[Ground-station] Satellite program

Jonathan Brandenburg jonathan at jonathanbrandenburg.com
Wed May 30 04:55:16 PDT 2018


I'm available for the proposed meeting,

jb


On 5/28/2018 2:50 PM, Michelle Thompson wrote:
> I think this is very good news and has enormous potential across many
> projects.
>
> One of the action items from Hamvention was to set up a repository
> structure for P4S that mirrors the payload projects we are beginning
> to become associated with (UPSat, etc.). One of the top level
> divisions is, of course, IHU. No time like the present to get that done.
>
> We will set this up today and invite everyone referenced here as
> maintainers. If we can get a copy of the documentation pegged, then we
> can start moving forward from there. Other options, like the Vorago,
> can be documented and discussed in parallel. 
>
> Wide review and evaluation can further improve an already good design.
> I know there's a lot of opinions and feedback surrounding this design.
> I know some discussions happened at 2017 Symposium and there has been
> plenty of work done since then. 
>
> Jonathan et al, do you think a conference call about the IHU would
> help? I was thinking Thursday 6pm Pacific might be good. 
>
>
> -Michelle W5NYV
>
> "Sit vis vobiscum."
>
>
> On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 10:14 AM, Jonathan Brandenburg via
> Ground-Station <ground-station at lists.openresearch.institute
> <mailto:ground-station at lists.openresearch.institute>> wrote:
>
>     [I'm speaking a bit for Zach Metzinger, so I've copied him on this
>     email. I'm not sure if he's on this mailing list or not and want
>     him to be in a position to expand or correct my statements, or
>     even disavow anything I'm saying, if he desires.]
>
>     A small team, primarily Zach Metzinger with the assistance of
>     others (Bill Reed, Jordan Trewitt, me), is designing an IHU based
>     on the TI Hercules safety-critical processor. While the Hercules
>     is not necessarily radiation-hardened, the processor is designed
>     for operation in very noisy environments. It's also designed to
>     detect faults, by executing instructions on two cores in lockstep,
>     detect when the result differs, and signal a failure. (I imagine
>     there are other features, but this is a high point.)
>
>     So, we've been designing an IHU with two Hercules processors and
>     two digital transceivers configured in a fail-over configuration
>     along with redundant power circuits. There's still work to be
>     done, but Zach has begun laying out this board in a 1U footprint.
>
>     [This is the part where I'm speaking for Zach...] I believe Zach
>     is committed to ensuring this design is open and available. As a
>     result, I expect we'll be quickly publishing this work (by
>     ITAR/EAR definitions) as we achieve milestones. This IHU work was
>     begun before the AMSAT Golf program was kicked off and is now
>     being integrated into Golf. I don't know of any reason this work
>     couldn't be leveraged and used in other satellites.
>
>     Thus, I submit this IHU-in-progress for our consideration...
>
>     Jonathan Brandenburg
>
>
>     On 5/16/2018 1:54 PM, Bruce Perens via Ground-Station wrote:
>>
>>     Legal stuff first: Image credit: XKCD #1992: "SafetySat" at
>>     http://xkcd.com/1992/ Creative Commons Attr-NC 2.5 license.
>>
>>     Yes, we should have a satellite program and do what AMSAT is not.
>>     Everyone I have heard from so far is asking for a "DX Satellite",
>>     "like AO-13" and not LEO.
>>
>>     Mission should include digital communications using Michelle's
>>     design. I also have some blue-sky ideas that we can discuss at
>>     Hamvention, some of them might be good grant candidates. Think
>>     grant. Money is out there, we will start soliciting as soon as we
>>     have a mission plan.
>>
>>     Build the satellite (and maybe P-pods) first, approach launch
>>     providers with flight hardware in hand and ready to go.
>>     Satellites are cheap, launches are not. Be prepared to take
>>     advantage of opportunities on very short schedules.
>>
>>     I think we should fabricate extras of parts we design, and sell
>>     them as TAPR does to supplement their budget, but right off of
>>     Amazon Prime. Make them really easy and fast to buy, and someone
>>     else does the shipping. Aim at flight-quality but mostly going to
>>     classroom use rather than flight, to start. Nicer for the class
>>     than the PLA 3-D printer stuff that is so obviously non-flight
>>     that they are using now.
>>
>>     Aim for 100% to 200% markup over cost, Amazon gets around 18% of
>>     the order and a warehouse fee and fulfills from their warehouse.
>>     Most of the commercial cubesat companies, like Pumpkin, are
>>     running 500% to 1000% markup in order to amortize R&D and
>>     operational costs and still make a profit, but most of them have
>>     flight heritage that we would not start out with. We use slave
>>     labor :-) and can mostly base our final cost on fabrication and
>>     sales costs.
>>
>>     I have been looking at cubesat structures (because I feel
>>     competent enough to make one, at least with your help) and I
>>     really like Pumpkin's design. Almost all laser-cut 5000-class
>>     sheet aluminum, bent on a brake, anodized corners on the sheet,
>>     only the 8 corner pieces are machined, and that only simple
>>     shaping and drilling of bar stock into a simple rectilinear shape
>>     with specified-radius corners and edges and a place to put the
>>     springs and cutoff switch pins. Most other designers seemed to be
>>     more interested in showing their skill in CNC machining than
>>     making a practical structure. If you look at Pumpkin's stuff, it
>>     is clear that they put a lot of thought into mechanical
>>     engineering. And they actually engineered for cost and
>>     mass-production, while few others bothered. We will not ever
>>     directly copy anything (I am an intellectual property specialist,
>>     and will keep us legal), but we can and should learn from their work.
>>
>>     Besides the structure, other non-mission-specific stuff we should
>>     be building would include an IHU (computer) and the other general
>>     bus components: lithium battery pack with heaters and per-cell
>>     management, magnetorquer, solar panels (what cells, from where?),
>>     maybe some heat distribution components like adiabatic heat pipes?
>>
>>     Can we hear from volunteers for any of this?
>>
>>     LIME mini might be a good flight candidate, besides Ettus and
>>     Rincon. Their CEO and Open Source guy are very friendly and their
>>     PCB design may already be licensed appropriately. No idea how the
>>     chip would take radiation.
>>
>>     We should look into the Open Source finite element analysis and
>>     CFD programs. We should simulate as much as possible before going
>>     to thermal vacuum, vibration and shock, etc. And publish all
>>     input data so that it can be reused along with our part designs.
>>
>>     I saw a really nice indium electronic thruster at Cal Poly. All
>>     proprietary, of course. Goes up with the fuel solid, gets heated
>>     in flight. No moving parts, works by wicking through a sintered
>>     tip. Probably very patented. But a source of ideas.
>>
>>         Thanks
>>
>>         Bruce
>>
>>
>>     On Wed, May 16, 2018, 09:23 Michelle Thompson
>>     <mountain.michelle at gmail.com
>>     <mailto:mountain.michelle at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         Heh! The SDR really ties it all together in your sketch there. 
>>
>>         Yes, there's interest in building an open source satellite.
>>         The time is right and we have the best chance of making it
>>         happen that I've seen in a long time. There's a variety of
>>         forces at work in the industry, in academia, and in open
>>         source culture and achievement that help make a modern,
>>         innovative, amateur, open source payload possible. 
>>
>>         I don't know enough about MEO but I'm game for supporting any
>>         payload that enables an enduring amateur community through
>>         reliable communications in space. I'm very happy we get the
>>         chance to dig into this and I want to enable and support it
>>         as much as possible. 
>>
>>         The Careful COTS of an Ettus USRP effort is one way to get a
>>         capable SDR for space. This is a joint project between Phase
>>         4 Space and GOLF to get the E310 in play soon/now for GOLF
>>         and the E320 later for Phase 4 Space. Business unit at Ettus
>>         is reviewing it. Systems engineering lead for GOLF endorsed
>>         it as an open source effort. Meeting minutes were posted to
>>         the list. Next steps depend on what IP from Ettus. We'll
>>         proceed with the E320 as far as it takes us regardless. I
>>         expect to make a lot more progress here in late summer/early
>>         fall, especially at GNU Radio Conference 2018.
>>
>>         The Rincon AstroSDR is another option, and Rincon has reached
>>         out with questions and clarifications in response to the
>>         Kittens Weekly Report. There will be more talks after
>>         Hamvention. Rincon will be a significant presence at GNU
>>         Radio Conference 2018. 
>>
>>         Propulsion, attitude control, solar power, and a variety of
>>         antennas all have open source flight-tested options at LEO. I
>>         don't know much about navigation. 
>>
>>         I do know that we have a lot of support out there from
>>         like-minded organizations and projects.
>>
>>         I do know that a payload design is within the capabilities of
>>         people on this list and within our extended
>>         Slack/GitHub/phone/email/club/conference network. That does
>>         not mean it's easy by any stretch, and it means that our
>>         economic development team will be tested. I think we are up
>>         to the challenge.
>>
>>         What's the first thing that you think we need to do? 
>>
>>         -Michelle W5NYV
>>
>>
>>
>>             ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>             From: Howie DeFelice <howied231 at hotmail.com
>>             <mailto:howied231 at hotmail.com>>
>>             To: "ground-station at lists.openresearch.institute"
>>             <mailto:ground-station at lists.openresearch.institute>
>>             <ground-station at lists.openresearch.institute>
>>             <mailto:ground-station at lists.openresearch.institute>
>>             Cc: 
>>             Bcc: 
>>             Date: Wed, 16 May 2018 04:16:15 +0000
>>             Subject: Satellite Building
>>             Just wondering if there is interest in putting together a
>>             project to build a satellite. There is no particular
>>             launch in mind and no particular mission at this pint
>>             other than the generic Amateur Radio goal of furthering
>>             the art of communication. I think most will agree that
>>             the LAST thing we need another LEO. To simply exploit the
>>             microwave bands I think we want to consider orbits that
>>             allow hours of coverage at a time. A GEO would be great,
>>             a HEO would be really good. An overlooked orbit, at least
>>             in ham radio, is MEO. An orbit between 8000 and 10,000 Km
>>             would provide about 2 hours of coverage and orbit the
>>             earth about twice a day. The problem is that not too many
>>             people fly there so we need another  strategy. If we
>>             aren't in a big hurry, maybe we can get there from LEO.
>>             This means we need propulsion, attitude control,
>>             navigation, lots of solar power and a really cool radio.
>>             Does this sound reasonable? How  long would this actually
>>             take with a milli-Newton thruster ? I have attached a
>>             sketch of my first ideas.
>>
>>             - Howie AB2S  
>>
>>
>>             ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>             From: ground-station-request at lists.openresearch.institute
>>             <mailto:ground-station-request at lists.openresearch.institute>
>>             To: 
>>             Cc: 
>>             Bcc: 
>>             Date: Wed, 16 May 2018 00:16:18 -0400
>>             Subject: confirm db1d86455ef4eb7857a41676b75024137549ff1d
>>             If you reply to this message, keeping the Subject: header
>>             intact,
>>             Mailman will discard the held message.  Do this if the
>>             message is
>>             spam.  If you reply to this message and include an
>>             Approved: header
>>             with the list password in it, the message will be
>>             approved for posting
>>             to the list.  The Approved: header can also appear in the
>>             first line
>>             of the body of the reply.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Ground-Station mailing list
>>     Ground-Station at lists.openresearch.institute
>>     <mailto:Ground-Station at lists.openresearch.institute>
>>     http://lists.openresearch.institute/mailman/listinfo/ground-station
>>     <http://lists.openresearch.institute/mailman/listinfo/ground-station>
>
>     -- 
>     Jonathan Brandenburg
>     1-214-213-1066
>     jonathan at jonathanbrandenburg.com
>     <mailto:jonathan at jonathanbrandenburg.com>
>     -----------------------
>     When possible, please sign and encrypt your communication. See https://ssd.eff.org
>
>     I updated my PGP certificate on December 8, 2015. Please update your keychain:
>     PGP certificate fingerprint: 824E 8871 5474 61F7 09D4  9B67 8AFC 1E70 924D B20
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Ground-Station mailing list
>     Ground-Station at lists.openresearch.institute
>     http://lists.openresearch.institute/mailman/listinfo/ground-station
>     <http://lists.openresearch.institute/mailman/listinfo/ground-station>
>
>

-- 
Jonathan Brandenburg
1-214-213-1066
jonathan at jonathanbrandenburg.com
-----------------------
When possible, please sign and encrypt your communication. See https://ssd.eff.org

I updated my PGP certificate on December 8, 2015. Please update your keychain:
PGP certificate fingerprint: 824E 8871 5474 61F7 09D4  9B67 8AFC 1E70 924D B20

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openresearch.institute/pipermail/ground-station-openresearch.institute/attachments/20180530/5aaeef9e/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openresearch.institute/pipermail/ground-station-openresearch.institute/attachments/20180530/5aaeef9e/attachment.sig>


More information about the Ground-Station mailing list