I have been thinking more about those cradle-like support boards the
Colorado CubeSat group made for their Flat-Sat environment. Friday we said
Colorado's approach may be overkill on one extreme, and what CalPoly did
with flying wires everywhere being at the other end. I think having
something closer to the Colorado approach may be better.
Some of the following features may be desirable:
- As appropriate each subsystem board would have it's own custom
"FlatSat Support Breakout" board (FSB) board.
- The FSB should allow the subsystem to be tested independently, and
away from the rest of the FlatSat, and really other than easy integration
into a FlatSat that is it's only purpose. This is where the complexity of
interconnecting it to the OreSat backplane will be challenging. The
question of an FSB, or an OreSat extender card, or both should be
- The FSB should should allow us take the subsystem in a fully running
state into testing environments such as Thermal-Vacuum, Vibration, RF,
various bench tests, etc, without interfering with the test.
- The FSB should not introduce any side effects to the FlatSat when
connected into it. It's not intended to add another layer of infrastructure
to the subsystem or backplane, but just allow easy FlatSat integration, and
- As was pointed out on Friday, access to both sides of the subsystem
board should be possible.
Glenn Noel LeBrasseur
psas-avionics mailing list