Re: [psas-avionics] [psas-software] Wikis and simulators [1kg satellite design]

2007-06-06 Thread glennl
It would be fun to put the avionics package into Erik's bell jar and  
see how well it works at 10^-6 Torr, just for a starting point. In  
front of the space shuttle it is something like 10^-14 Torr. Let me  
know if someone want's to do that; I'll be free in 2 weeks.

Glenn


Quoting Keith Packard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> On Tue, 2007-06-05 at 14:33 -0700, Andrew Greenberg wrote:
>
>> However, we had one of those "aha" moments several months ago where we
>> realized that our avionics system is a pretty darn good satellite by
>> itself
>
> We're not currently selecting space-rated parts, and experiences with
> other satellite projects seem to require parts with well known
> radiation-induced failure modes (e.g., no lockups).
>
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>




___
psas-avionics mailing list
psas-avionics@lists.psas.pdx.edu
http://lists.psas.pdx.edu/mailman/listinfo/psas-avionics


Re: [psas-avionics] [psas-software] Wikis and simulators [1kg satellite design]

2007-06-06 Thread Keith Packard
On Tue, 2007-06-05 at 14:33 -0700, Andrew Greenberg wrote:

> However, we had one of those "aha" moments several months ago where we
> realized that our avionics system is a pretty darn good satellite by
> itself

We're not currently selecting space-rated parts, and experiences with
other satellite projects seem to require parts with well known
radiation-induced failure modes (e.g., no lockups).

-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
psas-avionics mailing list
psas-avionics@lists.psas.pdx.edu
http://lists.psas.pdx.edu/mailman/listinfo/psas-avionics


Re: [psas-avionics] [psas-software] Wikis and simulators [1kg satellite design]

2007-06-06 Thread Andrew Greenberg
Hey Jeff!

> Has anyone started on a design/implementation of a 1kg satellite
> prototype yet?

No, no one has given us any kind of payload yet.

However, we had one of those "aha" moments several months ago where we
realized that our avionics system is a pretty darn good satellite by
itself - so now it's a larger satellite, but heck, it's free since we
need it anyway. And after all, it's all software these days, so why
can't the avionics system reconfigure itself after orbital insertion?
We'll have a magnetometer, an ATV system, and a GPS, so why not use that
as our satellite? And heck, if someone adds more satellite-like things
to the avionics system (like, for example, magnetorquers and solar
panels), how could that be bad? :) Just think we shut down the IMU and
pressure sensors, and keep the ATV system, GPS, magnetometer on.

In fact, we were just joking a few days ago that on the current avionics
system, ditching a stage is going to be like unplugging a USB peripheral ;)

So, one of the questions we're asking ourselves right now is exactly how
small and light weight can we make the avionics system. For example,
could it be made small enough to fit in a cubesat (10 x 10 x 10 cm)? It
might be tough, but why not? Sounds like a fun challenge. But there are
lots of gotchas: heat dissipation. Outgassing. Etc.

But one step at a time: we've got to get the recover node up and
running, then the power system, then the flight computer... we've got a
ways to go before we can start packing things in tight together.

Andrew

-- 
---
Andrew Greenberg

Portland State Aerospace Society (http://psas.pdx.edu/)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  P: 503.788.1343  C: 503.708.7711
---


___
psas-avionics mailing list
psas-avionics@lists.psas.pdx.edu
http://lists.psas.pdx.edu/mailman/listinfo/psas-avionics