NASA NTRS · 20150019727
No abstract available
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Likins, Daniel Thomas, Hunter, Roger. 2015-10-08. CubeSats and Science Return. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20150019727
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Presently, most CubeSat components and buses are generally not appropriate for missions where significant or indeterminate risk of failure is unacceptable. This has precluded their use in many cases where their attributes could otherwise enable or enhance mission objectives. However, in the future, CubeSats and SmallSats, which deviate from CubeSat form factors but often incorporate CubeSat components and subsystems, will address challenges that many presently consider to be beyond the platform's capabilities. This growing potential utility, combined with the limited volume of successful CubeSat flight heritage, is driving an interagency effort to improve small satellite mission confidence.
We have been developing terahertz high resolution spectrometers and radiometers on CubeSat platforms for astrophysics, planetary science, and Earth science applications. We are also developing millimeter-wave communications systems on CubeSat platforms to provide communication links during the entry-descent-landing (EDL) phase of Mars and other planetary missions. In this paper, we present an overview of the state of the millimeter-wave and terahertz instrumentation development for CubeSat platforms. We discuss the design and implementation challenges for these instrument developments. We also look into innovative packaging solutions, antenna technology, and low-power backend options for these instruments. We show that CubeSats and SmallSats will play a key role in future scientific space missions and also they will find increasing applications in commercial communication and other endeavors.
At present, CubeSat components and buses are generally not appropriate for missions where significant risk of failure, or the inability to quantify risk or confidence, is acceptable. However, in the future we anticipate that CubeSats will be used for missions requiring reliability of 1-3 years for Earth-observing missions and even longer for Planetary, Heliophysics, and Astrophysics missions. Their growing potential utility is driving an interagency effort to improve and quantify CubeSat reliability, and more generally, small satellite mission risk. The Small Satellite Reliability Initiative (SSRI)—an ongoing activity with broad collaborative participation from civil, DoD, and commercial space systems providers and stakeholders—targets this challenge. The Initiative seeks to define implementable and broadly-accepted approaches to achieve reliability and acceptable risk postures associated with several SmallSat mission risk classes—from “do no harm” missions, to those associated with missions whose failure would result in loss or delay of key national objectives. These approaches will maintain, to the extent practical, cost efficiencies associated with small satellite missions and consider constraints associated with supply chain elements, as appropriate. The SSRI addresses this challenge from two architectural levels—the mission- or system-level, and the component- or subsystem-level. The mission- or system-level scope targets assessment approaches that are efficient and effective, with mitigation strategies that facilitate resiliency to mission or system anomalies while the component- or subsystem-level scope addresses the challenge at lower architectural levels. The initiative does not limit strategies and approaches to proven and traditional methodologies, but is focused on fomenting thought on novel and innovative solutions. This paper discusses the genesis of and drivers for this initiative, how the public-private collaboration is being executed, findings and recommendations derived to date, and next steps towards broadening small satellite mission potential.