between the CubeSats and the launch vehicle. Its key features are, on
the one hand, to protect the launch vehicle and its main passenger from any
mechanical, electrical or electromagnetic interference from the CubeSats in the
event of a catastrophic picosatellite failure and, on the other hand, to release
the CubeSats with a minimum spin and without any collision.
The fact that the structure for a CubeSat is fixed allows the development of standard deployment systems, usually called Picosatellite Orbital Deployer (POD).
Currently there are four different deployment system:
P-POD: Poly-Picosatellite Orbital Deployer. Developed by the Stanford
University (Stanford, CA, USA) and the California Polytechnic Institute
(San Luis Obispo, CA, USA), it holds three single CubeSats stacked on
top on each other
T-POD: Tokyo-Picosatellite Orbital Deployer. Developed by the Technical University of Tokyo (Japan), it holds a single CubeSat
X-POD: eXperimental-Push Out Deployer. Developed by the Space Flight
Laboratory (SFL) of the University of Toronto Institute of AeroSpace
(UTIAS) (Canada), ita custom, independent separation system for three
CubeSats and can be tailored for satellites of different size
SPL: Single-picosatellite Launcher. Developed by Astrofein (Berlin, Germany) ita a custom deployment system for a single CubeSat
As explained in [RD2], the deployment system for the Vega maiden flight is
supplied by the Educational Office of the European Space Agency. Among the
possible choices, they selected the two standard flight-proven POD of the California State University (P-POD) and of Toronto University (X-POD). Each one
of them can carry three CubeSats fastened with an electrically activated springloaded mechanism. After a signal is sent from the launch vehicle to release the
mechanism, the spring-loaded door is open and the CubeSats are pushed out by
the main spring along guidance rails, ejecting them into orbit with a separation
speed of few m/s. The door open anywhere between 90 and 260 , measured
from its closed position, depending on how the POD is mounted. The two foreseen POD have the only main difference that the X-POD has an independent
release mechanism for the spring deployer and feedback to indicate that the
deployment has taken place.
The POD is a rectangular box made of high-strength Aluminium 7075-T73.
Its also coated Teflon-impregnated anodization to prevent cold-welding and
Galli Stefania
61
CHAPTER 6
Figure 6.3: P-POD: deployment system for three CubeSats

to provide a smooth guiding surface for the CubeSats during deployment. A
deployment sensor send telemetry data to the launcher: the switch is wired as
a normally closed circuit and, when the door is open, the circuit opens. This
guarantees that the door remains close until the CubeSats are deployed.
Currently negotiations are going on between the Educational Office and the
POD suppliers: the final choice hast been communicated yet but this doesnt
change anything in the CubeSat development as both meet the same standard.
Galli Stefania
62
CHAPTER
7
ATTITUDE CONTROL SYSTEM
The Attitude Control System (ACS) stabilizes the spacecraft and orients it in
desired directions despite to the external disturbing forces acting on it. Actually, its part of a more complex system: the Attitude Determination and
Control System (ADCS) but, in the case of OUFTI-1, speaking about attitude
determination is inappropriate as it wont be on board.
An ADCS needs in fact sensors and actuator with the consequent mass and
power needed: this is often incompatible with a CubeSat.
The incompatibility with OUFTI-1 doesnt come much from the mass requirement as we expect to fulfill it but from the power. As explained in chapter 10,
the power produced in orbit is low because of the limited solar arrays surface
and just enough to guarantee a good communication when the satellite is at
the apogee. Furthermore, we intend to provide OUFTI-1 with omni-directional
antennas: in this context, it does not need a priori to point in a specific direction and may gently tumble about all three axes. Therefore we opt for two
possible solutions: not having any kind of ACS or have a totally passive ACS
with the goal of slowing down its rotation rate due to disturbing torques and of
guaranteeing an acceptable equilibrium position.
63
CHAPTER 7
7.1
Inertia properties
Before proceeding with the estimation of the disturbing torques acting on the
satellite, we need to know its inertia properties. As the position of the elements
inside the structure is still unknown, we will use a totally simplified model. As
shown in figure 7.1 there are four antennas: they are approximately Llong = 50
cm and lshort = 17.5 cm long as they are 1/4 of the wavelength. Made of
aluminium and with a diameter of 2 mm, they have respectively a mass of
mlong = 4.15 g and mshort = 1.44 g. The mass of the cubic central body is
therefore mcube = 0.994 Kg. The longest antennas are directed as the y-axis
and the shortest as the z-axis.
Figure 7.1: Example of OUFTI-1 configuration

We study the CubeSat as a cube with uniform density, whose gravity center
is situated in the geometrical center, to which we add a mass M on the corner
[0.05 0.05 0.05] m respect to the geometrical center of the cube in order to keep
into account all the non-symmetrical components. We calculate it in order to
displaces the gravity center 2 cm away from the geometric center of the cube:
this is the maximum allowed by the CubeSat specifications.
M=
0.02mcube
= 0.3976
0.05
Kg
The mass of the uniform cube is then munif = 0.5964
(7.1)
Kg.
We calculate then the inertia moments of all the parts and we place them
into the gravity center of the satellite thanks to the Huygens-Steiner theorem
of parallel axis:
IP = IGC + md2
Galli Stefania
64
(7.2)
CHAPTER 7. ATTITUDE CONTROL SYSTEM
where IGC and IP are respectively the inertia moment respect to an axis
passing through the gravity center and the one respect to an axis parallel to the
previous one and passing through the point P; d id the distance between the
two axis.
So the moments of inertia of the cube of uniform density respect to the
gravity center of the satellite are:
Ix,cube = Iy,cube = Iz,cube =

munif l2
+ munif 0.032 + 0.032 = 1.47 103 Kgm2(7.3)
6
Then, the moment of inertia of the mass M respect to the gravity center
are:

Ix,M = Iy,M = Iz,M = M 0.032 + 0.032 = 7.16 104 Kgm2
(7.4)
If we call 3 the longitudinal axis of each antenna, its moments of inertia

respect to its extremities are:
2
mlong llong
Ilong = I1,long = I2,long =
= 3.32 104 Kgm2
3
2
mshort lshort
Ishort = I1,short = I2,short =
= 1.39 105 Kgm2
3
I3,long
= I3,short
=0
(7.5)
With the y-axis directed as the longer antennas and the z-axis as the shorter,
we can now have the antennas moments of inertia respect to gravity center:

Ix,ant =Ilong + mlong 0.022 + 0.033 + Ilong + mlong 0.022 + 0.073 +

+Ishort + mshort 0.022 + 0.033 + Ishort + mshort 0.022 + 0.073 =
=7.28 104 Kgm2

Iy,ant =mlong 0.022 + 0.023 + mlong 0.022 + 0.023 +

+Ishort + mshort 0.022 + 0.033 + Ishort + mshort 0.022 + 0.073 = (7.6)
=4.38 105 Kgm2

Iz,ant =Ilong + mlong 0.022 + 0.033 + Ilong + mlong 0.022 + 0.073 +

+mshort 0.022 + 0.023 + mshort 0.022 + 0.023 =
=6.93 104 Kgm2
Hence, the total moment of inertia are:
Galli Stefania
65
CHAPTER 7
Ix = Ix,cube + Ix,M + Ix,ant = 2.91 103

Iy = Iy,cube + Iy,M + Iy,ant = 2.23 103
Iz = Iz,cube + Iz,M + Iz,ant = 2.88 103
7.2
Kgm2
Kgm2
Kgm2
(7.7)
Disturbing torques
The first step to identify the most appropriate ACS is to quantify the disturbance torques acting on the satellite. They are affected by spacecraft orientation, mass properties and design symmetry. In a preliminary design phase is
therefore impossible to have a precise estimation of these torques because some
parameters, as the inertia moments or the center of mass position, arent well
known yet . The only thing we can do is to quantify the maximal disturbance
torque that we expect to have.
Once the inertia properties are known, we can proceed with the quantification
of the disturbance torques.
We identify four main sources of disturbance:
The gravity gradient: generated by the fact that the mass is not uniformly
distributed and therefore the gravity force vary depending on the position,
it forces the axis of minimum inertia moment to align themself with the
nadir direction:
Tgg =
3
(R IR)
r3
(7.8)
where R is the nadir direction and I the inertia matrix. If we pose =

45 (angular displacement of the minimum inertia axis from the nadir
direction) and r =apogee radius, we are in the worst case:
TGG,max =
3
|Imax Imin | sin (2) = 1.33 109
2r3
Nm
(7.9)
For an inertial spacecraft it is cyclic and it depends mainly from the inertia
properties of the vehicle and from its altitude.
Solar radiation: generated by the solar pressure whose resultant acts over
the surface on a specific point, not coinciding with the center of mass.
TSP =
Galli Stefania
X

Cs
(1 R)
rsk nTk S SAk
c
66
(7.10)
where Cs is the solar constant, c the speed of light, R the reflectivity

factor, rsk the vector from the center of mass to the kth surface element
Ak , nk the outward surface normal and S the unit vector from satellite to
sun.
We pose R = 0.6, in a simplified scalar expression and we have:
Cs
A (1 + R) cos(i) (cSP cGC ) = 2.06 109 N m (7.11)
c
where i = 0 is incidence angle of sun and cSP cGC = 0.022 + 0.022

the distance between the center of mass and the center of solar pressure,
projected on the surface.
Its usually cyclic when the satellite turns around the earth or around
itself (constant only for sun-oriented vehicles) and depends mainly from
the surface properties and from the spacecraft geometry.
TSP,max =
Aerodynamic drag: generated by the aerodynamic drag acting on the face

in a point non coinciding with the gravity center.

X
1
k
VA
rsk nTk V
TA = v 2 cD
2
(7.12)
where cD is the drag coefficient, rsk the vector from the center of mass to
the unit
the kth surface element Ak , nk the outward surface normal, V
vector of velocity and V the module of the velocity vector.
With cD = 2 and at the perigee we have:
1
TA = v 2 AcD (cA cGC ) = 1.84 107
2
Nm
(7.13)
where cA the center of aerodynamic force.

Variable for inertially oriented vehicle, it depends from the altitude and
on the geometry.
Magnetic field : generated by the coupling between the earth magnetic
field and the satellite residual dipole.
TM = D B
(7.14)
where B is the earth magnetic field and D the residual dipole. For the
moment we are not able to estimate it.
Galli Stefania
67
CHAPTER 7
This rough estimation is extremely useful to have an idea of the maximum

intensity of each perturbing couple but, as their directions are unknown, we
cannot add them to have the rotation rate of the satellite.
We made therefore a simulation for one day of the disturbing couples and we
calculate the cumulated angular momentum. A priori, a longer simulation could
be possible but the absence of attitude control causes the satellite to turn about
their axis and a really small time step is needed the have reliable results: the
computing time becomes quick huge and difficult to handle.
If we accept the hypothesis that the satellite is not turning, we have the
results shown in figures 7.2 and 7.3.
Figure 7.2: Gravity gradient couple for one orbit in case of non updated configuration
Galli Stefania
68
Figure 7.3: Aerodynamic couple for one orbit in case of non updated configuration
Galli Stefania
69
CHAPTER 7
Otherwise, an orbit simulation with the updated satellite attitude has been
run: the results are shown in figures 7.4 and 7.5.
Figure 7.4: Gravity gradient couple for one orbit in case of updated configuration
Figure 7.5: Gravity gradient couple for one orbit in case of updated configuration
Galli Stefania
70
We can see that the couples trend in the updated case is almost the same
than in the non-updated.
7.3
Attitude control hardware
The main question in the OUFTI-1 project is if we really need an attitude

control system. In fact, the use of omnidirectional antennas doesnt require a
specific orientation of the satellite respect to the earth. In theory, there would
be only one position to be avoided: the ideal antennas gain diagram shows in
fact that the only case that prevents the communication is when the antenna is
pointing directly to the ground station. In the real world, as the presence of the
CubeSat structure between the antennas avoids the perfect dipole, the gain is
non-null even along the antennas direction. Anyway it will be really small and
probably not enough to guarantee the communication. In this case we would
like to avoid these undesired positions.
Another problem connected to the attitude control system is that the rotation rate of the satellite shouldnt be too high. In fact, an high rotation rate
combined with the satellite speed on the orbit, could generate an huge speed
respect to the ground station with the consequent doppler effect. Event if it can
be corrected on earth, we cannot accept a too high value to guarantee a good
correction. Zero angular velocity is also undesired because of the risk of having
the antennas pointing towards the earth and because of thermal behavior with
a side continuously in sunlight.
Excluded all the active ACS devices as inertia and momentum wheels because
they require a power that is not available and because basically we do not need
to control the satellite but only to avoid some angular positions, we have two
possible choices: leave out any attitude control system or choose a passive system. The KISS philosophy would push us towards the first one but the need of
a good communications level makes us think it out.
A possible ACS would be a Passive Magnetic Attitude Control System (PMACS).
It has been used before on other CubeSats as Delfi-C3 and in XI-IV, respectively at the University of Delft (The Netherlands) and at the University of
Tokio (Japan).
Generally, it consists of a strong permanent magnet and hysteresis material on
one or two axes to damp rotation. The only rotation left is therefore the one
about the longitudinal axis of the magnet and the hysteresis material damp
the rotations about the others. As the magnet would align itself with the earth
magnetic field (almost always parallel to the earth surface on the OUFTI-1 orbit
as the inclination is low), we could in this case place the magnet on a direction
that prevents the antennas to be pointed towards the earth.
Otherwise, we could use only hysteresis material on all the three axes: in this
case, they wouldnt try to align themself to a precise direction but they would
Galli Stefania
71
CHAPTER 7
only slow down the rotation rate.

The two possibilities are under study and only more detailed analysis would
allow the choice between them.
Galli Stefania
72
CHAPTER
8
POWER SYSTEM
The electrical power system provides, stores, distributes and controls spacecraft
electrical power.
In this chapter, we will take care only of the power source: the hardware for
power control and distribution wont be part of this work.
The power source on an earth orbiting satellite is usually the sun power: through
solar arrays we can in fact collect the sun rays and transform their energy into
electrical power. As the performances of solar cells are subjected to degradation
along the mission, we speak about Beginning Of Life (BOL) and End of Life
(EOL). As the radiation environment over the foreseen orbit is hard, the solar
cells will be affected by an important degradation of their efficiency: all the
analysis will be carry out with the EOL parameters.
Usually the first step is to identify the power needed in order to adapt the solar
arrays surface to the requirements. In the case of a CubeSat, the problem is
different as the surface if fixed: even if deployable orientable solar arrays are
available, the constraints of mass and volume often hold the design back from
these heavy and risky elements. Furthermore, OUFTI-1 need power only for
the communication system and for the on-board computer. We will therefore
proceed in the identification of the available power and then we will size the
D-STAR system in order to work with it.
Two scenarios are still open, depending on the final design of the communication
system: the payload can be on all the time or it can be switch off when its not
used, for instance over the oceans. If the former option is the safer as the system
is never turn off and there isnt any risk of problems in turning it on, the latter
would allow an important power saving. As we follow the KISS principle as
far as its possible, we would prefer to leave the payload active all the time in
73
CHAPTER 8
order to prevent any failure due to the switching it on and off, but we need to
guarantee enough power. Furthermore, turning on and off the payload implies
that commands have to be generated by the on-board computer or sent from
the ground station.
All the following analysis is made for the elliptic orbit in the hypothesis of = 0
and = 0. However at the end of this chapter a parametric study for the power
produced in orbit will be carry out making vary this two parameters: the results
are basically the same but shifted in time and the most critical situation with
the minimum power always happen. Furthermore, the orbital parameters are
supposed to remains constant.
8.1
Eclipses duration
The first step to have an idea of the available power is to know the time of
eclipse: to have it, we need to know the direction of the sun rays on the orbit
plane.
As shown in figure 8.1, three planes play a role in this calculation with their
reference system: the ecliptic plane, the equator plane and the orbit plane.
Figure 8.1: Reference sistems

As shown in figure 8.1, the sun rays arrive to earth on the ecliptic plane on
the direction:
S = {cos (e )
N
sin {e }
0}
(8.1)
As above mentioned, the goal of this part is to express this direction into
the orbit reference. We can transform a vector from the ecliptic plane into the
equatorial plane thanks to a rotation about the xecl = xeq with the the rotation
matrix R1
Galli Stefania
74
CHAPTER 8. POWER SYSTEM
Figure 8.2: Sun rays direction on the ecliptic plane
1
0
0
xecl
xecl
xeq
yecl
yecl
yeq
= R1
= 0 cos (ieq ) sin (ieq )
zecl
zecl
0 sin (ieq ) cos (ieq )
zeq
(8.2)
One we have our vector expressed in the equatorial plane, we pass into a
first intermediate reference by turning of the right ascension of ascending node
about the zeq = z0 axis with the rotation matrix R2 :
cos () sin () 0 xeq

xeq
x
yeq
y0
yeq
= sin () cos () 0
= R2
zeq
0
0
1
z
zeq
(8.3)
Then we can consider the orbit inclination i for a rotation about the x0 = x00
axis thanks to the rotation matrix R3 and passing into a second intermediate
reference:
00
0
0
1
0
0
x
x
x
0
y 00
0
cos
(i)
sin
(i)
y
y0
=
= R3
00
0
0
z
0 sin (i) cos (i)
z
z
(8.4)
This second reference system is on the orbit plane but the abscissas axis
isnt oriented to the perigee. We consider therefore the argument of perigee by
rotating about the z00 = zorb with the matrix R4 :
00
cos () sin () 0 x00

xorb
x
yorb
y 00
= sin () cos () 0 y 00
= R4
00
00
zorb
0
0
1
z
z
Galli Stefania
75
(8.5)
CHAPTER 8
s expressed into the orbit reference:
We have now the vector N
xorb
xecl
yorb
yecl
= R4 R3 R2 R1
zorb
zecl
(8.6)
As the satellite is moving on the orbit plane, what we are interested in to

calculate the eclipses time is actually the projection of Ns on the orbit plane.
As indicated in figure 8.1, we calculate the angle that the projection of Ns
generates with the xorb :

Ns = atan
Ns,y
Ns,x

(8.7)
Figure 8.3: Sun rays direction projected on the orbit plane.

So far, we know the eclipses central angle = 180 + and therefore we
know the corresponding orbit radius.
As the distance between earth and sun is much bigger than the earths radius,
we can make the hypothesis that the lines determining the entrance and the exit
from eclipses are tangent to the earth surface, as shown in figure 8.1. Hence,
we have:

Re
out = 90 acos
r

out
R
e
in = 90 acos
rin
(8.8)
We can also exploit the relationship between radius and anomaly and we
have:
Galli Stefania
76

Re
1 + ecos + out
cos 90 out =
P

R
e
cos 90 in =
1 + ecos in
P
(8.9)
We solve this two equations and we have out and in . Then we transform
them into the corresponding eccentric anomalies in order to calculate the eclipses
duration.
A simulation over an year orbit shows the eclipse duration shown in figure
8.4: it means that, given the position of earth respect to sun, roughly corresponding to the day of the year, all the orbit taking place on that day have the
indicated eclipses duration.
Figure 8.4: Eclipse duration as a function of earth anomaly
8.2
Configuration and solar cells
In order to quantify the available power, we also need to know the satellite
configuration and, more specifically, the solar panels orientation.
The first thing to point out, is that, as we are not planning any attitude control,
we need solar panels on each face: in fact, we cant risk to have a face without
solar cells watching the sun causing a fall in the power production.
Galli Stefania
77
CHAPTER 8
Here we add an important hypothesis: the satellite turns on its orbit remaining inertially fixed. Considering that, as mentioned in the previous chapter, we
are trying to avoid the attitude control, this is a big approximation as its almost
impossible that its not tumbling about its axis. Aware of this limitation, we
also recognize that we are performing a feasibility study and that all the results
obtained are only indicative and will be useful to have an idea of the produced
power.
Another possibility is to study the so-called barbecue mode: as the satellite is
spinning around its axis and as all the faces are covered by solar cells, we could
identify an equivalent surface to use for the calculation.
We define each solar panel though its normal vector, its area and its efficiency. The area is the effective surface of solar cells and the efficiency is the
EOL efficiency. This latter is defined as the maximum percent of incident power
converted into electrical power:
Pmax
Cs S
Where Cs is the solar constant and S the cells surface.
(8.10)
In particular, for this simulation we used a triple junction Gallium-Arsenide

cell type having the properties reported in tables 8.1 and 8.2. We place two
cells on each face.
Table 8.1: Solar cells mechanical properties
Area [cm2 ]
Weight [mg/cm2 ]
Thickness [m]
30.18
86
150 20
Table 8.2: Solar cells electrical and thermal properties

BOL 1E14 5E14 1E15
%
26.8 0.953 0.913 0.886
Max Power Voltage Vmax [mV ]
2275 0.0953 0.920 0.908
Max Power Current Imax [mA/cm2 ] 7.922
1
0.993 0.976
dVmax /dT [mV / C]

-6.4
-6.8
-6.8
-7.0
2
dImax /dT [A/cm / C]
4.2
6.7
7.6
8.4
absorbivity at 28 C 0
0.91
1
1
1
The values indicated in the last three columns are the coefficient to apply for
the fluence of electrons having 1 Mev energy indicated on top of the column in
Galli Stefania
78

Eectrons/cm2 . For our mission the fluence over the lifetime, estimated through
the software Spenvis, is of 8.55 1011 : we can use the values of the third column
even if they are too pessimistic.
They give a value for the efficiency of 25.5 %: we will use 25% to be sure of not
oversetimating the power.
8.3
Power produced
We have now all the elements to calculate the power produced: the direction
of sun rays, the eclipse duration and the solar arrays orientation. The program
developed calculates the eclipses anomalies of entrance and exit. Looping on
the satellite anomaly, it determine whether its in sunlight or not: if yes, it
calculate the scalar product between the sun rays direction and the normal to
each face in order to have the incidence angle of sun:
s Ni
cos (i ) = N
i=1:6
(8.11)
where i indicates the face.

If cos (i ) < 0, it means that the face is not watching the sun as its turned in the
opposite direction: it doesnt contribute to the power production. Otherwise
we have the power produced by the i-th face:
Pi = Cs Ai i cos (i )
(8.12)
As logical, the maximum power of a face is generated when the sun rays
are perpendicular to it. This doesnt mean that the total maximum power is
produced when one solar array is perpendicular the sun: in fact, in order to
have the total maximum power we need to add the contributions of all the
faces. Indeed, the Delfi-C3 team performed a study to optimize the orientation
of solar cells: it came out that the best configuration is when a corner is directed
to the sun.
Once we have the power generated by each face, we sum the contribution and
we have the total power.
8.3.1
Elliptic orbit with starting orbital elements
For the OUFTI-1 elliptical orbit in case of = 0, = 0 and for a simulation

starting at the vernal equinox we have the result represented in figure 8.5.
Each vertical line represents one orbit on the moment of the year indicated
by the earth anomaly in abscissa. In blue are represented the eclipses and in
the dark red the maximum power.
Galli Stefania
79
CHAPTER 8
Figure 8.5: Total power produced: simulation over one year orbit.
Anyway, we are more interested in the power that we can effectively use at each
time: we calculated therefore the integrated power shown in figure 8.6. To have
it, we integrate the power over each orbit to have the total energy available
and then we divided it by the orbit duration. In this way, we know exactly the
power that we can guarantee continuously to our payload. All the losses on the
electrical power system and in the battery havent been taken into account yet.
Figure 8.6: Integrated power: simulation over one year orbit

We can see that, even in the worst period of the year, we can guarantee 1.3
W. This is the value we will use to dimension our communication system.
Galli Stefania
80
8.3.2
Elliptic orbit with orbital elements after one year

mission and circular orbit
As in this analysis the orbital parameters are supposed to be constant, we would

like to have an idea of the power available after one year mission, assuming that
the system will be able to work till that moment. We imposed then the orbital
parameters obtained by the perturbation study:
Table 8.3: Elliptic orbit with orbital parameters after one year
Perigee altitude [Km]
Apogee altitude [Km]
Semi-major axis [Km]
Eccentricity
Right ascension of ascending node
Argument of perigee
Inclination
341
1036
7067
0.0491
279
128
71
Starting with those parameters, we have the power produces represented in

figure 8.7
Figure 8.7: Total power and integrated power for the orbital parameters after
one year mission
As we can see, the difference is really small: we can therefore assume that
after one year mission we will still have enough power.
The same analysis has been performed for the circular orbit at 350 Km
altitude: the results are in figure 8.8
We find out that the total integrated power is lower than in the elliptic
case. Even if this lack in power could appear as a main drawback, the situation
Galli Stefania
81
CHAPTER 8
Figure 8.8: Total power and integrated power for the circular orbit with = 0
and = 0
is different. In fact, being at lower altitude, the communication system needs
less power to communicate as the path losses at smaller: even if the available
power is less than in the elliptic case, we could in theory guarantee all the same
a good communication. However, as above mentioned, this orbit present the
main drawback of en extremely brief lifetime.
8.3.3
Parametric study
The availability of power is the main parameter in the development of a CubeSat. In fact, due to the limited solar arrays surface and to to the mission
requirements, the power is often less than what needed. If the design is carried
out in the hypothesis of a certain amount of power and then the power effectively available on board is less than expected, the mission would definitely be
compromised. Thats the reason why we used an efficiency of 25% instead of
25,5% and why we also performed a parametricl study on the orbit parmeters
that havent been fixed yet: the right ascension of ascending node and the
argument of perigee .
We studied many possibles combinations of those two parameters and we found
out that the most different situations are those with them set to 90 . In figures
8.9, 8.10 and 8.11, the total power produced and the integrated power for these
cases are represented. The important remark that comes out, is that the most
critical situation, the one with the minimum power available, always happens,
even if shifted in time. This means that the two missing parameter havent a
predominant role in this phase of mission design as we have all the same to
guarantee a correct functionality of the payload with 1.3 W.
Galli Stefania
82
Figure 8.9: Total power and integrated power for = 90 and = 0
Galli Stefania
83
CHAPTER 8
8.4
Battery and operating modes
As above mentioned, no detailed study has been conducted over the power
hardware. Anyway, in analogy with all the other CubeSats, launched or in an
advanced design phase, we will choose a lithium-ion battery because they provide more energy per kilogram than other battery types. Regarding the power
conditioning and distribution unit, a non-regulated bus possibly coupled with
DC/DC converters seems the best option.
The lack of active attitude control and of a specific payload simplified the identifications of operating modes respect to power. We have in fact only two operating modes depending on the D-STAR system. We have three elements requiring
power: the D-STAR system, the on board computer and the radio beacon. The
latter, as introduced chapter 10, is the safer communications system and needs
a power much smaller than that of D-STAR.
Table 8.4: Operating modes
D-STAR
ONBOARD COMPUTER
RADIO BEACON
MODE 1 MODE 1
OFF
ON
ON
ON
ON
ON
The first mode is a kind on stand-by mode: the on board computer is on and
the radio beacon is sending the housekeeping data and receiving the commands.
The second mode is the real operating mode when the D-STAR system is on
and receiving and sending a amateur radio signal.
Galli Stefania
84
CHAPTER
9
THERMAL-CONTROL SYSTEM
The goal of thermal control is to guarantee to all the elements on board thermal
conditions that allow them to reach their expected performances: each one of
them has to be able to work when needed, during lifetime, with the required
performances from the beginning until the end of life.
Each system has well defined temperature limits. We usually define the working
temperature limits and the stand-by temperature limits: the former indicates
the temperature gap where the element can work respecting the requirements,
the latter the temperature gap where the elements cant respect the specified
requirements but it doesnt suffer any damage. For instance, the electronic
equipments and the battery have typically as working temperature limits -20 C
and +40 C and as stand-by limits -40 C and +60 C.
The thermal control can be active, semi-active or passive: we call active a system
that needs power to work and passive a system that doesnt. The definition of
semi-active (or semi-passive) control system is more vague. It comes from the
fact that an active system can break down, while a passive cant, even if it
can be degradated by the external environment: we call therefore semi-active a
system that doesnt require power but that can break down. A typical example
are all the system with a states change (ex. heat pipes).
On a CubeSat, because of the limited mass and power, often the only possible
choice is a passive thermal-control system.
85
CHAPTER 9
9.1
Passive thermal-control
The thermal control of OUFTI-1 is a critical problem. In fact, as the satellite is

not-stabilized, we need to place solar cells on each face and, if we want enough
power, we need their surface to be as big as possible: the place available for
thermal control surfaces is really small. Anyway with an accurate choice of the
coating material we still can guarantee the respect of temperature limits.
We chose a passive control system based on painting: we need therefore to
choose a coating and to verify that the limits are respected.
The thermal equilibrium depends on the incoming and outgoing heat flux. Making it on a satellite means to consider the spacecraft, the sun, the earth and the
cold space. Basing on the Wiens law, each body radiates mainly at a wavelength which depends on its temperature: looking the temperatures of all this
bodies, we notice that the radiative exchanges are mainly at visible and infrared
wavelength. Furthermore the Kirchhoff theorem says that the spectral directional emissivity and absorption have the same value. Extending this theorem
to the integrated absorption and emissivity, ESA and NASA adopted therefore
a special convention: they call the absorption and emissivity factor in infrared
and the absorption and emissivity factor in visible.
= V IS = V IS
= IR = IR
We will use this rule.
As the incoming flux is mainly visible and the outgoing infrared, the equilibrium
temperature of a body in space depends from the ratio : the higher this ratio,
the warmer the body.
Doing passive thermal control based on painting means to choose the appropriate color to keep the body temperature within its limits. If we have a body in
space without any kind of power production on board and we neglect the earth,
the thermal balance says:
Cs A = AT 4
where Cs is the solar constant and = 5.67 108
Boltzmann constant.
Hence we can obtain the equilibrium temperature as:
(9.1)
W
m2 K
is the Stefan-
Cs
(9.2)

In table 9.1 the value of end and of the equilibrium temperature for three
colors are reported.
We see that if we want to have a cold satellite we can paint it in white, otherwise we can choose between black and golden, depending on the temperature
we would like to reach.
Teq
=
Galli Stefania
86
CHAPTER 9. THERMAL-CONTROL SYSTEM
Table 9.1: Surface thermal properties

Teq

WHITE 0.2 0.9 0.22 0 C
BLACK 0.94 0.9 1.04 125 C
GOLD 0.25 0.04 6.25 350 C
9.2
Analytic temperature determination
In order to have an idea of the satellites equilibrium temperature, we represent it as a flat plate hit by solar radiation and albedo, exchanging heat with
earth and cold space and dissipating 1W power. The thermal coefficients are
determined doing an averaged weighed on the surface of solar cells and coating:
SC ASC + COAT ACOAT
0.1
SC ASC + COAT ACOAT
=
0.1
The thermal equilibrium says:
=
A
C 1.3 +
| {zs }
sun+albedo
1
|{z}
dissipation
(9.3)

4
4
= 5A T 4 Tcold
+ A T 4 Tearth
|
{z
} |
{z
}
space
(9.4)
earth
where Tcold = 5k is the cold space temperature and Tearth = 255K is the standard earth surface temperature.
In this model, we consider that the sun and the albedo act like a visible flux
each one on a face, that one face is radiating to the earth and not to the cold
space and therefore only 5 faces are radiating to cold space. All these hypothesis
will be explained in the next paragraph.
In table 9.2, the average thermal coefficient and the equilibrium temperature
are reported.
Table 9.2: Equilibrium temperatures

Teq
WHITE 0.63 0.84 265.5 K
BLACK 0.92 0.84 287 K
GOLD 0.65 0.49 301.3 K
These temperatures will also be used as first guess for the nodes model which
will be introduced in the next paragraph.
Galli Stefania
87
CHAPTER 9
9.3
Nodes model
The CubeSat configuration is still unknown and therefore a precise thermal

study is impossible. The best thing to do in this case is to generate an equivalent
nodes model in order to have a simplified representation of the structure to verify
the thermal exchanges with an equivalent electric model. Then the model is
passed to Thermal Excel. The fist step is indeed to identify a representation
that well symbolize the satellite: this corresponds to choose where to place the
nodes. Then we need to identify the resistive connection between the nodes
based on the properties of the modeled part. In the next paragraphs this two
steps will be treated.
9.3.1
Representation
The idea is to place a node for each part of the satellite and to study its thermal
behavior in the steady-state case: the model is shown in figure 9.1
We assume that there is a face watching the earth and one directed to sun.
Each face is represented by two nodes: the thermal coating and the solar cell (we
have two solar cells but they are modeled as one node). The solar cells are then
linked to the back face structure through an equivalent conductive resistance.
As the thermal coating thickness is really small, we consider it as a part of
the structure: basically we use the conductive parameters of the real aluminum
alloy material but the optics coefficient of the coating for the radiation. This
hypothesis is equivalent to impose that the coating and the back face structure
have the same temperature: as the thermal coating is just a painting, this is
definitely verified in the reality. The node corresponding to the face structure
is then connected to the other faces trough a conductive resistance.
With reference to figure 9.1 we have the following convection:
nodes 1 6 are the solar cells
nodes 7 12 are the faces structures with thermal coating
node 99 is the cold space
node 98 is the earth
the black resistances represent conduction between solar cells and structure. They are based on solar cells properties
the blue resistances represent conduction between faces. They are based
on structure properties
the red resistances represent the infrared radiation between the faces and
the cold space. They are based on surface properties.
Galli Stefania
88
Figure 9.1: Nodes model for thermal analysis

the green resistances represent the infrared radiation between the face
watching the earth and the earth.
The sun light and the albedo are flux on the corresponding faces (node 2
and 8 for the sun flux, nodes 5 and 11 for the albedo):
Qsun = CsS
Qalbedo = 0.3CsS = 0.3Qsun
(9.5)
The factor 0.3 keeps into account the average reflectivity of the earth where
seas and continents have different values: in fact the albedo is the solar visible
flux reflected by the planet.
9.3.2
Equivalent resistances
The heat transfer between two parts of a body with different temperatures T2
and T1 situated at distance L is ruled by the Fouriers law:
(
~q+
= ~
cp T
t
(9.6)
~
~q = k T
Galli Stefania
89
CHAPTER 9
KJ
W
where cp is the materials heat capacity [ KgK
], k the conductivity [ mK
], ~q the
heat flux and the energy generated inside the body.
For a steady monodimentional problem without heat generation we have :
dq
dx
= k ddxT = 0
T (0) = T1
T (L) = T2
(9.7)
Solving the problem we have the following expression of the heat flux:
Q12 = qA =
T2 T1
L
kA
Req =
L
kA
(9.8)
where A is the contact surface through which the heat can pass.
As expected, the heat goes from the hotter body to the colder. We also have
the expression of the equivalent conductive resistance.
The same can be done for the radiation. With reference to figure 9.2, a body
, the irradiance G, the reflected
is in thermal equilibrium with the heat flux Q
A
irradiance GR and the radiant energy E.
Figure 9.2: Equilibrium for radiative heat exchange
JA = Q + GA
J = E + GR = EB + G = EB + (1 ) G
(9.9)
where J is the radiosity and represent the total outgoing flux.

We introduce the view factor FA,B , which represents the proportion of all the
radiation which leaves surface A and strikes surface B for the first time, without
multiple reflection:
Q12 = F1,2 A1 (J1 J2 )
Galli Stefania
90
(9.10)
Combining the precedent expressions, we obtain:
Q12 = qA = 11
1 A1
T24 T14
+ F1,21A1 +
12
2 A2
1
1 2
1 1
+
+
Req =
1 A1
F1,2 A1
2 A2
(9.11)
In this case the equivalent resistance is composed by three terms that can
be divided as shown in figure 9.3.
Figure 9.3: Radiative equivalent resistance

We need now to identify the view factors.
All the faces see the cold space with a view factor Fi,99 = 1 except for the faces
directed towards sun and earth that have a lower factor. We start with the
face which sees the earth and the cold space: it can be treated as the radiative
exchange between a square (the satellites face) and a circle with radius r (the
earth projected) separated by a distance h (the altitude). The corresponding
formula for an average altitude of 775 Km give the following result:
Ff ace,earth =
1

2
h
r
= 0.98
(9.12)
+1
We can say that practically the face can see only the earth. Anyway we
maintained the link with the cold space too.
Applying the same formula for the face regarding the sun and using the suns
radius and the suns distance from earth, we have the view factor:
Ff ace,sun = 2, 27 105
(9.13)
The hypothesis of modeling the sun as a visible flux on the satellite is definitely acceptable as the face practically sees only the cold space but collects the
sun rays.
Galli Stefania
91
CHAPTER 9
We have now all the parameters to connect the nodes: we only need the
surfaces parameters and the conductivity.
If the structures and coatings parameters are fixed, the solar cells optical
parameters vary as a function of the temperature.
The goal of a solar cell is in fact to collect the suns flux and to convert it into
electrical power: not all the energy collected becomes heat. The absorption
factor of a solar cell varies following the relation:
(T ) = 0 (1 (T ))
(9.14)
where 0 is the absorption at 28 C and (T ) the efficiency.

This formula shows an important conclusion: higher is the efficiency, and so the
power produced, lower is the percent of collected energy converted into heat.
We have so a double interest in having an efficiency as higher as possible.
Then, the efficiency varies in function of temperature:
(T ) = 0 +
d
(T 28 C)
dT
(9.15)
where 0 is the efficiency at 28 C.

As the efficiency is defined as the maximum percent of incident power converted into electrical energy (see formula 8.10 ), we define its derivate respect
to temperature as:
d
d
=
dT
dT
Pmax
Cs S
1
=
Cs S
dVmax
dImax
+ Imax
Vmax
dT
dT

(9.16)
Using the values indicated in table 8.2, we can calculate the absorption factor of the solar cells.
Concerning the infrared emissivity , we need to point out that each solar
cell is usually covered by a transparent tape and by a so-called cover glass which
is transparent for the visible wavelength but determine the infrared emissivity:
is usually between 0.8 and 0.85. We used = 0.8.
The dimension of solar cells are indicated in table 8.1.
Concerning the structure, its an aluminium alloy with the following properties:
Table 9.3: Structure properties
W
Conductivity k [ mK
]
Thickness [mm]
Galli Stefania
92
138
1.27
9.3.3
Hot and cold case
We are dealing with a simplified model: we are not expecting to have a detailed
thermal description of our CubeSat. The goal of this preliminary study is to
identify the maximum and minimum temperatures reached during lifetime in
order to avoid the overpass of the imposed limits.
We identify therefore three possible cases:
the hot case: the satellite is in sunlight and the solar arrays do not produce
any power but only cumulate solar heat flux. The solar flux is injected on
a face and the absorption coefficient is 0 as the efficiency is null.
the operating case: the satellite is in sunlight and the solar arrays are
providing the necessary power. The payload is on and we need to radiate
0.5 W corresponding to the losses in the communication system converted
into heat. In this case, the absorption factor of solar cells needs to be
updated as a function of the solar cell temperature
the cold case: the satellite is in eclipse and the payload is off. In this case
the solution seems to be trivial: the equilibrium temperature is practically
the Tcold but it doesnt respect the reality. Furthermore in this case the
hypothesis of steady-state cannot be applied integrally. We added therefore a flux of 847W/m2, which is the solar flux weighed on the average
time of eclipse.
For the operating case, we needed to add a worksheet to Thermal-Excel in
order to update the solar cells properties as a function their temperatures.
9.4
Thermal results for OUFTI-1
Once decided the kind of model to study and identified the material properties,
we passes to the implementation into the software Thermal-Excel.
As above mentioned, a starting guess temperature is demanded and for each
case we calculated it as explained in section 9.2 respecting the characteristics
of each case.
At the beginning, we had some problems as the final results depended on the
starting temperature, which is impossible for the static case. With an accurate
reflection we find out the reason: the standard algorithm used by the software
has a really slow convergence when the number of radiative exchange is important respect to the conductive. As the criterion of convergence is the difference
between successive temperatures, the software thought to have converged even
if it was not true. We needed therefore to strongly reduce the convergence criterion in order to have the good solution.
Galli Stefania
93
CHAPTER 9
A typical layout of a Thermal Excel sheet is in figure 9.4: this is the operating
case with black coating. As expected the absorption function has been updated.
Figure 9.4: Typical Thermal Excel layout: operating case whit black coating
In the other sheets, the conductive and radiative equivalent resistance are
passed.
As expected, the hottest face is the one directed towards the sun and the coldest
those watching only the cold space. The face pointing the earth is in an intermediate condition. An interesting point is that the temperatures of solar cells
and structure on a same face are almost the same, even if they seem equal. For
instance, in black coated satellite in operating case we have for the face 1 the
solar cell at 272.623 K and the structure at 272.624 K. Anyway, for all practical
cases, we can consider them to be the same.
In table 9.4 the results for different coatings and case are reported.
Table 9.4: Temperatures
WHITE COLD CASE

WHITE OPER. CASE
WHITE HOT CASE
BLACK COLD CASE
BLACK OPER. CASE
BLACK HOT CASE
GOLD COLD CASE
GOLD OPER. CASE
GOLD
HOT CASE
T0
236 K
251 K
265.5 K
255 K
275 K
287 K
266 K
282 K
301.3 K
MIN T
236 K
249.26 K
263.21 K
255 K
272.62 K
284.04 K
266 K
280.08 K
297.76 K
INTERM T
236 K
252.36 K
266.52 K
255 K
276.13 K
287.83 K
266 K
282.27 K
300.19 K
MAX T
236 K
256.18 K
272.0 K
255 K
283.60 K
296.99 K
266 K
287.34 K
307.07 K
We can see that with a simple passive coating we can maintain the satellite
temperature within some reasonable limits.
Galli Stefania
94
We still do not now the exact temperature limits of our D-STAR payload and
therefore we will make some comments basing on the average limits of the
electronics equipments and battery as thay are usually the most sensible to
thermal gradient.
We impose therefore that the working temperature has to be between 253 K
and 313 K and the stand-by temperature between 233 K and 333 K.
We find out that, on the one hand, the stand-by limits are respected with all the
coating and, on the other hand, the working limits are respected only with the
black and golden coating. Furthermore, the coldest temperature for the black
coating and the hottest temperature for the gold coating are on the borderline.
For this reason, up to now we cannot chose one of this two coating as the model
is too simplified to allow a choice with so small margins. The final decision will
be taken after an accurate study based on orbit and satellites configuration
with the more detailed software Esatan and Esarad. Anyway, even if we dont
have a final choice, on the base of these results, we can assume that OUFTI-1
will remains within the required temperature limits.
Galli Stefania
95
CHAPTER
10
COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
The communication system is the interface between the satellite and the earth.
If in the case of OUTI-1 it also represents the payload, for the next missions of
LEODIUM Project it will be just a mean to be in contact with the spacecraft.
The D-STAR system is used as main communication tool to send command,
both for the satellite and for the future payloads, and to receive telemetry and
payloads results. Given that D-STAR is an amateur-radio protocol, we plan
to make our CubeSat available to the ham-radio community when the radio
link is not used for command and telemetry. Furthermore, we plan to get
spontaneous help from the worldwide amateur-radio community to keep an eye
on our satellite when it is not within sight of our ground station.
Aware of the fact that a D-STAR has never flown into space, we cannot take
for granted that everything will go fine, especially considering the fight loads
at launch and the radiation environment in orbit. Furthermore, if something
fails just after launch, we strongly desire to be able to assess what happened
with the satellite. Therefore, we will place a backup command and telemetry
system based on a CW beacon. Probably always switch on, it will be able to
send minimum housekeeping and to receive some commands.
97
CHAPTER 10
10.1
Communication hardware
The hardware for satellite D-STAR communication has never been built until
now: its the main grey area of the project. In fact, a traditional D-STAR
ground repeater is composed by a series of boxes with dimension and mass
definitely incompatible with a CubeSat: everything has to be reduced at most
and some functionalities will be cut out.
We are not going to give detailed information on the subject as its part of an
other thesis on OUFTI-1 [RD5]. Anyway a brief introduction of the hardware
is almost compulsory.
The system is shown in block diagram in figure 10.1
Figure 10.1: Communication system block diagram

The signal at 145 MHz frequency is received, amplified and demodulated.
Voice and data stream are then separated. The low rate stream is then searched
for command packages and, if any, they are analyzed, verified as originating from
the Reference Control Station and then processed if suitable. In this case, downlink data are fitted with requested telemetry information. Otherwise, received
low rate users data are recombined without additional delay with the received
voice stream, modulated, amplified and sent back immediately via the downlink
path at 435 MHz frequency.
The mode of operation is a voice based system called DV mode: it runs at
4800 bds, 0.5 GMSK modulated. It is made by 3600 bds AMBE encoded voice
stream (2400 bds voice + 1200 bds FEC) and a low speed uncorrected data
Galli Stefania
98
CHAPTER 10. COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
stream at 1200 bds, giving about 950 bds real data throughput.
Concerning the antennas, we need four different quarter-wave deployable antennas: two about 17 cm long for the downlink and two about 50 cm long for
the uplink. They have to be folded during launch and deployed once in orbit.
To this end, they will be wrapped around contact points and maintained in
this configuration using the deployment mechanism. As mentioned in chapter
7.3, they are omnidirectional and dont require any specific orientation of the
satellite respect to the earth.
More information about the communication hardware and the D-STAR protocol
can be found in [RD5].
10.2
Link budget
A link budget is the accounting of all of the gains and losses from the transmitter,
through the space, to the receiver in a telecommunication system: its goal is to
Eb
and the signalverify if the ratio of received energy-per-bit to noise-density N
0
S
to-noise ratio N are higher than some limit values depending on the modulation
type.
As the available power is not too much, the link budget assumes a capital
role: we need in fact to verify that the power is enough to guarantee a good
communication level.
Starting from the available power for communication P0 , through the system
efficiency we have the power available at the transmitting antenna:
PT = P0
(10.1)
Then we better pass to decibel-watt instead of watt, where:

PT [dBW ] = 10log10 (PT [W ])
(10.2)
In this way, we deal with algebraic sum instead that with multiplications
and divisions. Hereafter, if not differently specified, all the values will be in
decibel-watt or decibel.
The first step is to identify the Effective Isotropic Radiated Power (EIRP)
which represents the power that effectively leaves the antenna:
EIRP = PT + LT + GT
(10.3)
where LT and GT are respectively losses and gains in the transmitting antenna.
Once the electromagnetic waves have left the transmitting antenna, they need
Galli Stefania
99
CHAPTER 10
to reach the receiver passing through the free space. The losses on this way are
called space loss:
2
2

S2
RIP [W ]
c
4
Ls [W ] =
=
=
(10.4)
=
EIRP [W ]
4Sd2
4d
4df
where RIP is the Received Isotropic Power, the wavelength and S the
power per unit area at distance d.
Passing in decibel, we have:
Ls [dBW ] = 20log (c) 20log (4) 20log (d) 20log (f ) =
= 147.55 20log (d) 20log (f )
(10.5)
The space loss contains the hypothesis of free-space propagation: in reality,

the signal pass through the atmosphere and we would have therefore to take into
account the attenuation due to atmosphere and rain. As these attenuations are
important only for high frequency wave (mainly in the SHF band and higher),
they are practically are null in our case.
Once the signal is received by the receiving antenna, its gain GR should be
added.
In digital communications, the received energy-per-bit Eb is equal to the received
power times the bit duration:
Eb = PR 10log(R)
(10.6)
where PR = RIP + GR is the received power and R the data rate.

The noise spectral density, N0 , can be expressed as:
N0 = 10log(k) + 10log(T s)
(10.7)
where k = 1.38 1023 is the Boltzmanns constant and Ts the system noise
temperature.
Hence, the total received noise is:
N = N0 + 10log(B)
(10.8)
where B is the bandwidth.

Using the above mentioned equations, we can obtain the parameters we were
looking for:
the radio of received energy-per-bit to noise-density
Eb
= EIRP + Ls + GR 10log(k) 10log(T s) 10log(R)
N0
Galli Stefania
100
(10.9)
the signal-to-noise ratio

S
= EIRP + Ls + GR 10log(k) 10log(T s) 10log(B) (10.10)
N
This method has been applied OUFTI-1 in the most critical case: the satellite is at the apogee and the ground station can see it at 5 elevation. The
system parameters are summarized in the table 10.1.
Table 10.1: Communication system parameters
GROUND
SATELLITE
POWER PT [W]
20
0.5
ANTENNA GAIN [dB] 13.4 (TX), 17.5 (RX)
0
LINE LOSS [dB]
-2 (TX), -1 (RX)
-1.1
The link budget gives the following results:
Table 10.2: Link budget at 1200 Km altitude, 5 elevation
DOWNLINK UPLINK
EIRP [dBW]
-4.1
24.4
Ls [dBW]
-157.75
-148.26
RIP [dBW]
-161.8
-123.84
Eb
[dB]
20.01
43.16
N0
S
[dB]
19.04
42.19
N
This is en extremely simplified method to have an idea of the expected
signals power at the receiving antenna. In fact, even if frequency has been
considered in the space losses, the dependence of some system parameter from
it has been neglected.
A more detailed analysis, made by a telecommunications expert, is in figure
10.2.
Galli Stefania
101
CHAPTER 10
Figure 10.2: Detailed link budget for the satellite at the apogee, 5 elevation
Galli Stefania
102
We can see that the results are not so different from the simplified model.
Eb
We also have the minimum required values of NS and N
: the system is able to
0
guarantee a good communication level with the available power in the assigned
orbit.
Obviously the most critical case is the downlink as the transmitting power is
extremely limited, while the ground station can increase its power if it turns
out to be too low. Furthermore, the OUFTI-1 platform is supposed to used for
the next CubeSat of LEODIUM project with a payload on board which needs
power too. Even if the orbits of the future missions are unknow, we performed
a link budget for different value of power available on the satellite in case of the
same orbit as the one of OUFTI-1. We have the results represented in figure
10.3.
Figure 10.3: Downlink link budget for different values of transmitting power in
case of 1200 Km altitude, 5 elevation.
We see that the power can be partially reduced in order to use it for other
elements. Anyway, in case of use of the satellite by the amateur radio commuEb
nity, the margins on N
and NS have to be as bigger as possible in order to allow
0
the communication even with ground antennas with mediocre performances.
10.3
Backup telemetry and ground station
A CW beacon is also added on the CubeSat mainly for reliability reasons. As

the D-STAR has never flown into space, a backup system is almost compulsory.
In fact, if the main communication system fails, we would like to know what
happened in order to avoid the same problem in the future missions. This is
even more important if the D-STAR system dont light up soon after launch.
With the radio beacon, we will be able to pass some commands to the satellite
trying to fix the problem and, even if all the operations to save the mission
will be useless, anyway thanks to the housekeeping we hope to find out the
Galli Stefania
103
CHAPTER 10
failure reasons. Its also true that, without the D-STAR system, OUFTI-1 will
be useless as inaccessible by the amateur radio community: all the tests will be
therefore performed to avoid such a kind of problem.
Concerning the ground station, it will be installed in the University of Liège
area. It will be a traditional tracking station for simultaneous transmission and
reception on the amateur radio frequencies and it will be connected with the
already existing D-STAR repeater of the university to exploit all the system
properties, included the connection to the internet. A backup ground station
will also be installed in the neighborhood: it main purpose is to track other
satellites but it can be used for OUFTI-1 if needed.
A possible participation of this ground station to the GENSO (Global Educational Network for Satellite Operations) network is also wished.
Galli Stefania
104
CHAPTER
11
TESTS
The launch and space environment are extremely hard for the spacecraft: it is
in fact subject to vibrations at different frequencies, vacuum and frequent thermal cycling. Given that, once in orbit, there is not any way to repair a damage
on the satellite, we need to verify that all the components and the integrated
system can survive to the external environment: the block of all these actions
constitutes the test campaign. The tests usually performed on a satellite before
launch include mechanical test as vibrations and shocks, environmental tests as
thermal vacuum and functional test as the electromagnetic compatibility. The
tests level and duration depends, on the one hand, on the test philosophy and,
on the other hand, on the launcher specifications and on the space environment
expected. We can then demonstrate some spacecraft function by testing some
group on components: it is called verification test and typically includes the
antennas and solar arrays deployment test.
105
CHAPTER 11
11.1
Test philosophy and facilities
All the elements need to be tested before being placed on board and some
integrated system test are then performed after the assembly. In the case of
OUFTI-1, the D-STAR system will undergo many functional and radiations
tests before being placed on the platform for the integrated tests.
The qualification and acceptance test document of a launcher, in our case Vega
[AD2], gives the test intensity and duration based on the typical mission envelop.
Two levels and durations are specified: the acceptance test and the qualification
test. The acceptance spectrum envelops the expected environment and is higher
than the conducted level specified by the launch vehicle contractor to account
for structural resonance and acoustic inputs. Respect to the qualification level,
it is 3 dB lower for random vibrations and 80% of sinusoidal acceleration.
Concerning the assembled satellite, the number of tests to be performed as well
as their level and duration depend on the so called test philosophy. In fact,
many satellite models can be produced and tested, depending on schedule and
budget:
structural (SM), thermal (TM) and structural and thermal (STM) models:
they need to be representative of the satellite mechanical (mass, eigenfrequencies, stiffness) and/or thermal behavior. They are tested at qualification level to verify if the design satisfy the testing requirements.
engineering model (EM): it is composed by all the electromagnetic components and it undergoes to electromagnetic compatibility and functionality
tests.
qualification model (QM): it is the assembled satellite and it is tested at
qualification level.
flight model (FM): it is the final model and undergoes to acceptance test.
The same kind of classification can be done for all the satellite components.
In the OUFTI-1 case some models of the D-STAR board will also be tested.
The spacecraft verification strategy is specified in Vega acceptance and qualification test document [AD2]. Three main types of tests are envisioned, namely
mechanical, thermal and electromagnetic compatibility tests. Because of schedule and budget reasons, only one complete model of the CubeSat will be built:
our test philosophy is therefore based on an EM/PFM protoflight model philosophy. On the PFM, the tests will be performed at qualification levels with
durations for acceptance tests.
As explained in the next paragraph, severity Level 2 defined in [AD2] should
be assumed. As in the area of random vibration the required level could be
challenging for the compliance of CubeSats, we do not exclude the possibility
Galli Stefania
106
CHAPTER 11. TESTS
of asking for some notching as soon as the damping coefficients of our system
are experimentally known.
A thermal balance test will be performed at the same time of the thermal
vacuum test. An acoustic test should not be carried out, because the facility
foreseen for the test cannot perform such a test and because the acoustic vibrations need to be considered only for huge surfaces.
Before, during and after tests verifications will take place including dimensional
checks, visual inspection and functional test.
The University of Liège disposes of two important test facilities that will be
used for OUFTI-1.
Vibration and environment tests will be performed at Liège Space Center (CSL),
an university research center which is also an ESA-coordinated test facility. In
this facility, satellites (like Planck) and space instruments are usually tested.
Even more important in the present context, the CubeSat Compass-1 was also
tested with the cooperation of German and Belgian students, supervised by
CSL staff.
Electromagnetic compatibility test will be instead performed at the Electromagnetic Compatibility Laboratory of the university. Since 2003, it is accredited
by the Belgian Organization for Accreditation (BELAC) under the ISO 17025
norm.
In principle, radiation tests are also possible at IPNAS, an university research
center, but they will probably performed only for some electronic equipment.
11.2
Mechanical tests
During launch, a satellite experiences an extremely hard dynamical environment. It is in fact stressed at all the frequencies depending on the mission
phase:
Continuous accelerations due to launchers ascension. They dont usually
generate problems and do not need to be tested.
Sinus vibrations at low frequency (f<100 Hz) due mainly to pogo effect.
Transient low frequency (f<100 Hz) vibrations due to wind at take off
(<10 Hz), blasts (<10 Hz), propellant movement (<1 Hz), trust transient
at light up and off of engines (100 Hz) and maneuvers.
Shocks at high frequency (100<f<2000 Hz) due to pyrotechnics and stages
separation.
Galli Stefania
107
CHAPTER 11
Acoustic vibrations at very high frequency (f<10 KHz) due to engines

noise and its reflection on the ground. They have catastrophic effects
only on huge surfaces.
Random vibrations at high frequency (100<f<2000 Hz) as the result of
acoustic vibration inside the launcher structure.
Therefore, the mechanical tests envisioned for OUFTI-1 are sinus vibrations,
random vibrations and shock. As above mentioned, the severity will be Severity
2 on the [AD2]. Actually, the shock test cannot be performed at CSL and it is
substitute by an equivalent sinus test.
The sinus vibration intensity is represented in figure 11.1: it has to be executed along each of three axis.
Figure 11.1: Qualification level test for sinus vibrations

The sweep rate is 1/3 oct/min, corresponding to 11.4 min, between 5 Hz
and 70 Hz and 2 oct/min, corresponding to 2.4 min, between 5 Hz and 70 Hz.
Galli Stefania
108
CHAPTER 11. TESTS
The random vibrations are performed with the intensity indicated in figure
11.2: it has to be applied along each of three axis.
Figure 11.2: Qualification level for random vibrations

The test duration is 4 minutes.
The shock test, and its equivalent sinus test, is performed with the Shock
Response Spectrum (SRS) shown in figure 11.3 at severity level 2 for the amplification factor Q=10, corresponding to a damping = 0.05. It has to be
executed three times along each of three axis.
Figure 11.3: Shock Response Spectrum for Q=10. The level prescripted for
qualification is the severity level 2
Galli Stefania
109
CHAPTER 11
11.3
Environmental tests
The space environment is extremely hostile for a satellite: radiations, thermal

cycling and vacuum are the main problems. Especially the electronic equipment
are sensible as they have narrow temperature limits and often suffer of damages
due to radiations.
Given that all the material used on OUFTI-1 will be among the approved material of NASA in order to avoid an excessive out-gassing, the behavior of the
spacecraft and of the payload need to be carefully tested. Environmental test
include thermal vacuum, thermal cycling and other more mission oriented tests
as rain and humidity test.
For OUFTI-1 thermal-vacuum and thermal cycling are combined with a thermal balance test in a single vacuum sequence.
The thermal vacuum test level for acceptance test are indicated in table
11.1. The duration of the acceptance test to use for the PFM test is 2 hours.
Table 11.1: Thermal vacuum qualification test for the PFM.
Number of cycles
Maximum Temperature Tmax
Minimum Temperature Tmin
Duration at Tmax
Duration at Tmin
Temperature rate (heating)
Temperature rate (cooling)
4
70 C
20 C
2h
2h
< 20 C/min (internal),> 20 C/min (external)
2 3 C/min
The thermal cycling level for acceptance are indicated in table 11.2. The
duration of the acceptance test to use for the PFM test is 2 hours.
Table 11.2: Thermal cycling qualification test
Number of cycles
Maximum Temperature Tmax
Minimum Temperature Tmin
Duration at Tmax
Duration at Tmin
Temperature rate (heating)
Temperature rate (cooling)
Stabilization criterion
Galli Stefania
10
70 C
20 C
2h
2h
< 20 C/min (internal),> 20 C/min (external)
2 3 C/min
1 C/1h
110
CHAPTER
12
FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS
The feasibility study of a satellite is only the first step of the design of a space
mission: starting from it, a detailed study needs to be performed.
If the structures CAD model is already available as we are using an off-the-shelf
structure, the location and the number of the electronic boards and of the payload has not been decided yet. Once it will be known, a detailed modal study
can be carried out in order to identify the eigenmodes and the eigenfrquencies
and to verify with a finite elements analysis the resistance to the flight loads.
The antennas deployment system design represents another challenging task:
they will be in fact wrapped around contact points and maintained in this
configuration using the deployment mechanism. Their foreseen position in the
middle of the faces between the two solar cells needs still to be verified: this is
in fact the best solution on the communication point of view but not necessary
on the mechanical and energetic ones. Furthermore, if their position wont be
aligned with the gravity center, additional attitude problems can appear during
deployment: in fact, unless opposite antennas are deployed simultaneously, a
torque would be generated.
A decision about the attitude control has also to be taken as soon as possible
in order to begin the design of the control system or to foreseen a satellite tumbling in space.
The thermal design based on the complete model has also to be detailed in
order to choose between black and golden painting or to plan a combination of
the two.
The electric and electronic hardware as well as the solar cell type must be fixed:
only with a precise estimation of efficiencies and losses, we will know the exact
power available.
111
CHAPTER 12
All these tasks will be accomplish with a tight cooperation between university
and industries: in particular, Thales-Alenia Space ETCA in Charleroi for the
electrical power subsystem, the Liège Space Center for the thermal control and
the choice of future payloads, Spacebel in Liège for the on board data handling,
LuxSpace for the mission analysis, Open-Engineering in Liège for the attitude
control and V2 i in Liège for the structure and configuration subsystem.
Anyway, all these future developments need more information on the payload,
not available at the moment. A satellite is in fact its payload and, without
it, it hasnt any reason to exist. All the design has to be conducted on the
base of payloads requirements and in order to give him the best conditions to
accomplish its mission. The first and more important step is therefore to have
a precise configuration of the D-STAR system and to know its limits. Only in
this way, we will be able to evaluate if the power produced is enough, if the
doppler effect without attitude control is too high and how much we need to
shield the payload from radiations.
12.1
Possible payloads
The foreseen payloads of the future missions of LEODIUM Project deserve a

separate treatment. In fact, mass and power available on a CubeSat make this
evaluation quite complicate.
Among the university departments, the interest is mainly concentrated on MicroElectro-Mechanical Systems (MEMS) and on granular material. The former is
particularly suitable for a nanosatellite: so small actuators and sensors can in
fact be used to control the satellite and we can in this way test their behavior
in space and their resistance to external environment before employing them on
more ambitious missions.
The ideal target for a CubeSat mission is in fact a technology demonstration
or testing a recently developed element. The project is cheap and its goal is
mainly educational to give students hand-on experience: placing on a CubeSat
non space-tested elements that risk to cause the satellite failure is much less
dramatic than chance loosing a bigger mission. In fact, even if the mission fails,
students have taken advantage of the acquired experience.
Among the possible technology demonstration payloads, the most interesting
seems to be some MEMS for attitude control systems sensors and actuators,
active antennas and thermal sensors and magnetometers.
Also testing into space some active damping systems seems interesting: one of
the main problems in space is in fact that the viscous damping of a structure
disappears and only the structural damping remains. As a result, structures
that on the earth are sufficiently damped, in space need some added dampers
to avoid excessive vibrations as well as damping systems are less effective into
Galli Stefania
112
CHAPTER 12. FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS
space. This kind of test has already been done into space: in particular Professor Preumont of Bruxelles University placed an active vibration damper on the
Space Shuttle to test it. Testing a miniaturized version of the same system on
a CubeSat would have probably been much less expensive.
The test of advanced solar cells is also a kind of mission target that perfectly
fits a CubeSat: their effective efficiency in orbit can be determined as well as
their hardness to radiations.
Some nanosatellite missions are also used for testing micropropulsors but they
cannot be launched using a Pico Orbital Deployer and finding a launch becomes
more complicate.
Last but not least, a CubeSat can be equipped just like all the other satellites
with a scientific payload on board. In this case, the most difficult task is to find
a suitable instrument. Placing a camera and taking pictures of the earth is certainly a good idea on the educational point of view as the mission design would
be exactly like the one of a bigger satellite with all the requirement of pointing
precision and stability, but the scientific result wouldnt be innovative: many
other satellites do the same thing but they employ cameras with much higher
resolution. Depending on the orbit, the study of earth radiation environment
or of the gravitational and magnetic fields can also be interesting. Formation
flight is another possibility but it demands much more resources as multiple
satellites are launched at the same time.
Finally, a CubeSat is suitable for many different payloads but they need to
have compatible dimensions and weight: a dedicated design phase is therefore
necessary.
Galli Stefania
113
CHAPTER
13
CONCLUSIONS
This work constitutes a complete feasibility study for the CubeSat OUFTI-1.
The goal was to demonstrate that with the assigned orbit, we can effectively
design, build and operate the satellite.
We analyzed the orbit and its evolution in time: we obtained a lifetime of 4.2
years, a field of view length of up to more than 6000 Km and an available communication time with the ground station in Liège of up to 104 min/day. A study
on the radiation environment has also been carried out to identify the necessary thickness of shielding material. The structure and the deployment system
have been discussed, as well as the attitude control feasibility. Furthermore, we
calculated the power available: OUFTI-1 disposes continuously of 1.3 W. The
maximal and minimal satellites temperature in orbit have been estimated for
different coatings with a nodes model: among the acceptable solutions we have
a temperature range between 255K in the cold case with black coating and 307
K in the hot case with golden coating. Thanks to the link budget, we know that
the available power is enough to guarantee a good communication between the
omnidirectional antennas of the satellite on the assigned orbit and the ground
station. Finally the different tests have been presented.
The results show that the design is feasible and that the mission could effectively work with the available power and mass. Some effort need to be done to
optimize the payload efficiency but the mission target can be reached.
On the educational point of view, the goal has definitely been achieved: we
experienced in fact the participation to a real satellite design phase and to a
team work. Furthermore some external events as the CubeSat workshop at
the European Space Technology Research Center were really challenging but
motivating tasks.
115
Acronyms
AAR
ACR
ACS
AD
ADCS
ASI
AVUM
BOL
CCR
CSG
CSL
D-STAR
EIRP
EOL
ESA
ESTEC
FOV
GENSO
GSE
IAA
ISS
JARL
LARES
LEODIUM
OUFTI
PMACS
POD
RD
SEB
SEL
Area Access Rate

Area Coverage Rate
Attitude Control System
Applicable Document
Attitude Determination and Control System
Agenzia Saziale Italiana (Italian Space Agency)
Attitude and Vernier Upper Module
Beginning of Life
Corner Cube Reflector
Centre Spatial Guyanaise (Guyana Space Centre)
Centre Spatial de Liège (Liège Space Center)
Digital Smart Technology for Amateur Radio
Effective Isotropic Radiated Power
End Of Life
European Space Agency
European Space Technology Research Centre
Field Of View
Global Educational Network for Satellite Operations
Ground Support Equipment
Instantaneous Access Area
International Space Station
Japan Amateur Radio League
LAser RElativity Satellite
Lancement En Orbite de Demonstations Innovantes
dune Universite Multidisciplinaire
(Launch into Orbit of Innovative Demonstrations
of a Multidisciplinary University)
Orbiting Utility For Telecommunication Innovation
Passive Magnetic Attitude Control System
Picosatellite Orbital Deployer
Reference Document
Single Event Burnout
Single Event Latchup
117
CHAPTER 13
SEP
SEU
SPENVIS
SRS
SSO
VEGA
Galli Stefania
Single Event Phenomena

Single Event Upset
SPace ENVironment Information System
Shock Response Spectrum
Sun Synchronous Orbit
Vettore Europeo di Generazione Avanzata
(European Vehicle of Advanced Generation)
118
BIBLIOGRAPHY
[1] Wiley J. Larson, James R. Wertz, Space Mission Analysis and Design,
third ed., Springer, Space Technology Library, 1999
[2] James R. Wertz, Spacecraft Attitude Determination and Control, Springer,
Space Technology Library, 1978
[3] Vladimir A. Chobotov, Orbital Mechanics, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2002
[4] James R. Wertz, Mission Geometry Orbit and Constellation Design Management, Springer, Space Technology Library, 2001
[5] P. Rochus, V. Rochus, Contr
ole thermique spatial, notes of Conception
dexperiences spatiales classes, University of Liège
[6] P. Rochus, Effet de lenvironnement spatial sur la conception, notes of
Conception dexperiences spatiales classes, University of Liège
APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS
[AD1] Vega Users Manual, Issue 3, Rev. 0, March 2006
[AD2] Vega Launch Vehicle Program General Specification: Qualification and
Acceptance Test of Equipments (VG-SG-1-C-040-SYS), Issue 5, Rev. 1, 13
November 2006
[AD3] Poly Picosatellite Orbital Deployer Interface Control Document, Issue 1,
11 February 2004
[AD4] CubeSat Design Specification, Rev. 10, 2 August 2006
[AD5] Cubesat P-POD Deployer Requirements, May 2002
REFERENCE DOCUMENTS
119
CHAPTER 13
[RD1] Stefania Galli, Jonathan Pisane, D-STAR based student CubeSat of the
University of Liège, CubeSat Workshop, ESTEC, Noordwijk, NL, 22-24
January 2008
[RD2] Educational Payload on the Vega Maiden Flight. Call for CubeSat Proposal
[RD3] Stefania Galli, Philippe Ledent, Jonathan Pisane, The D-STAR based
student CubeSat of the University of Liège (Leodium Project), 17 Mars
2008
[RD4] S.Galli, J. Pisane, P. Ledent, A. Denis, J.F. Vandenrijt, P. Rochus, J.
Verly, G. Kerschen, L. Halbach, OUFTI-1: The CubeSat developed at the
University of Liège, 5th Annual CubeSat Developers Workshop, San Luis
Obispo, USA, 9-11 April 2008
[RD5] Jonathan Pisane, Design and implementation of the terrestrial and space
telecommunication components of the student nanosatellite of the University of Liège
Galli Stefania
120
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank all the members of the OUFTI-1 team for their support and cooperation, in particular the original group: Amandine Denis, Mr.
Luc Halbach, Prof. Gaetan Kerschen, Philippe Ledent, Jonathan Pisane, Prof.
Pierre Rochus, Jean-Francois Vandenrijt and Prof. Jacques Verly. Without
them this project wouldnt have been possible.
I would like in particular to express my gratitude to my supervisor, Prof.
Pierre Rochus, whose expertise, understanding, and patience, added considerably to my graduate experience.
I also acknowledge all the employees of the Liège Space Center, where this
work took from, for their helpfulness and kindness in answering to all my questions.
A final special thanks goes to my family as without their support and encouragement I woulnt probably be in Liège.
121

07-08 Galli

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

07-08 Galli

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

University of Li`

Mission Design for the CubeSat

Supervisor: Professor Pierre Rochus

Author: Stefania Galli

Academic Year 2007-2008

Space is probably the main symbol of technological progress in the modern

Keywords: OUFTI-1, CubeSat, LEODIUM, D-STAR, amateur radio.

2 The LEODIUM Project

3 The Flight Opportunity

4 The CubeSat OUFTI-1

6 Structure and deployment

7 Attitude Control System

A typical 1-unit CubeSat structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

CubeSat-Kit structure skeletonized and solid-walls . . . . . . . .

Example of OUFTI-1 configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nodes model for thermal analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10.1 Communication system block diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98

Comparison between the two possible orbits . . . . . . . . . . .

CubeSat Kit mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Solar cells mechanical properties . . . . . . . .

Surface thermal properties

10.1 Communication system parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

The Education Office of the European Space Agency (ESA), in cooperation

OUFTI-1 is a CubeSat representing the first step of the LEODIUM Project:

The CubeSat concept

CHAPTER 4. THE CUBESAT OUFTI-1

Figure 4.1: A typical 1-unit CubeSat structure

have to be smooth and their edges rounded

Amateur Radio and D-STAR system

Before proceeding with the description of OUFTI-1, a brief introduction of the

CHAPTER 4. THE CUBESAT OUFTI-1

The Vega Launcher

Vega, Vettore Europeo di Generazione Avanzata, is the new European small

Figure 5.1: Vega launcher

CHAPTER 5. MISSION ANALYSIS

Typical Mission Profile

A typical mission profile consists of three phases:

Vega is designed to launch a wide range of missions and payload configuration:

Figure 5.4: Vega performances: payload mass as a function of orbit inclination

CHAPTER 5. MISSION ANALYSIS

Figure 5.5: Vega: spacecraft preparation and checkout phase

Figure 5.6: Vega: spacecraft hazardous operations phase

CHAPTER 5. MISSION ANALYSIS

Figure 5.7: Vega: combined operations phase

The Vega Maiden Flight

CHAPTER 5. MISSION ANALYSIS

The orbital mechanics studies the motion of a spacecraft on a specific trajectory,

- The squares of the orbital period of planets are directly proportional to

Figure 5.8: Orbital Parameters

CHAPTER 5. MISSION ANALYSIS

the semi-major axis:

the angular momentum and its magnitude:

where r is the radius, v the speed and the flight angle.

where v and r are the magnitude of speed and the radius.

Hence, the perigee and apogee radius can be expressed as:

where n, called mean motion, is the average angular velocity.

Figure 5.9: Eccentric and mean anomalies.

CHAPTER 5. MISSION ANALYSIS

The orbit of OUFTI-1

Figure 5.10: OUFTI-1 orbit representation for 12 hours orbit(STK)

angular momentum: h = 5.33 104 Km

period: T = 6020.8s = 100.35min

CHAPTER 5. MISSION ANALYSIS

cos (i) sin () sin ( )