PROBA 3 PROBA 3. 3 rd Participants Meeting. 13 March 2008 D/TEC-SY. 13-March-2008

Transcription

1 PROBA 3 PROBA 3 3 rd Participants Meeting 13 March

2 Introduction of the Meeting PROBA 3 2 nd Participants Meeting Agreement to proceed with 4 main Participants and to review the situation after consolidation of the baseline PROBA 3 main activities submitted to IPC in April 2007 (ESA/IPC(2007)76) Bridging step inserted in the Project logic for the new industrial consortium Industrial Phase A activities completed Bridging step initiated in October 2007, to be completed May 2008 Bridging step PM2 completed (mission and design baseline) Technology pre-developments initiated or continued 2

3 Objectives of the Meeting To agree on steps and schedules for the implementation of the project, To review and comment the Special Implementation Plan provided, To take note of the status of on-going Bridging Step and associated technology developments activities in TRP and GSTP, To identify any item which requires clarification from the Executive and plan required actions, To address the involvement of Participants besides S, SWE, B, UK. 3

4 Steps and Schedules 3 rd Participants Meeting Letter to the GSTP Office indicating the intended contributions for Phase B and C/D/E (5 April 2008), Procurement Proposal to AC endorsed by 18 April 2008, Approval by IPC (6/7 May 2008) of: Procurement Proposal, Special Implementation rules, Proposition to shorten subscription (for Phase B) to 2 weeks Subscription by interested Participating States (21 May 2008) Issue of ITT 4

5 Agenda Introduction (ESA) Phase A outcome (ESA) Bridging step status (SSC) Technology pre-development status (ESA) Payload status (ESA) Additional participants (ESA) Programmatic (ESA) Project organisation (ESA) Comments from Delegations Conclusion 5

6 General Background The interest of implementing a mission to develop satellite formation flying has been recognised for several years. In 2005 the programmatic effort was strengthened and the proposal for PROBA 3 was presented to IPC (ESA/IPC(2005)76, rev. 1) Phase 0 was conducted, also in cooperation with CNES, in ESA CDF Phase A were performed under the GSP Bridging step with the planned implementation consortium is on going Technology development activities are ongoing or initiated 2 nd Participants Meeting was held in

7 General Mission Background Flying satellites in formation is the only reasonable way of implementing identified high performance missions in various domains: Space Science and Exploration, Earth Observation, Surveillance and Security Being able to fly satellites in tight formation (as if it were a single body) opens new horizons, makes conceptually possible new missions; e.g. focal lengths are not limited by physical dimensions, new way of synthesizing apertures, long baseline interferometer / gradiometer, etc These missions are not without risk and are expensive, PROBA 3 will be a cost effective means of developing formation flying to TRL 8/9, The alternative, each user developing the capability, will be considerably more expensive and risky, FF techniques can also spin-off to other domains, e.g. RV in non Earth orbits, Furthermore, PROBA 3 will allow to use for space advanced System Engineering and development approaches It prepares the ground for future large missions based on small spacecraft using Formation Flying. 7

8 General Objectives PROBA 3 is a technology development and demonstration mission of precise Formation Flying techniques and technologies to prepare for future user missions The objectives derived from the goal are: The development of FF system concepts The development of FF vehicle management and GNC and implementation in operational SW The development to TRL-8/TRL-9 of technology required for satellite FF The development to operational SW release of SW, tools / facilities The utilisation of advanced design, development and verification techniques This is to be achieved by Developing and deploying two high performance small satellites with the appropriate FF system and a sun coronagraph payload Using a cost-effective development approach ( lightsat ) 8

9 General Requirements The mission requirements are therefore of two classes: Requirements associated to the formation flying, the development of the technology, the tools and facilities and utilisation of the techniques Requirements associated to the sun-coronagraph mission / payload. The FF mission requirements are established with the future user programmes: Space science, Earth Observation, Exploration, Surveillance Mission and System requirements Documents will be established and monitored with user programmes The intention is to progress also in the utilisation of advanced techniques for System Engineering and Software Development and AIV. The challenge is also at system level: First FF mission, Upgrade of small spacecraft platform to include FF functionalities. 9

10 Astrium and Thales Phase A 10

11 Phase A Mission Requirements PROBA 3 Mission Goal is the demonstration in orbit of Formation Flying Demonstrate Formation Flying for high accuracy missions Demonstration of FF acquisition and maintenance Demonstration of FF manoeuvres Demonstrate FF in the context of a user mission (coronagraph) Demonstrate performance of FF technologies of most demanding missions Metrology systems Actuation systems GNC Validate development approach and tools for FF missions Within the constraints of a small and demonstration mission (small spacecraft and launcher) 11

12 Astrium - Study Consortium and WBS 12

13 Astrium - Mission and System Architecture 13

14 Astrium Mission baseline Highly Elliptic orbit (3 days, 800/160000, i=5) Reduced gravity gradient Long time for FF VEGA (Rockot) + Propulsion Module Time-lining orbit 14

15 Astrium System Architecture Suite of Metrologies from Coarse to Fine FF RF based for coarse Optical based for fine Performances Coarse lateral:5mm, longitudinal:1cm Fine lateral:5mm, longitudinal:2mm 15

16 Astrium FF Spacecraft Architecture Baseline concept Occulter Cold gas propulsion System (Marotta thrusters) Corner Cubes Coronagraph Cold gas propulsion system Detectors optical metrology (CLS, FLS, DWI) EP concept Cold gas propulsion Corner Cubes Electrical Propulsion (RIT-2 by Astrium) Detectors optical metrology (CLS, FLS, DWI) 16

17 Astrium Spacecraft Design 17

18 Astrium Product Tree Equipment Category SC Comment Separation mechanism D CS Separates CS+OS stack from PRM Separation mechanism D CS Separates CS and OS Solar Panel D CS Solar Panel D OS Solar Array Drive Mechanism D CS Li-Ion battery D CS Li-ion battery D OS On Board Computer D Common common cell technology, different arrays common battery technology Mass memory D CS Same memory technology as OBC main memory Propulsion D OS Mono-prop or cold gas Propulsion A CS Electric Propulsion S-band Tx/Rx D CS Omni and high gain antennas S-band Tx/Rx D OS Omni antenna only Structure C OS Simple H-frame assumed Structure C CS Simple H-frame may not be suitable (TBC) OBSW operating system D Common RTEMS for example OBSW platform A Common Unionics is an example of software platform OBSW tasks A Common Tasks (e.g. ACS) will be tuned for CS or OS instantiation STR D Common Rate gyros D Common Reaction wheels D Common GPS D Common Passive thermal control D Common RF metrology C Common Includes ISL Optical Coarse Lateral sensor A CS Detector unit Optical Coarse Lateral Sensor A OS Laser diodes Optical longitudinal sensor A CS HPOM DWI Optical fine lateral sensor A OS Detector (part of HPOM system) 18

19 Astrium - Budgets Occulter Coronagraph Baseline concept (launch mass: kg-no system margin) Mass kg kg Incoming power 175 W (BOL) 159 W (EOL) 350 W (BOL) 319 W (EOL) EP concept (launch mass: kg- no system margin) Mass kg kg Incoming power 175 W (BOL) 159 W (EOL) W( BOL) 478 W (EOL) 19

20 Astrium - Budgets PROPULSION MODULE with VEGA Current Mass (kg) Contingency (kg) Maximum Mass (kg) Propulsion Module Additional Structural Mass for VEGA and higher mass Separation System PROPULSION MODULE DRY TOTAL Fuel Oxidiser Residuals 25.4 Helium 3.6 CONSUMABLES TOTAL PROPULSION MODULE WET TOTAL LAUNCH COMPOSITE Maximum Mass (kg) Coronagraph Spacecraft Occulter Spacecraft Propulsion Module LAUNCH COMPOSITE DRY TOTAL Consumables LAUNCH COMPOSITE WET TOTAL VEGA Launch Vehicle Capability Launch Vehicle Margin % system margin is achieved only with mass savings 20

21 Astrium Technology Status Technology item TRL Status/Responsibility Mission Planning (MMOPS) 4 Will be developed by PROBA-3 Industrial Team Formation Command and Control 3 Will be developed by PROBA-3 Industrial team Formation Position Control 4 Will be developed by PROBA-3 industrial team Attitude Control System 5 Will be developed by PROBA-3 industrial team Testbed Infrastructure 2 ESA managed technology development to TRL5 GPS 8 Mature flight technology R-GPS 7 Mature technology (ground based) FF RFM 5 CNES managed development to fly on PRISMA Shadow Position Sensor 1 ASPIICS development to PROBA-3 specification Optical longitudinal (HPOM) 3 ESA managed technology development to TRL 5 Optical Coarse Lateral 1 CNES funded R&D study aimed at Simbol-X Optical Fine Lateral (HPOM) 3 ESA managed technology development to TRL 5 Alternative Optical longitudinal 1 ESA managed technology development to TRL 5 MIDGITS mini ion 1 ESA managed technology development to TRL 5 RIT-2 mini-ion 4 ESA managed technology development to TRL 5 10 mn Mini-cold gas (on-off) 6 Mature technology 10 mn cold gas, proportional 3 Being considered for GAIA 21

22 Astrium Proposed WBS 22

23 Astrium SW/System development 23

24 Astrium Spacecraft Issues Cold gas propulsion system on CSC and OSC is baseline, EP concept is also feasible, but extra deployable panel on CSC are required 20% system margin on mass budget is achievable only after mass savings Thermal: Occultor (solar cells and units) becomes very hot. Heat pipes and a radiator are required Thermal deformation: compliancy with requirement can be obtained by removing electronic units of instrument and metrology from the optical bench and adding heaters to keep dissipation constant on the bench Power budget of the Occultor is very critical Power budget is positive in all cases with constraints on the manoeuvers 24

25 Astrium Project Issues Technical Risk At Risk Until Risk Reduction Activity VEGA performance PDR Arianespace analysis of mission requirement Structural design of Coronagraph to meet stack requirements PDR Analysis Thermo-Elastic spacecraft structural distortions compromise required PDR Detailed thermal modelling precision in relative alignment of STR and CLS FF RFM fine mode performance degraded by multipath CDR Early testing on spacecraft models Sun dazzling and thermal effects on optical sensors PDR Properly Specify in unit level requirements Coupling between attitude and displacement measurements compromises PDR Analysis and simulation required positional control Thermal transients caused by operating in Occulter shadow PDR Analysis Mass budget constrains operational orbit PDR Proper use of system margins Shadow Position Sensor Performance affects calibration accuracy CDR Early prototyping, analysis and simulation Formation Command and Control complexity underestimated PDR Early analysis and simulation Optical GSE involves new expertise CDR Early analysis of requirements Programme Risk At Risk Until Risk Reduction Activity Requirements Overload SRR Manage ESA expectations ASPIICS project office not set up till PDR PDR Dialogue with LAM High mission profile puts pressure on ECSS3 assumption CDR Dialogue with ESA Cost and schedule overruns on the FF technologies during Phase C/D CDR Careful assessment of status at end of Phase B CLS is a national development, not influenced by P3 requirements CDR Develop alternative sensor 25

26 TAS - Study Consortium and WBS Proba 3 - Phase A Prime : Alcatel Alenia Space Mission Analysis and FF Mgt DEIMOS Formation Flying FDIR / Anticollision Avionics and SW Sci Syc Prisma Heritage and MicroPropulsion SSC Proba Platform Verhaert Proba 3 - Phase A Prime : Alcatel Alenia Space Formation Flying technologies Consultancies ASPICS Instrument Consultancy GNC Consultancies Nanosat Platform Optical Metrology AAS-Italy Cold Gas Micropropulsion SSC + AAS-Italy Electrical Micropropulsion Qinetiq RF Metrology and ISL AAS-France Laboratoire d' Astrophysique de Marseille NGC Analytikon GMV Nanosat option : SSTL 26

27 TAS - Study Consortium and WBS PROBA-3 WBS Proba-3 Formation Flying Demonstration Mission Requirements & Concept Analysis WP 1000 Proba 3 Detailed Definition WP 2000 Proba 3 Consolidation WP 3000 Proba 3 Management WP 4000 Analysis of Requirements & Drivers WP AAS Identification of mission architecture concepts and recommendation of baseline WP AAS Analysis of status and plans of FF Technology WP AAS / Consultancies Preliminary Sun Corona Mission Payload Analysis and Concepts WP AAS/LAM Preliminary Mission Analysis WP DEIMOS Preliminary FF System Analysis and Concepts WP AAS FF System WP AAS FF Management WP DEIMOS FDIR WP SciSys GNC WP AAS/Consultancy Avionics and SW WP SciSys Spacecraft Requirements and Concepts WP VERHAERT Coronograph Payload Interface Requirements WP AAS/LAM Mission Detailed Analysis WP DEIMOS FF System Refinement WP AAS (same sharing as WP 1600) Detailed Spacecraft Configuration and Systems Definition WP VERHAERT Avionics - SciSys Nanosat (Option) - SSTL Ground Segment Concept Definition WP AAS/Spacebel Consultancy Development Plan and Cost Estimates WP AAS + Verhaert support Exploitation Concept WP AAS PROBA-3 System Specification WP AAS PROBA-3 Conclusion and Recommendations WP AAS NanoSat (option) WP SSTL Requirements on Ground Segment WP AAS/SPACEBEL Consultancy Preliminary Development and AIV Plan WP AAS + Verhaert support 27

28 TAS Mission baseline Highly Elliptic orbit (1 day, 800/71212, i=5) VEGA (Rockot) + Propulsion Module Time-lining orbit 28

29 TAS System Architecture Suite of Metrologies from Coarse to Fine FF RF based for coarse Optical based for fine (ULIS) Performances Lateral:2mm (6mm), longitudinal:10mm 29

30 TAS FF Spacecraft Architecture Occulter Cold gas propulsion System (NanoSpace/Proel thrusters) Detectors optical metrology (ULIS, FLS, DWI) Coronagraph Electrical propulsion system (Astrium, Qinetiq) Corner Cubes 30

31 TAS Spacecraft Design 31

32 TAS Product Tree 32

33 TAS Product Tree 33

34 TAS - Budgets Occulter Coronagraph MIDGIT concept (launch mass: 493 kg 10% system margin) Mass 213 Kg 280 Kg RIT concept (launch mass: 491 kg 10% system margin) Mass 213 Kg 278 Kg Power 307 W (BOL) 273 W (EOL) 277 W (BOL) 247 W (EOL) 34

35 TAS Technology Status RF metrology Micro-propulsion Optical metrology 35

36 TAS Proposed WBS 36

37 TAS Proposed WBS 37

38 TAS Development Flow 38

39 TAS Project Issues Mass budget critical Occultor, solar cells temperature Shadowing on Coronagraph solar arrays Radiation level Power consumption of metrology Electrical Propulsion development status Constraints induced by VEGA + propulsion module (LPFM) 39

40 Bridging Step (SSC) 40

41 Technology pre-developments 41

42 Technology pre-development activities Design Development and Test of a Mini Ion Engine System (GSTP) Scope: Characterisation of ion engines for future missions including PROBA 3, TRL 4 Planning: December 2006 to June 2008 delayed to December 2008 Milestones: System Design Review July 2007 (Astrium) delayed to January 2008 TRR November 2007 (QinetiQ) delayed to April 2008 TRR December 2007 (Astrium) delayed to May 2008 PDR April 2008 (QinetiQ) delayed to November 2008 PDR June 2008 (Astrium) delayed to December 2008 Status: Two parallel contracts placed with Astrium (D) and QinetiQ (UK) Addition for PROBA 3: Complete flight propulsion system (including power electronic) Open Points: Usual technical performance issues Accumulation of delays 42

43 Technology pre-development activities Development of a Power Conditioning Unit for a Mini Ion Engine System (GSTP) Scope: Develop a power conditioning unit for mini-ion engines Planning: planned for March Status: Open competition. Candidates Astrium (D) and CRISA (E) Addition for PROBA 3: Flight model Open Points: Subscription Planning 43

44 Technology pre-development activities RF Metrology Development (GSTP-4) Scope: EQM of the generic RF metrology unit. Upgrade of PRISMA design. Planning: Feb 2008 to Feb 2009 Status: Direct negotiation TAS (F and E) and GMV Addition for PROBA 3: 2 Flight units, upgrade of test benches, analysis of PROBA 3 specific performances (multi-path, configuration, ) Open points: Cost of PROBA 3 complement, Compatibility of performances with optical metrology suite, Confirmation of funding. 44

45 Technology pre-development activities High Precision Optical Metrology (TRP: MMO-630) Scope: Development of HPOM to TRL 5/6 in line with PROBA 3 performances Planning: June 2007 to December 2008 delayed to March 2009 Milestones: CDR: February 2008, delayed to June Status: Direct negotiation Astrium (F and D) Addition for PROBA 3: Full flight model: optical head and electronics Open points: Funding of flight model Transfer to Switzerland 45

46 Technology pre-development activities Alternative concepts for optical metrology (GSTP-4: FF04-04SP) Scope: Investigation of new metrology systems adequate for PROBA 3, TRL 3/4 Planning: August 2007 to August 2008 Status: Direct negotiation QinetiQ Milestones: TRR: June 2008 Open points: Selection for PROBA 3 in phase B Planning Optical Metrology - Coarse Lateral Sensor (GSTP-4: FF04-03SC) Scope: Development of the complement of HPOM and possible sensor for low accuracy FF missions, TRL 5/6 Status: Proposal not accepted Open points: Re-issue ITT, Investigation of back-up (F, DK,CH) 46

47 Technology pre-development activities Fabry Perot (FP-MET) Metrology (Portuguese task force) Scope: Adapt FSI to 1064 mm compliant to HPOM-2 design Milestones: 1 st Phase: March 2008 Status: INETI (PT) Addition for PROBA 3: Flight model and inclusion with HPOM-2 47

48 Technology pre-development activities FF SW Validation Facility, Requirements and Concepts (FF03-01SP) Scope: Pre-development of SW system validation facility adapted to a multi- spacecraft mission Planning: September 2007 to September 2008 Status: SBI (B) with GMV (E) and Scisys (UK) Addition for PROBA 3: Become part of the engineering development flow Open points: Aligned with PROBA 3 industrial consortium 48

49 Payload 49

50 PROBA 3 Coronagraph During Phase 0 and A, a coronagraph was proposed by LAM and a preliminary design was prepared For the bridging step, SSC, Qinetiq and LAM were tasked to simplify the proposed instrument to minimise cost due to lack of support During the bridging step, NRL has proposed to team up with the Europeans to build the coronagraph (NRL PI and instrument Prime) NRL has submitted to SMEX (NASA) a proposal for a coronagraph (XCTEL_ED) following a quick design iteration with SSC, Qinetiq and LAM SMEX selection results will be known in May

51 Additional Participations 51

52 PROBA 3 Additional Contributions Interest (at least already known to ESA) from Canada, Switzerland, Norway, Portugal, Denmark, Luxemburg, Greece: Canada: GNC algorithms (follow-on of PROBA 1/2), FDIR methods Switzerland: optical metrology (fine and coarse), ARASS Norway: opto-pyros, space hardware Portugal: Rendez-vous experiment and fine optical metrology Denmark: same than Portugal Luxemburg: spacecraft structures Greece: avionics 52

53 PROBA 3 Additional Contributions Interest (at least already known to ESA) from Canada, Switzerland, Norway, Portugal, Denmark, Luxemburg: Canada: GNC -> participation to Phase B (already in Phase A), FDIR -> TBD Switzerland: optical metrology fine -> on going action on HPOM, optical metrology coarse -> TBD, ARASS -> currently in the system design Norway: possible participation to be selected in Phase B Portugal: RdV -> to be taken into account in phase B, fine optical metrology -> on going action Denmark: same than Portugal Luxemburg: spacecraft structures -> possible participation to be selected in Phase B Points of consideration PROBA 3 is a technical challenge with tight programmatic envelope and system budgets -> no room for technology experiments not related to FF in the system design (possible opportunity but at a later stage!) Potential participants shall be known for the Phase B (contributions clarified) 53

54 PROBA 3 Programmatic Aspects 54

55 PROBA 3 Schedule Activity Date PROBA 3 Bridging Step 11/ /2008 PROBA 3 procurement proposal to IPC May 2008 PROBA 3 RFQ for Phase B/C/D/E1 PROBA 3 proposal for Phase B/C/D/E1 06/2008 PROBA 3 Phase B 06/ /2009 PROBA 3 SRR, PDR 12/2008, 06/2009 PROBA 3 updated proposal for Phase C/D/E1 05/2009 PROBA 3 Phase C/D 07/ /2011 PROBA 3 CDR, FAR 12/2009, 11/2011 PROBA 3 Phase E 01/ /

56 PROBA 3 Implementation Plan The PROBA 3 Procurement Proposal will be submitted to IPC with an Implementation Plan (distributed): Project Background Project Objectives Project Description Project Phases and Schedule Scale of contribution by Participating States Admission of new participants to the project PROBA 3 procurement steps and schedule PROBA 3 budget breakdown Industrial policy, geographical return and adjustment of contributions Management Overrun and delays Delivery and exploitation of satellites and ground segment Regime of results and follow-on 56

57 PROBA 3 Cost Figures ESA/IPC(2007)76 Title PROBA 3 space and ground segment BCDE1 Launcher and propulsion module procurement Ground segment deployment, LEOP support and operations Budget (K ) 93,200 19,500 Remarks Budget based on Phase 0 cost estimates. Budget for the Phase B is 20 M. Assuming a VERTA flight (14.5 M ) and a propulsion module procurement (5 M ), 6,500 Budget based on Phase 0 cost estimates Total Project Costs 119,200 Total (including ESA Costs) 147,406 57

58 PROBA 3 Cost Figures Cost estimates are based on: Optimised project set-up which requires close collaboration between the mission Prime and the spacecraft Prime, and reasonable industrial distribution, Small satellite/ Lightsat approach, including: Large amount of re-use implying a trade-off in the mission requirements, Relaxing PA requirements but conducting tests of representative effects, Relaxing availability and reliability requirements, Reduced paper work but closer relation ESA industry Strong technology effort to reach timely the right TRL Low number of layers, deep knowledge of elements E2E testing Assumptions on Vega and LPF propulsion stage. 58

59 Cost Allocation / Phase / Country (GSTP workplan) Using bridging phase work organisation 59

60 Cost Allocation / Phase / Country (GSTP workplan) 60

61 Cost Allocation Procurement Proposal costs estimated were presented at mid Phase A, Usage of recurrent elements and commonalities between spacecraft shall be maximised, A central FF and System Engineering group shall be created to avoid multiplication of interfaces and overlap. Share between countries is based on the Bridging Step set-up. 61

62 Phase B activities It will include standard Phase B tasks including in particular : - Consolidation of mission and system requirements, system and support specifications, justification dossiers and interfaces - Make / buy / Make more for specific FF technologies based on TRL and pre-developments, - Prototype of the flight software running into a system simulator (SVF) including at least GNC (FF modes) and specific FF management SW, - Hardware in the loop validation of critical software, - Baseline launcher (Vega), launcher interface and formation deployment, - Payload confirmation, - Establishment of detailed development plan following small sat/lightsat approach, - Ground testing infrastructure, - Ground segment support, - FF technologies advanced developments, - Small spacecraft platform design. The activity will end with a PDR, including thorough review of achievement of TRL 5/6. 62

63 Project Organisation 63

64 Bridging Step WBS 64

65 Organisation outline The Bridging Step organisation will be (re-)used for the implementation phase (if in line with budget). WBS agreed with all participants to the Bridging Step will be provided at the end of the Bridging Step. Additional participations will be assessed in Phase B. Issues: Technology providers, Involvement of UK in the system tasks 65

66 Conclusion 66