Series
Master's Projects

Permanent Link
https://hdl.handle.net/1853/71003
Series Type
Publication Series
Description
Associated Organization(s)
Associated Organization(s)

Filters
2010 - 2012 8
8
8
8
Reset filters

Settings
search.filters.applied.f.advisor: Spencer, David A. × End date: 2013 × Start date: 2010 × search.filters.applied.f.resourcesubtype: Masters Project ×

Publication Search Results

Now showing 1 - 8 of 8
Thumbnail Image
Item

Structural Design, Analysis, and Test of the Prox-1 Spacecraft

2012-12-01 , Willingham, Allison L.

HE Prox-1 spacecraft is Georgia Institute of Technology’s entry into the 7th University Nanosatellite Program Competition, a two year cycle competition for the AFRL where university teams consisting of both graduate and undergraduate students design, build, and test a 50 kg nanosatellite for a team-specified mission. Judging is based on various presentations to the AFRL review teams, importance of the mission to AFRL objectives, and development of a sound nanosatellite system among other criteria [5]. Prox-1 is a nanosatellite which will demonstrate the use of low-thrust propulsion for automated safe trajectory control during proximity operations. Passive, image based observations will be used for the navigation and closed loop attitude control of Prox-1 relative to a deployed CubeSat. Prox-1’s objectives include: Rendezvous and proximity operations with a target CubeSat, automated relative navigation and trajectory control, closed-loop attitude control based upon automated image processing, and relative orbit determination using image-based angle and range estimates, validated by the Mission Operations System [4]. The student’s particular research involved design, build, and test of the structural components of the Prox-1 satellite. This paper will describe what design information was based on previous Prox-1 structure iterations, what design modifications were made to improve the structure’s capabilities and meet requirements, what analysis and testing was performed to validate those requirements, and what was needed to integrate with the subsystem components. When referring to different plate orientations in this document, the Prox-1 body coordinate frame is used. This is centered at the middle of the Lightband interface ring on the bottom plate, and in the same plane as the Launch Vehicle Interface. In the final structure configuration, the X-axis is pointing toward the Ppod deployment direction and cameras, the positive Y-axis is in the direction opposite of the thruster, and the Z-axis is pointing from the LVI plate toward the top plate [2]. All figures depicting the spacecraft will have this body coordinate frame pictured

View
Thumbnail Image
Item

Prox-1 Attitude Determination and Control

2011-12-01 , Pietruszewski, Amanda N.

The Prox-1 mission is Georgia Institute of Technology’s entry to the University Nanosat Program’s competition cycle. Since the goal of the program is to design a complete satellite that will function on orbit, it must have fully designed and space capable subsystems. This paper details the design of the Attitude Determination and Control Subsystem. First, the requirements for the subsystem are derived from the mission requirements, and then trades are presented to find which architecture is the best selection to meet these requirements. Then the trades for specific hardware selections are done, followed by the hardware budgets and tests. Once the hardware is chosen, the algorithms can be explored and described. A rough analysis of detumble length is done, followed be a detailed derivation and explanation of the coarse attitude control system. A filter for attitude determination is explained, followed by a discussion of the fine attitude determination and control system and then the flight rules for the system. Thus, the design of the system done to date is presented in this paper

View
Thumbnail Image
Item

Thermal Algorithms

2010-05-01 , Vedie, Nathalie

An overview of the thermal algorithms utilized in the R3 mission is presented. The R3 satellite will have thermal algorithms to process images taken by the thermal imager. The algorithms will calculate the area of features based on whether the feature’s size matches the intended features area and on whether the temperature of the feature falls within a certain range. The center of each matching feature can be calculated and validated onboard the satellite. The algorithms will also be able to detect edges to various ends.

View
Thumbnail Image
Item

Design and Analysis of the Deorbit and Earth Entry Trajectories for SPORE

2012-05-02 , Nehrenz, Matthew

Small Probes for Orbital Return of Experiments (SPORE) provides on-orbit operation and recovery of small payloads. The flight system architecture consists of a service module for on-orbit operations and deorbit maneuvering, and an entry vehicle for atmospheric entry, descent, and landing. Prior to approximating a landing footprint with a Monte Carlo analysis on the entry trajectory, the entry state uncertainties must be characterized. These uncertainties arise from errors induced by the guidance system and thruster pointing control during the deorbit maneuver. In order to capture the effect that these errors have on the entry state uncertainty, the service module’s attitude determination and control system (ADCS) and guidance system were both modeled in Matlab. By incorporating the ADCS loop into the guidance loop, the effect of pointing errors during the deorbit trajectory combined with errors in the guidance system can be assessed. A Monte Carlo analysis is performed on this 3+3 DOF deorbit simulation (which terminates at entry interface), resulting in an entry state covariance. The analysis is performed on the three orbits under consideration for SPORE: ISS, LEO, and GTO. Finally, the resulting entry state covariance from the deorbit simulation is used as input for an entry, descent, and landing trajectory Monte Carlo analysis. Landing footprint, heating, and g-loading are considered for trajectories targeting Woomera Test Range in Australia

View
Thumbnail Image
Item

Near-earth object extravehicular activities: Using apollo and iss operations to map low-gravity terrestrial spacewalk objectives and challenges

2011-12-01 , Gast, Matthew A.

The notion of human exploration of a near-Earth object (NEO) is nothing new. Jules Verne wrote about this very idea in his story “Off on a Comet,” first published in France in 1877. Since that time, a number of studies have examined NEO exploration for scientific purposes, in-situ resource utilization, mineralogical exploitation and even planetary defense; as early as 1966, a study was conducted to utilize the Apollo program hardware to fly by asteroid Eros 433 [32]. Yet there is very little in the literature archive addressing extra-vehicular activities operations on the surface of a near-Earth object. The arguments for manned missions to near-Earth objects have been presented in a number of papers, recognizing astronauts’ adaptability to real-time challenges, the capability to collect geological samples while identifying the overall geological context, and the ability to return a great quantity of those geological samples to Earth, as just a few of the many reasons for a NEO manned mission. Few studies, however, have identified or discussed the myriad challenges of performing surface operations in an environment where the gravitation is considerably less than that of the Moon, but not negligible like the micro-gravity of an International Space Station (ISS) – based EVA. Using the operational experience learned from NASA’s various human exploration programs, this paper will identify key challenges unique to NEO surface operations. Furthermore, this paper will map the applicable EVA tasks from both the Apollo program’s lunar exploration missions and ISS construction to present an EVA operational concept for NEO surface exploration. Through mapping the applicable Apollo and ISS tasks to the surface of a NEO, relevant operational objectives and challenges are identified, and conceptual approaches to meeting the NEO EVA mission objectives and mitigating key risks are discussed

View
Thumbnail Image
Item

Rapid reconnaissance and response (R3) mission plan

2010-04-01 , Kelly, Jenny

The Rapid Reconnaissance and Response (R3 ) Mission Plan defines the baseline mission and discusses the set of activities for which spacecraft sequences and ground procedures will be developed and tested. The Mission Overview section summarizes the mission and its objectives, as well as the mission phases and spacecraft modes defined for the project. The Flight System section describes the baseline satellite subsystems, while the Instruments section discusses the radiation dosimeter, microbolometer, and visible imager that will be used for science operations. Finally, the Mission Design section describes the image processing algorithms to be used onboard the spacecraft, along with certain analyses that were performed to support the design of the mission. This document will be updated periodically to reflect the current state of the mission design and operations plan. In addition, the information in this document supersedes the information contained in the following memos: R3-TM-2009-013 and R3-TM-2010-001 (Orbit Analysis); R3-TM-2010-002 (Data Return Strategy); and R3-TM-2009-017 and R3-TM-2010-03 (Mission Phases and Spacecraft Modes of Operation).

View
Thumbnail Image
Item

Design, Analysis, and Testing of the Prox-1 Satellite Structure

2011-12-01 , Pappas, Thomas D.

View
Thumbnail Image
Item

Center For Space Systems Mission Success Assurance: Requirement Verification and Spacecraft Integration and Test Program

2011-05-01 , McNeese, Sarah E.

This document provides the framework of mission success assurance for space-flight projects developed within the Center for Space Systems (CSS). These guidelines, protocols, and procedures were defined during the development of the first project within the laboratory: the Rapid Reconnaissance and Response (R3 ) small satellite mission. The document first details the guidelines and systems put in place for requirement development and verification, the integration and test program, and the hardware development best practices. It then enters into a discussion of how this framework was implemented for R3 , including specific details and examples of the tests planned and executed. The Requirement Verification Matrix (RVM) developed for R3 is provided as an Appendix in both electronic and hard copy as a model. Templates of all documentation developed to support CSS flight projects are also provided as an Appendix in both electronic and digital versions. All documentation of the R3 verification and testing program (hardware inspections, test planning forms, test completion records, etc.) is provided in an electronic appendix that is provided alongside this document.

View