University of Li`ge e Faculty of Applied Sciences Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering Department

OUFTI-1 nanosatellite: Dynamic analysis and qualication testing

Thesis submitted in partial fullment of the requirements for the degree of Master in Aerospace Engineering

by

BERTHA Mathieu

Supervisor: Prof. Jean-Claude GOLINVAL

Academic Year 20102011

Abstract OUFTI1, standing for Orbital Utility For Telecommunication Innovation, is a nanosatellite in the CubeSat standard developed by a student team at the University of Li`ge. e The rst objective of the project is above all to provide a rst experience to students in the design of a special mission. OUFTI1 also carries a principal and two secondary payloads. The rst one is a repeater for the D-STAR protocol, a new communication protocol for amateur radio. The two secondary payloads are an innovative digitally-controlled power supply developed with Thales Alenia Space ETCA, and new high-eciency solar cells developed by Azur Space. To operate in orbit, OUFTI1 has rst to pass through the launch phase and its harsh dynamic environment. The satellite must therefore prove its capability to withstand quasi-static and dynamic loads encountered during these few minutes. Therefore, a nite element model of the current design of the satellite is built. Quasi-static and sine vibrations analyses performed on this model result in positive margin of safety concerning the quasi-static and sine vibrations requirements. Finally, a testing procedure is drawn up to further correlate with the current model.

Contents

Acronyms Acknowledgements Introduction 1 VEGA maiden ight

xiii 1 2 9

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.1 1.2 VEGA Launch Vehicle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Launch environment and ESA requirements . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.2.1 1.2.2 1.2.3 1.2.4 1.2.5 Lower limit in frequency requirement . . . . . . . . . . 13 Quasi-static loads requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Sine vibration requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Random vibration requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Shock load requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 2 Finite element modelling and updating 24

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 2.1 Previous nite element models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.2 The CubeSat Kit structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 The battery support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Finite element modelling of electronic cards . . . . . . . . . . 29 2.2.1 2.2.2 Choice of the element type in the modelling . . . . . . 30 Consideration of electronic components . . . . . . . . . 32

2.3

Experimental modal analysis and update process . . . . . . . 34 2.3.1 2.3.2 First step: tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Second step: identication phase . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

2.4

Modelling of the OBC2 card . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 2.4.1 2.4.2 2.4.3 2.4.4 2.4.5 Modelling of the PCB and PC104 . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Experimental modal analysis of the unpopulated OBC2 44 Update of the unpopulated OBC2 model . . . . . . . . 47 Characterization of the PC104 connection . . . . . . . 50 Consideration of the electronic components . . . . . . . 52

2.5

Modelling of the EPS card . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 2.5.1 2.5.2 Modelling of the PCB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 Consideration of the electronic components . . . . . . . 58

2.6

Modelling of the xEPS card . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 2.6.1 Modelling of the PCB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 ii

2.6.2 2.7 2.8

Consideration of the electronic components . . . . . . . 64

Modelling of the FM430 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Global nite element model of the satellite . . . . . . . . . . . 74

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 3 Numerical testing 80

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 3.1 Modal analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 3.1.1 3.2 3.3 Boundary conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

Quasi static accelerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 Sinusoidal vibrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 3.3.1 3.3.2 3.3.3 Boundary conditions and applied loads . . . . . . . . . 91 X direction loading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 Y and Z direction loadings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95

3.4

Random vibrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 3.4.1 3.4.2 Transformation of the prescribed PSD . . . . . . . . . 99 Adding SPECTRAL commands . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 4 Testing procedure 102

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 4.1 4.2 Needed facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 Test set-up . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 4.2.1 Accelerometers placement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

iii

4.3

Sinusoidal and random acceleration tests . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 4.3.1 4.3.2 4.3.3 Objectives of these tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 Test sequence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 Pass criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107

4.4

Shock tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 108

Conclusion

iv

List of Figures

1 2 3 4 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8

Small satellites [1]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pumpkins CubeSat structures corresponding to 1, 1.5, 2 and 3units CubeSats, respectively for 10 10 15, 20 and 30 cm. Illustration of the PPOD structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Exploded view of the OUFTI1 CubeSat. . . . . . . . . . . . .

3 4 5 7

Vettore Europeo di Generazione Avanzata (VEGA) launch proles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Encountered types of loads [2]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 VEGA coordinate system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Acceleration envelope. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 CubeSat coordinate system [3]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Qualication and acceptance X sine acceleration levels. . . . . 19 Qualication and acceptance Y sine acceleration levels. . . . . 20 Qualication ans acceptance Z sine acceleration levels. . . . . 21

1.9

Random vibration levels. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

1.10 Shock level for qualication. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 2.1 2.2 Model of the external structure by Gauthier Pierlot. . . . . . . 27 Correlation bewteen Finite Element Analysis (FEA) and Experimental Modal Analysis (EMA) mode shapes of the external structure [4]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 FE model of the batery support. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Example of an unpopulated and a populated electronic card. . 29 Geometrical dimensions of the electronic cards (in mm). . . . 30 Shell and volume models for comparison. . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Good matching between shell and volume elements meshed models. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Smearing methods [5]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Last years experimental set-up [3]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9

2.10 Correlation with the last years experimental set-up [3]. . . . . 35 2.11 New free-free set-ups. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 2.12 Set-up with one card. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 2.13 Set-up with two cards. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 2.14 Measurment points map. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 2.15 Measurement map used to point the laser beam. . . . . . . . . 40 2.16 Unpopulated and populated OBC2 card . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 2.17 Determination of masses by several weighing. . . . . . . . . . . 42 2.18 Finite element model of the PCB and the PC104 connector. . 44 2.19 Shading factor for the exponential moving average. . . . . . . 45

vi

2.20 Stabilisation diagram of the unpopulated OBC2. . . . . . . . . 46 2.21 Argand diagram of the rs mode of the rst double peak . . 46 2.22 Mode at 1400 Hz at the 30th order. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 2.23 Correlation between numerical and experimental modes of the OBC2s PCB. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 2.24 Correlation between numerical and experimental modes of the OBC2s PCB (rst update). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 2.25 Correlation between numerical and experimental modes of the OBC2s PCB (second update). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 2.26 Modelling of the PC104 connection pins. . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 2.27 Cerrelation for a couple of unpopulated OBC2 cards. . . . . . 52 2.28 Similar numerical mode shapes examples. . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 2.29 Stabilisation diagram of the SSI identication on the OBC2 card measurements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 2.30 Correlation between numerical and experimental results. . . . 55 2.31 3th and 5th experimental mode shapes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 2.32 Unpopulated and populated xEPS card . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 2.33 Correlation between numerical and experimental results for the unpopulated EPS card . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 2.34 FE model of the EPS card . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 2.35 Stabilisation diagram from the EPS identication . . . . . . . 60 2.36 Correlation bewteen numerical and experimantal modes of the EPS card . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 2.37 Unpopulated and populated xEPS card . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 2.38 Stabilisation diagram for the PCB of the xEPS card . . . . . . 64

vii

2.39 Correlation between the initial of the PCB of the xEPS compared to the experimental modes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 2.40 Comparison between the 3th and 4th experimental mode shapes with the 3th numerical one . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 2.41 Correlation between the updated model of the PCB of the xEPS compared to the experimental modes . . . . . . . . . . . 65 2.42 Finite element model of the xEPS card . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 2.43 Stabilisation diagram of the xEPS card . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 2.44 MAC matrix between numerical and experimental modes of the xEPS card . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 2.45 Nmerical modes involving only the bottom card . . . . . . . . 69 2.46 FM430 Flight Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 2.47 FE model of the FM430 card . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 2.48 Stabilisation diagram of the FM430 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 2.49 Correlation between the FM430 model and experimental results 73 2.50 Correlation between the updated FM430 model and experimental results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 2.51 Starting point for the global model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 2.52 Equivalent connection between cards and feet added to the model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 2.53 Clearance between feet and the chassis . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 2.54 Global model of the satellite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 3.1 3.2 3.3 Rails on the structure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 Graphical representation of the ten rst modes. . . . . . . . . 84 Worst cases in longitudinal loading. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

viii

3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9

Load cases for the QSL study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 Stress concentration in the linked elements between the chassis and the End plate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 Maximum displacements in the worst load case. . . . . . . . . 91 Maximum displacement during the sine vibration analysis in the Xdirection. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 Global displacements under sine vibrations along the X direction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 Displacements of the EPS card under sine vibrations along the X direction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94

3.10 Stress repartition inside the structure under sine acceleration along the X direction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 3.11 Stress repartition inside the screws under sine acceleration along the X direction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 3.12 Stress concentration in the battery support under sine acceleration along the X direction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 3.13 Stress concentration in the PCBs under sine acceleration along the X direction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 3.14 Internal displacement under sine loading along the Y axis . . . 97 3.15 Internal displacement under sine loading along the Z axis . . . 97 3.16 Prescribed PSD and PSD required by SPECTRAL . . . . . . 99 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 Shaker installed in the laboratory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 Jumper components to be removed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 Test-POD conguration for X, Y and Z directions testing . . 105 Accelerometers placement for X and Y axes loading . . . . . . 106

ix

List of Tables

2 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6

Small satellites categories [1]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Quasi-static loads during the launch. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Qualication and acceptance X sine acceleration levels. . . . . 18 Qualication and acceptance sine Y acceleration levels. . . . . 19 Qualication and acceptance Z sine acceleration levels. . . . . 20 Random vibration levels. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Shock level for qualication. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Numerical and experimental external structure frequencies. . . 28 Frequencies calculated with the two models. . . . . . . . . . . 32 First set of eigen frequencies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Natural frequencies and damping ratios of the unpopulated OBC2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 OBC2s PCB frequencies comparison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Measured frequencies and damping ratios. . . . . . . . . . . . 54 x

2.7 2.8 2.9

General comparison of the OBC2 results. . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Measured frequencies and damping ratios of the EPSs PCB . 58 List of considered components in the EPS model . . . . . . . . 59

2.10 Measured frequencies and damping ratios for the EPS card . . 60 2.11 Summary tabular of the EPS results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 2.12 Electronic components considered in the xEPS model . . . . . 66 2.13 Frequencies and damping ratios from the identication process of the xEPS card . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 2.14 Summary tabular of the xEPS results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 2.15 Electonic components considered in the FE model of the FM430 card . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 2.16 Frequencies and damping ratios from the identication process of the FM430 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 2.17 Summary tabular of the FM430 results . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 3.1 3.2 3.3 Ten rst modes with their frequency and description. . . . . . 83 Yield limits and safety factors used in the quasi-static analyses. 88 Summarise of the margins of safety for the eight load cases considered. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90

xi

Acronyms

ASI AVUM Cal Poly CDS CMIF COM COTS CSK DSTAR DoF EMA EPS ESA FEA FM430 FRF GFRP ICD

Italian Space Agency. Attitude and Vernier Upper Module. California Polytechnic State University. CubeSat Design Specication. Complex Mode Identication Function. Communication. Commercially O-The-Shelf. CubeSat Kit. Digital Smart Technology for Amateur Radio. Degree of Freedom. Experimental Modal Analysis. Electrical Power Supply. European Space Agency. Finite Element Analysis. FM430 Flight Module. Frequency Response Function. Glass Fibre Reinforced Plastic. Interface Control Document. xii

Isp ITD LARES LDV LSCE LSFD LV MAC MoS OUFTI

Specic Impulse. Ibrahim Time Domain. LAser RElativity Satellite. Laser Doppler Velocimeter. Least Squares Complex Exponential. Least Squares Frequency Domain. Launch Vehicle. Modal Assurance Criterion. Marging of Safety. Orbital Utility For Telecommunication Innovation. Poly-PicoSatellite Orbital Deployer. Printed Circuit Board. Power Spectral Density. Quasi Static Loads. Root Mean Square. Safety Factor. Shock Response Spectrum. Stochastic Subspace Identication. University of Li`ge. e Vettore Europeo di Generazione Avanzata. Experimental Electrical Power Supply.

P-POD PCB PSD QSL RMS SF SRS SSI ULg VEGA xEPS

xiii

Acknowledgements

First of all, I wish to acknowledge my supervisor, Professor Jean-Claude Golinval, for its support throughout the realisation of this work. I would also like to thank Professors Gatan Kerschen and Pierre e Rochus, Amandine Denis and Daniel Simon for the attention they will bring to this work in the coming weeks. Many thanks go to the OUFTI1 System team for their involvement in this project. I would like to show my gratitude to Frdric Marin for its precious e e advices in the use of the Samcef software, and to Jean-Philippe Noel and Ludovic Renson for their advices in modal identication. Finally, I wish to acknowledge my nearest and dearest for their support during my studies and the realisation of this work.

Introduction

Since Sputnik 1 in 1957, thousands of satellites have been launched and are nowadays used in our everyday life. With time, some of them have become increasingly large, massive, powerful, and sophisticated. However, with the increase of these characteristics, the cost of a whole project (design, launch, and orbital operations) risen too. Therefore, small satellites meet some success for lower-cost spatial missions. According to [1], spacecraft for which the mass is less than 1000 kg can be considered as small satellites. Furthermore, this family of satellites can also be distinguished between four categories reported in Table 2 and illustrated in Figure 1. Class Conventional large satellite Conventional small satellite Minisatellite Microsatellite Nanosatellite Picosatellite Mass (kg) Cost ( M) > 1000 > 100 500 1000 25 100 100 500 7 25 10 100 17 1 10 0.1 1 <1 < 0.1

Table 2: Small satellites categories [1]. Small satellites have the advantage to reduce the part of the cost due to launch operations, which is proportional to its mass. Indeed, they can be launched besides a second payload in the launcher and so share the launch expenses. The choice of a smaller Launch Vehicle (LV) can also be made in the same perspective of cost reduction. Finally, for the smallest spacecrafts 2

Figure 1: Small satellites [1]. (nano- and picosatellites), the launch can be done beside a primary mission that takes on the major part of the expenses. In addition to the savings on the launch operation, the design phase is also simpler and faster (1218 months). Furthermore, the use of Commercially O-The-Shelf (COTS) components which are not initially designed for applications in the harsh space environment can also dramatically reduce the cost design.

The CubeSat standard

Designing a space mission, even in a small satellite approach, is still cost prohibitive. Therefore, in order to facilitate the access to space to universities, high schools and some private rms, the CubeSat standard was created. In 1999, California Polytechnic State University (Cal Poly) and the Space Sys-

tems Development Laboratory of the Stanford University created a standard of a 10 cm cubic satellite. This is what is called a One-Unit (1U) CubeSat. For slightly greater payloads, 1.5, 2, and 3-units CubeSat formats, also exist as shown in Figure 2, representing the structures marketed by Pumpkin, Inc. 1 . According to the previous classication, CubeSats are situated in the bottom of the range of the nanosatellites family.

Figure 2: Pumpkins CubeSat structures corresponding to 1, 1.5, 2 and 3 units CubeSats, respectively for 10 10 15, 20 and 30 cm. The CubeSat standard is very suitable for educative projects with small technical or scientic missions. Indeed, whereas the complete design of a general space mission is long and expensive, the CubeSat standard allows a signicant time saving because of its association with standardised deployment systems, such as the Poly-PicoSatellite Orbital Deployer (P-POD). P-PODs are structures that can contain three 1-unit CubeSats, or the equivalent (two 1.5 or one 3-units CubeSats), and put them into orbit. Figure 3 shows the structure of a P-POD. Besides the compatible deployment system, a multitude of components, equipments, or even hole subsystems marketed by various societies also exist. In a such way, designer teams can concentrate themselves only on particular subsystems instead of designing all the parts of the satellite. To ensure the safety of the LV and the primary payload, the CubeSat providers have to full the CubeSat Design Specication (CDS) in addition to the LV requirements.
1

http://www.cubesatkit.com

Figure 3: Illustration of the PPOD structure

OUFTI1
Born in 2007, OUFTI1 will be the rst nano satellite designed at the University of Li`ge (ULg). Its name stand for Orbital Utility For Telecommunie cation Innovation (OUFTI) because of its principal payload which is a space repeater for the Digital Smart Technology for Amateur Radio (DSTAR) communication protocol. The aim of this project is rst of all to be an educative project. Through their master thesis, several student teams have succeeded, and other will follow, to lead to a functional satellite in orbit. In addition to the main DSTAR payload, two secondary payloads will take place aboard OUFTI1. The rst one is an innovative digitally-controlled electrical power system developed with Thales Alenia Space ETCA2 (a major electronic systems company for space application). The goal of this payload is to study its behaviour in space environment. The second secondary payload is a set of new high-eciency solar cells developed, by AzurSpace3 , shared on ve solar panels. As for the Experimental Electrical Power Supply (xEPS), the goal is to test this technology in space environment.
2 3

www.thalesgroup.com www.azurspace.com

Thanks to the rst generation of students who defended the project, OUFTI1 is one of the nine CubeSats selected by the ESA Educational Ofce to take place aboard the VEGA maiden ight besides the Italian primary payload : LAser RElativity Satellite (LARES).

General overview of the satellite

In order to help the reader, a non exhaustive list of particular elements frequently brought up throughout the document is drawn up hereafter: The CubeSat Kit (CSK) Structure: it is a cubic aluminium structure supporting all the internal elements. It is made up of three parts: the End Plate: aluminium structure of the top face of the CSK structure, the Chassis: aluminium structure forming the four lateral faces of the CSK structure, the Base Plate: aluminium structure of the bottom face of the CSK structure. All these parts are soldered by screws. Electronic cards and PC104 connector: aboard OUFTI1, ve electronic cards are present. They are all designed on the same model: a PCB on which the elements of each card are soldered, a common connector: the PC104 connector. The PC104 connector is a rectangular plastic volume in which 104 holes are dug and connected to 104 connection pins under the component. All the electronic are stacked up and interconnected through these PC104 connectors. The battery support: aluminium structure designed to support the two batteries. Endless screws: four screws that travel the structure along its height. They are xed directly on the Base Plate and maintained to the top of the chassis with four Midplane Standos. These four screws cross all the internal elements in their four corners. 6

Figure 4: Exploded view of the OUFTI1 CubeSat. Spacers: they are a series of aluminium cylinders slipped around screws in order to x the clearance between two superimposed elements. All the latter components and additional ones are illustrated in Figure 4 representing an exploded view of the OUFTI1 CubeSat.

Thesis outline
This thesis takes place in the [VIB] workpackage of the OUFTI1 project during the academic year 20102011. Its purpose is the quasi-static and dynamic studies of OUFTI1 in order to full the mechanical requirements provided by European Space Agency (ESA). To this end, this work is divided in several parts. First, the problem is introduced by a summary of the loads encountered during the launch phase. The launch environment is also discussed in the special case of the VEGA maiden ight. Then, the building of a nite element model of the satellite is presented, based on previous work. The aim of the work is the modelling of the electronic cards aboard OUFTI1. After that, based on the nite element model, numerical testing will be performed to verify if the structure is capable of withstand the launch loads. Finally, testing procedures are exposed for further vibration tests.

1
VEGA maiden ight
Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 1.2 VEGA Launch Vehicle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Launch environment and ESA requirements . . 1.2.1 1.2.2 1.2.3 1.2.4 1.2.5 10 10 11 Lower limit in frequency requirement . . . . . . . . 13 Quasi-static loads requirements . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Sine vibration requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Random vibration requirements . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Shock load requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 22

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Introduction
In this chapter, the VEGA launcher is rstly presented. Then, the dynamic loads that a payload encounters during its launch are discussed. The several kinds of loads are studied, rst in a general case, and then in the particular case of the VEGA maiden ight. Once the loading cases presented, they will be quantied by examination of the mechanical requirements, prescribed by ESA, that the satellite must withstand.

1.1

VEGA Launch Vehicle

VEGA, which is translated by European Advanced Generation Carrier, is the new small launcher of the ESA. The development of VEGA began in 1998 in close collaboration with the Italian Space Agency (ASI) to provide ESA the ability to launch smaller payloads (300 to 2000 kg) than conventional satellites. Doing so, and taking advantage of the previous Ariane technologies, VEGA can oer lower launch costs to small satellites providers. Unlike Soyuz or Ariane launchers which use external boosters, VEGA is a single-body launcher. It consists of three solid propellant stages with the following characteristics in terms of thrust, Specic Impulse (Isp) and burn time: 1st stage: P80FW Solid Rocket Motor: Thrust: 2261 kN (see level) Isp: 280 s Burn time: 106,8 s 2nd stage: ZEFIRO 23 Solid Rocket Motor: 10

 Thrust: 1196 kN (see level) Isp: 289 s Burn time: 71,7 s 3rd stage: ZEFIRO 9 Solid Rocket Motor: Thrust: 225 kN (vacuum) Isp: 295 s Burn time: 109,6 s

The last stage of VEGA, the Attitude and Vernier Upper Module (AVUM), uses a liquid propellant engine : AVUM upper stage: RD-869 Liquid Motor: Thrust: 2,45 kN (vacuum) Isp: 315,5 s Burn time: 667 s (up to ve controlled burns)

Figures 1.1(a) and 1.1(b) present the altitude and speed proles of a typical VEGA launch with the dierent ight operations. The last AVUM stage allows the orbit and attitude control, the separation of the satellites and the operation of desorbitation. Details concerning VEGA can be found in [6].

1.2

Launch environment and ESA requirements

Before being operational in orbit, the spacecraft have to pass through the launch phase. The LV provides to the satellite the adequate v and orbital parameters. From the dynamical point of view, the launch phase is certainly the most critical part of the life of a satellite. During these few minutes, the satellite will encounter several types of loads with their own frequencies and acceleration levels. 11

450000 all-AVUM2 400000 ext-AVUM2

350000

300000 Altitude (m)

250000 ext-AVUM 200000

150000 coiffe 100000 Larg-Z23

Larg-Z9

50000

Larg-P80FW

0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 Temps (s)

(a) Altitude prole

9000

8000

Larg-Z9

ext-AVUM all-AVUM2

ext-AVUM2

7000

Vitesse relative (m/s)

6000 coiffe

5000

4000

Larg-Z23

3000

2000

Larg-P80FW

1000

0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 Temps (s)

(b) Velocity prole

Figure 1.1: VEGA launch proles.

12

During the launch phase, the spacecraft will encounter harsh quasi-static and dynamic loads. These loads can be divided into quasi-static accelerations sinusoidal vibrations random vibrations shocks All these loads have their own amplitude levels and frequency range. Figure 1.2 illustrates these various loading cases.

Figure 1.2: Encountered types of loads [2]. A more detailed description of the launch behaviour can be found in [1, 2, 7, 8] and is summarised hereafter. Besides the description of the various loading cases, mechanical requirements to full to be accepted aboard VEGA are quantied. These requirements are prescribed by ESA in an Interface Control Document (ICD) [9].

1.2.1

Lower limit in frequency requirement

The rst dynamic requirement concerns the fundamental frequency of the satellite, which has to be higher than a lower boundary value to avoid any

13

dynamic coupling between the launcher and the satellite. This limit corresponds to the low frequency modes of the launcher. The requirement stipulates that the CubeSat shall not have a fundamental frequency below 120 Hz in hard-mounted conguration, that is to say inserted into the P-POD.

1.2.2

Quasi-static loads requirements

Because of the thrust and roll motion of the launcher, the satellite will be subjected to quasi-static or low frequency accelerations: the Quasi Static Loads (QSL). The quasi-static assumption is made due to the small values of excitation frequencies compared to the fundamental frequencies of the LV and the satellite. The maximum amplitude of these loads is generally encountered at the end of the rst stage burn because of the weaker mass of the launcher (the burned fuel mass being no longer present) for the same amount of thrust. The accelerations concerning the QSL requirement are referred in the VEGA reference frame and are to be considered acting on the centre of gravity of the CubeSat. The VEGA coordinate system is illustrated in Figure 1.3. In this coordinate system, the X axis correspond to the longitudinal axis of the launcher. The lateral Y and Z axes are aligned in a such way that the plane of separation of the shroud coincides with the plane XOZ. It is important to note that the lateral loads can act simultaneously with the longitudinal one. Concerning the latter, one will take the following sign convention: a positive sign corresponds to a solicitation in tension in the axes of VEGA a negative sign corresponds to a solicitation in compression in the axes of Vega

Table 1.1 summarises all the quasi-static loads occurring during each phase. From this table, we deduce the worst cases for each situation. Those are: 14

X, Roll

Figure 1.3: VEGA coordinate system Maximum compression: 6.7 g Maximum in tension: 3.0 g Maximum in lateral direction: 1.2 g

Since lateral loads can act together with the longitudinal one, the spacecraft has to withstand any combination of these loading cases. Therefore, an acceleration envelope is dened, based on the maximum values along each axis taking the sign into account. Figure 1.4 illustrates this acceleration envelope.

1.2.3

Sine vibration requirements

In addition to QSL, low frequency (f < 100 Hz) sine vibrations will appear. These one are mainly caused by the POGO eect. The POGO eect is a coupling between the hydraulic system of the engines and the structure. Structural vibrations aect the supply of propellants what disrupts the thrust. These disturbances in thrust will increase the structural vibrations 15

Event Lift-O Phase P80 max. dyn. pressure P80 max. dyn. Acceleration Z23 ignition Z23 ight and Z9 ignition Z9 max. acceleration AVUM ight

Longitudinal QSL [g] min: 4.5 max: +3.0 min: -3.0 max: -2.0 min: -5.0 max: -4.0 min: -5.0 max: -3.0 min: -5.0 max: -3.0 min: -6.7 max: -6.3 min: -1.0 max: +0.5

Lateral QSL [g] 1.2 1.2 0.7 0.7 0.2 0.2 0.7

Table 1.1: Quasi-static loads during the launch. what will increases the disturbance of the fuel supply and so on. Fortunately, this eect is well known and anti-POGO systems exist to reduce these vibrations. The sine vibration requirement imposes acceleration levels spectra that CubSats must withstand in the P-POD. The following levels are obtained by dening an envelope of the low frequency vibrations observed during the LARES qualication tests. This time, instead of dening the loading cases in the VEGA coordinate system, they are directly given in the CubeSat one. The CubeSat coordinate system is illustrated in Figure 1.5 in accordance with the CDS requirement concerning the coordinate system [10]. It is centred at the geometrical centre of the cube. The access panel and the base plate are located on the X and Z faces, respectively. Then, the Y axis is dened to obtain a dextrorsum coordinate system. The prescribed acceleration levels are of two kinds: the qualication and acceptance levels, the former being the most severe. These levels relate directly to the qualication and acceptance stage tests. Their respective denition can be found in [11] and are reported hereafter:

16

QuasiStatic Loads (QSL)

4 Longitudinal loads [g] 2 0 2 4 6 8 1.5 1 0.5 0 0.5 Lateral loads [g] 1 1.5

Figure 1.4: Acceleration envelope.

Figure 1.5: CubeSat coordinate system [3]. Qualication stage: the objective is to demonstrate that the design fulls the applicable requirements including margins. Acceptance stage: the objective is to demonstrate that the product is free of workmanship defects, is in accordance with the qualied design, and is ready for its intended use If a protoight approach1 is chosen, which is the case for OUFTI1, the qualication levels have to be considered for physical testing. In numerical testing these levels will be applied too.
In a protoight approach, a protoight model is designed, assembled, tested and then launched without passing by the step of an engineering model.
1

17

X-axis loading The X-axis sine vibration levels for both qualication and acceptance levels are listed and represented in Table 1.2 and Figure 1.6. The solicitation frequency content covers the range from 10 to 200 Hz. In addition to acceleration levels, the frequency sweep rate is also specied. In the case of the sine acceleration loading, it xed at two octaves per minute, which means that the frequency quadruples each minute until reaching 200 Hz. X direction Qualication level [g] Acceptance level [g] 1 0,8 1 0,8 22 17,6 22 17,6 16 12,8 16 12,8 6 4,8 6 4,8 28 22,4 28 22,4 8,5 6,8 8,5 6,8 4 3,2 Sweep rate : 2 oct / min

Freq. [Hz] 10 25 30 40 45 55 60 85 95 110 120 160 200

Table 1.2: Qualication and acceptance X sine acceleration levels.

Y and Z-axes loading In the same manner than for the X-axis loading, the qualication and acceptance sine acceleration levels are presented in Table 1.3 and Figure 1.7 for the Y direction, and in Table 1.4 and Figure 1.8 for the Z direction, respectively.

18

10

Sine vibration level (X direction)

Qualification sine Acceptance sine

Frequency [Hz]

10

10

10

10

10

10 Acceleration level [g]

10

Figure 1.6: Qualication and acceptance X sine acceleration levels. Y direction Qualication level [g] Acceptance level [g] 1 0,8 1 0,8 16 12,8 16 12,8 6 4,8 6 4,8 25 20 25 20 8,5 6,8 8,5 6,8 2 1,6 Sweep rate : 2 oct / min

Freq. [Hz] 10 25 30 55 60 85 95 110 120 160 200

Table 1.3: Qualication and acceptance sine Y acceleration levels.

1.2.4

Random vibration requirements

Low frequency transient vibrations are also present during the launch phase. These vibrations are encountered because of wind eects (gust) in the beginning of the launch phase as well at the engines extinction (chugging). The noisy environment is also very harsh. The acoustic noise (f < 10 kHz), mainly due to the engines but also to aerodynamic ows, can reach 150180 dB. At the lift-o, the ground reection increases its intensity. This reverberation can be limited by injecting liquid water in the exhaust gases of the engines. By its vaporisation, the water can absorb a fraction of the

19

10

Sine vibration level (Y direction)

Qualification sine Acceptance sine

Frequency [Hz]

10

10

10

10

10

10 Acceleration level [g]

10

Figure 1.7: Qualication and acceptance Y sine acceleration levels. Z direction Qualication level [g] Acceptance level [g] 1,5 1,2 1,5 1,2 10 8 10 8 3,5 2,8 3,5 2,8 17 13,6 17 13,6 13 10,4 13 10,4 4 3,2 Sweep rate : 2 oct / min

Freq. [Hz] 10 25 30 55 60 85 95 110 120 160 200

Table 1.4: Qualication and acceptance Z sine acceleration levels. noise energy. Random vibrations (f < 2000 Hz) appear, mainly due to this noise environment. One may indeed refer to a vibro-acoustic environment. The random vibrations induced to a spacecraft by the acoustic environment are particularly sensitive for large exible pieces like solar panels for example. The random vibration requirement imposes that the CubeSat comply with the random acceleration levels representative of the acoustic noise behaviour aboard VEGA during the launch. The specication to full are prescribed in terms of Power Spectral Density (PSD). As for the sine vibration requirements, there exist qualication and acceptance levels. As previously, 20

10

Sine vibration level (X direction)

Qualification sine Acceptance sine

Frequency [Hz]

10

10

10

10

10

10 Acceleration level [g]

10

Figure 1.8: Qualication ans acceptance Z sine acceleration levels. the qualication levels shall be withstood in a protoight approach. The PSD, expressed in g2 per hertz versus the frequency range is presented in Table 1.5 and Figure 1.9, respectively. The Root Mean Square (RMS) acceleration levels for both qualication and acceptance stages are equal to the square root of the area under their respective curve. Freq. [Hz] 20 70 900 2000 Duration 3 - axes PSD Qualication levels [g2 / Hz] Acceptance levels [g2 / Hz] 0,002 0,0008 0,035 0,014 0,035 0,014 0,003 0,0012 2,5 min. per axis 2 min. per axis Table 1.5: Random vibration levels.

1.2.5

Shock load requirements

The last loading case met is shocks (high frequency). Shocks are due to stages and shroud separations that involve pyrotechnic devices like explosive bolts. Shocks also appear at the ignition of the dierent stages. The CubeSats shall withstand the shock loads simulated by the qualication Shock Response Spectrum (SRS) represented in Table 1.6 and Figure 1.10. A SRS can be seen as the response of a series of one-degree-of-freedom systems covering all the frequency range of the spectrum.

21

10

Random vibrations PSD

10 PSD [g2 / Hz]

10

Qualification level (gRMS = 6.49) 10

4

Acceptance level (gRMS = 4.1)

1

10

10

10 Frequency [Hz]

10

Figure 1.9: Random vibration levels. Lower and upper tolerances are also provided, corresponding to 6 and +6 dB. The denition of the decibel involves power ratios (proportional to g2), subtracting or adding six dB corresponds approximately to halve or double the values of the SRS. Freq. [Hz] 100 3225 10000 SRS input [g] 20 5000 5000 Tolerance +6 dB 39.91 9976.31 9976.31 Tolerance 6 dB 10.02 2505.94 2505.94

Table 1.6: Shock level for qualication.

Conclusion
All the loading cases occurring during the launch phase were examined and quantied throughout this chapter. It was highlighted that the launch environment is very harsh. Therefore, some numerical and experimental studies are required to ensure that the CubeSat will be able to withstand the loads encountered in these few minutes. Next chapters present such studies. Firstly, in Chapter 2, the nite element modelling of the satellite is presented. Then, based on the numerical model, some simulations of these load cases are performed and discussed in Chapter 3. Finally, a testing procedure is drawn up to test the actual structure under sine and random vibrations. 22

Qualification SRS
10
4

SRS [g]

10

10

10 2 10

SRS input SRS input upper tolerance (+6 dB) SRS input lower tolerance (6 dB) 10 Frequency [Hz]
3

10

Figure 1.10: Shock level for qualication.

23

2
Finite element modelling and updating
Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1 Previous nite element models . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.2 2.2.1 2.2.2 2.3 2.3.1 2.3.2 2.4 2.4.1 2.4.2 2.4.3 2.4.4 2.4.5 2.5 2.5.1 2.5.2 26 26 The CubeSat Kit structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 The battery support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 29 Choice of the element type in the modelling . . . . 30 Consideration of electronic components . . . . . . 32 34 First step: tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Second step: identication phase . . . . . . . . . . 40 41 Modelling of the PCB and PC104 . . . . . . . . . 41 Experimental modal analysis of the unpopulated OBC2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Update of the unpopulated OBC2 model . . . . . 47 Characterization of the PC104 connection . . . . . 50 Consideration of the electronic components . . . . 52 56 Modelling of the PCB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 Consideration of the electronic components . . . . 58 Finite element modelling of electronic cards . .

Experimental modal analysis and update process

Modelling of the OBC2 card . . . . . . . . . . . .

Modelling of the EPS card . . . . . . . . . . . . .

24

2.6

Modelling of the xEPS card . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.6.1 2.6.2

62

Modelling of the PCB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Consideration of the electronic components . . . . 64 69 74 78

2.7 2.8

Modelling of the FM430 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Global nite element model of the satellite . . .

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

25

Introduction
This chapter is dedicated to the building of a nite element model of OUFTI 1. First, thanks to Gauthier PIERLOT and Nicolas FRANCOIS who have already worked on it, the model does not start from zero. Their models are described in the beginning of the chapter. Then, more accurate models of electronic cards are created according to simplication techniques that can be found in literature. Because of the simplications made in the modelling process, a validation step is required. This is why experimental modal analyses are performed. The set-up for this purpose is described and results are compared with the numerical ones. Once the discrepancies between the model and the experimental results are identied, an update process is performed to move the model as closer as possible to the actual structure. Finally, with all the electronic cards models, a global model of the satellite is created.

2.1

Previous nite element models

The global nite element model of the satellite is divided in various parts or sub-models. First, one may consider the CubeSat Kit (CSK) structure as the main part of the model. Indeed, based on this structure, the nal model is built up by adding each element one by one. Inside the structure, each electronic card of the satellite, as well as the support of the batteries, will take place one above the other. Outside the structure, solar panels will come in addition to the antennas support on each of the six faces of the cube. Some developments, [3, 4], have already contributed to build a global model of OUFTI1. Since the design of the antenna support has changed, and taking into account that the Communication (COM) card does not exist yet in the PC104 format and that the some changes on the Electrical Power Supply (EPS) card have to be done, the model will not be frozen at the end of this year.

26

Following sections present what already exist in terms of FE models.

2.1.1

The CubeSat Kit structure

In 20082009, Gauthier PIERLOT in its masters thesis [4] began the modelling of the satellite. He naturally started with the aluminium CSK structure. Due to the thin thickness of the walls (less than 2 mm) compared to the two other dimensions ( 10 cm) the use of shell elements was well suited. The structure is composed of three parts: the chassis, the base plate, and the end plate. These three parts are held together by screws in the actual structure which are modelled by rigid links. Figure 2.1 illustrate the FE model of the external structure.

Figure 2.1: Model of the external structure by Gauthier Pierlot. To validate its modelling, an EMA was performed. Two methods were applied on the recorded datas: Least Squares Frequency Domain (LSFD) and Ibrahim Time Domain (ITD) which both gave similar results. Finally a correlation was carried out to compare the FE model with the actual modal parameters of the structure. To summarise the results, the natural frequencies and the correlation between numerical and experimental modes are tabulated and represented in Table 2.1 and Figure 2.2. For the mode shapes correlation, the Modal Assurance Criterion (MAC) is used. Finally, G. PIERLOT has also modelled the satellite with simple plates instead of the electronic cards to perform a rst quasi-static loading case but the conguration at this time was dierent, the design concerning the battery has changed. The P-POD conguration was not the same too. 27

Modes FEA [Hz] 1 2 3 4 5

EMA [Hz] (IDT) 539 529.3 602 583.6 611 593.4 669 603.1 727 695.7

Relative error [%] 1.83 3.15 2.97 10.93 4.50

Table 2.1: Numerical and experimental external structure frequencies.

Figure 2.2: Correlation bewteen FEA and EMA mode shapes of the external structure [4].

2.1.2

The battery support

In the initial design the two batteries aboard OUFTI were located on either side of a dedicated Printed Circuit Board (PCB) screwed under the xEPS card. Two problems occurred with this plan. The rst one concerned the available clearance between the batteries and the two cards around. The smaller one had a value of 0.77 mm, which is insucient to prevent collision during the dynamic excitation of the CubeSat. The second trouble was due to the behaviour of the batteries under vacuum which tend to bulge. These two problems led to a new design of the batteries conguration. In the current design, they are encapsulated into an aluminium box which restricts the tendency to bulge and, by placing the batteries side by side, the clearance between the support and the adjacent cards became acceptable. Since the design has changed, this new component had to be modelled. This was done last year by Nicolas FRANCOIS in its masters thesis [3]. The model of the support he build is illustrated in Figure 2.3. 28

Figure 2.3: FE model of the batery support.

2.2

Finite element modelling of electronic cards

Populated electronic cards are very complex structures. They are made up of a PCB on which all the electronic components take place. The PCB is a multilayer laminated substrate, generally a reinforced polymer, with connecting holes and etched conductive tracks to connect the components together. The Figure 2.4(a) illustrates the complexity of such supports. The complexity of the cards also dramatically increases if the electronic components are taken into account as illustrated in Figure 2.4(b).

(a) PCB of the EPS card

(b) Populated EPS card

Figure 2.4: Example of an unpopulated and a populated electronic card. In a nite element modelling approach, it is clear that all these details will not be modelled, some simplications are made. 29

2.2.1

Choice of the element type in the modelling

First, because of their thinness, shell elements are used to build the model of the PCBs, instead of volume elements. The advantage of this choice is to greatly reduce the number of Degree of Freedom (DoF) of the problem for an assumed equal accuracy. Shell elements are well suited for the modelling of structures whose one geometrical dimension is small compared to the other two. Since the geometrical dimensions of the electronic cards aboard OUFTI 1 are approximately 100 100 1.6 mm (the exact dimensions can be found in Figure 2.5), the shell element assumption to describe the behaviour of the PCB appears naturally.

Figure 2.5: Geometrical dimensions of the electronic cards (in mm). To validate the use of shell elements, a simple modal analysis is performed. Based on the geometry of the PCBs, two models are created, the rst one using shell elements and the second using volume elements. The mesh is created by sharing the nodes along each edge and separating them by a distance of 5 mm. The two meshed models are illustrated in Figures 2.6(a) and 2.6(b). For the test purpose, the following material properties representative of a classical Glass Fibre Reinforced Plastic (GFRP) are applied on the two PCBs: Youngs modulus: 20 GPa Poissons ratio: 0.3 30

(a) Shell elements mesh

(b) Volume elements mesh

Figure 2.6: Shell and volume models for comparison. Density: 2200 kg/m3

Modal analyses with these two model performed, we may compare their natural frequencies and mode shapes. To do so, the metric of comparison for each case are the frequency deviation, measured by the relative error between the sets of frequencies, and the MAC between each couple of mode shapes. Graphically, the Figure 2.7 illustrates the good matching between the two models.
Frequency deflection
2000 1800 1600 Calculated frequencies

Volume elements

1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 500 1000 1500 2000

Shell elements

(a) Frequency deection

(b) Mode shapes correlation

Figure 2.7: Good matching between shell and volume elements meshed models. In Figure 2.7(a) frequencies of each model reported on the two axes lie on a line for which the slope is close to the unit. This implies a very good correlation in frequencies. Quantitatively, the frequencies and the relative 31

error between the two models are reported in Table 2.2, and we may observe that the maximum relative error is less than 2.5%. The correlation between the mode shapes of the two models is illustrated in Figure 2.7(b) by the MAC matrix. Here again, the good correlation between the two model can be highlighted. Diagonal terms very close to the unity besides values close to zero for the o-diagonal terms are representative of a very good correlation between the two models. Mode 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Shells [Hz] 369.84 531.16 676.57 923.20 994.15 1584.68 1744.11 1781.04 1825.17 Volumes [Hz] 376.07 541.52 683.69 937.90 1011.18 1614.92 1776.86 1824.91 1869.23 Relative error [%] 1.69 1.95 1.05 1.59 1.71 1.91 1.88 2.46 2.41

Table 2.2: Frequencies calculated with the two models. Given these results, the assumption of shell elements to model the PCBs can be adopted in the following.

2.2.2

Consideration of electronic components

The PCBs modelled, it remains to consider the electronic components populating each card. Last year, Nicolas FRANCOIS [3] gathered some refer ences about the modelling of electronic cards ([5, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16]) and summarised them. Even if presented in [3], the methods to model electronic cards are still shortly described here. Additional references were also consulted [17, 7, 18]. An electronic component, when added on a PCB, locally increases both the mass and the stiness of the structure. As for the modelling of the PCBs, electronic components will not be modelled in great detail and some degrees of simplication can be applied.

32

The eect of electronic components on a PCB can be taken into account according several methods based on averaging or smearing of material properties. These methods are described hereafter [5, 14]: Simple method: All the components are neglected. The idea is that neglecting stiness decreases the natural frequencies of a structure and conversely, ignoring mass increases them. The method is then based on a balance between these two characteristics. Global mass smearing: The mass of all the electronic components is smeared over the whole surface of the PCB. No stiness increase is done and the actual mass of the card is conserved. Global mass and stiness smearing: The mass and the stiness are smeared on the PCB. To do so, the stiness has to be calculated by testing or detailed numerical studies of the component on the PCB. Local smearing: Same as before, but instead of smearing the material properties on the whole PCB, they are smeared over local areas at the right position of each component. These previous smearing methods are illustrated in Figure 2.8

Figure 2.8: Smearing methods [5]. The components themselves are sorted in three categories: Light components: This category gathers very small and discrete components as resistors or transistors with a negligible eect on the card 33

behaviour. They can generally be neglected or taken into account in a global mass smearing method. Surface mounted components (SMT): Flat components that increase density and stiness. They can be modelled by local or global smearing methods. Heavy components: Larger components with a great inuence on the behaviour of the electronic card. They are modelled by discrete points mass or by more detailed models attached to the PCB. Note that this classication is subjective. A component could be classied as heavy in a small electronic card like these aboard OUFTI1, but as a light component if mounted in a personal computer mother board for example.

2.3

Experimental modal analysis and update process

To validate the nite element models of each electronic card, an EMA is performed. An EMA is composed of two steps. The rst step consists in taking a series of measurements in several points on the structure. The second step consists in an identication phase based on the previously measured responses of the structure. Many identication algorithms exist in both time and frequency domain depending on whether they work with temporal recorded datas (displacements, velocities or accelerations) or frequency datas (Frequency Response Functions (FRFs)). In the following, dierent congurations are discussed and the acquisition system is presented.

2.3.1

First step: tests

Boundary conditions To perform the measurements, the structure has to be set up. Last year, a test on the OBC2 card was performed in free-free conditions. To simulate

34

the free-free conditions, the card was tied with wires at its four corners. This set-up is illustrated in Figure 2.9.

Figure 2.9: Last years experimental set-up [3]. Accelerations were recorded through the use of a light accelerometer and the excitation made by an adequate impact hammer. Results so obtained were not very satisfying. Figure 2.10 shows the obtained correlation between the identication based on this set-up and a free-free numerical model of the studied card. We observe that only one mode is catch with a good matching in frequency and mode shape.

Figure 2.10: Correlation with the last years experimental set-up [3]. The reasons of this bad correlation could come from too restrictive boundary conditions and/or from a too much important perturbation due to the presence of the accelerometer. This year, a new free-free test was performed on the totally unpopulated PCB of the EPS card. The applied boundary conditions were simplied to 35

just tie two of the four corners of the card. The card was suspended with approximately 40 cm-long nylon wire with a diameter close to 1.5 mm. This set-up is illustrated in Figure 2.11(a). Given the obtained results, a new free-free set-up was carried out. This time, in order to further minimize the inuence of the boundary conditions, sewing threads were used, always tying the same two corners (Figure 2.11(b)). Once again, results were not satisfying and the free-free conditions for experimental analysis were abandoned. It is supposed that the cause of the perturbations of measurements does not come directly from the accelerometer, which can be considered with a 0.3 g point mass in the model, but from the electric wires connecting it to acquisition system.

(a) Nylon wires

(b) Sewing threads

Figure 2.11: New free-free set-ups. Therefore, a new set-up was though. Free-free conditions were replaced by xed conditions at the four corners of the card. To do so, in the aluminium interface plate to be mounted on a shake table, four threaded hole were manufactured. The cards to test are now xed above the plate through four screws and maintained elevated with the use of aluminium spacers. In this way, the test set-up get closer to the actual xations that the electronic cards will encountered once integrated into the satellite. Further, this conguration permits to place a second card underneath the card to test in order to consider the additional link through the PC104 connector. Figures 2.12 and 2.13 show the congurations with one and two cards, respectively.

36

Figure 2.12: Set-up with one card.

Figure 2.13: Set-up with two cards.

37

Acquisition Once the set-up built, the acquisition can be done. To this end, the needed material is: the set-up itself with the card to be tested, an impact hammer to perform the excitation, a Laser Doppler Velocimeter (LDV) to record the response in terms of velocities and some pieces of reecting paper to ensure a good reception of the Doppler shifted signal, the acquisition system (hardware and software).

The acquisitions parameters, in addition to the sensibilities of the hammer and the LDV, have to be provided to the acquisition software. They are chosen as : frequency range: [0 2000] Hz, sample time: 0.8 second, sample rate: 5120 Hz (corresponding to 2.56 2000 Hz to avoid aliasing), Force/Exponential windowing, average on three consecutive measurements for each point to minimize errors due to the imprecision of, the orientation and/or the position of the impact. Averaging also limits the eect of random noise on the datas.

In order to further compare experimental results with numerical ones, the response of the structure has to be recorded in several points. First, for a comparison in natural frequencies, just a few points are required. Theoretically, just one measurement may be sucient if the measurement point does not lie on a nodal point. Concerning the mode shapes comparison, more measurement points are required in order to catch the exact deformation 38

91 89
79

92
82

90
80 81

93
83

94
84

95
85

96
86

97 98
87 88

69

70 60 51 42 32 22

71 61 52 43 33 23

72 62 53 44 34 24

73 63 54 45 35 25

74 64 55 46 36 26

75 65 56 47 37 27

76 77 66 67 57 58 48 49 38 39 28 29

78 68

Excitation point

59 50 41 31 21

40 30

11
1

12
2

13
3

14
4

15
5

16
6

17
7 8

18 19
9 10

20

Figure 2.14: Measurment points map. of the structure. Not enough points may lead to spatial aliasing just as a temporal signal may be not correctly recorded if the sample rate is too low. To perform the acquisition, the electronic cards are spatially discretized by ninety-eight points lying on an approximately 10 10 cm grid. These points are referred to a local coordinates system on the card, centred at the right-angle corner opposed to the PC104 connector. The x and y axes are perpendicular and parallel to the principal direction of the PC104 component, respectively. These mapping nodes are numbered in ascending order from left to right and down to up. This measurement map is illustrated in Figure 2.14. To measure properly the response on these points, they are reported on an electronic card drawing printed on a 1 : 1 scale. To ensure the correct positioning of the map on the card to test, the outline of the PC104 is cut o. In that way, the map may be inserted above the card with the PC104 connector passing through it. The Figure 2.15 illustrates this map placed on a card to point correctly the laser beam.

39

Figure 2.15: Measurement map used to point the laser beam.

2.3.2

Second step: identication phase

In the following, two methods are applied to process measurements: the Stochastic Subspace Identication (SSI) method [19, 20] in time domain and the Complex Mode Identication Function (CMIF) [21] in the frequency domain. The SSI method is chosen in the set of time domain methods because it can be used on free responses of the structure and it does not require the measure at the excitation point to calculate the mode shapes. This particular point on the diagonal of the FRF matrix is required in the Least Squares Complex Exponential (LSCE) / LSFD method for instance. The determination of modal parameters with this method is based on a stabilisation diagram. On such a diagram, the poles representing both the natural frequencies and damping ratios for several model orders are plotted. In the set of calculated poles, some are physical and stabilise themselves along their corresponding natural frequency. However, by increasing the order of the model, the number of poles rises and the non-physical poles have to be eliminated. To do so, some criteria such the stabilisation in frequency and damping ratio are used.

40

The CMIF is one of the most used indicator function. It is based on a singular value decomposition of a FRF matrix. The obtained result is a single curve (if datas are measured from only one excitation point) in which natural frequencies are located by a series of peaks. Damping ratios cannot be calculated but approximates of the mode shapes can.

2.4

Modelling of the OBC2 card

Figure 2.16: Unpopulated and populated OBC2 card

2.4.1

Modelling of the PCB and PC104

As for each electronic cards aboard OUFTI1, the modelling of the OBC2 card begins by the modelling of its PCB. First, and for the need of experimental tests, it was allowed to cut the connection pins of one of the available unpopulated OBC2 cards. By several weighing, it was possible to determine the weight of the dierent components of the card. Three weighing with the element present in Figure 2.17 were performed with: the unpopulated OBC2 card with its PC104 connector Weight: 48.16 g the unpopulated OBC2 card with its PC104 connector for which the connection pins are cut o Weight: 45.02 g the components forming the PC104 connector 41

 Weight: 15.83 g

Figure 2.17: Determination of masses by several weighing. So, with these weights, it is possible to deduce the following masses by a set of subtraction operations: the mass of the cut o pins is 3.14 g the mass of the PCB is 32.33 g the mass of the black plastic part of the PC104 connector is 12.69 g

By modelling the PCB by a face in Samcef Field, it is possible to have access to its area which is SP CB = 8.397 103 m2 (2.1)

Knowing the weight, the surface, and the thickness of the PCB it is possible to calculate its density. But, with a thickness of 1.6 mm, the value obtained exceeded the common value expected for a GFRP material which should be close to 2200 kg/m3. After verication, it was observed that the thickness of the OBC2 card was closer of 1.7 mm than 1.6 (by averaging of several measurements in dierent points of the PCB). It should be noted that it is not an exceptional manufacturing error on this particular PCB, the PCB of the other OBC2 cards have the same thickness close to 1.7 mm. Similar verications for the PCB of the other cards led to values close to 1.6 mm as expected. 42

We can now deduce the equivalent density of the PCB of the OBC2 card. P CBOBC2 = mP CBOBC2 SP CB 1.6 103 32.33 103 = 1.4275 105 = 2264.8 kg/m3

(2.2)

Now that the density of the PCB is calculated, the same operation is performed to calculate the equivalent density of the PC104 connector. In the simplied nite element model, the 104 holes are not taken into account and the connector is simply modelled by a rectangular volume with equivalent material properties. The product of its dimensions gives the volume of the PC104, that is VP C104 = 66.55 103 10.16 103 11.05 103 = 7.47 106 m3

(2.3)

Dividing its mass by its equivalent volume, we get the equivalent density of the PC104 connector : pc104 = 12.69 103 7.47 106 = 1698.7 kg/m3

(2.4)

With these quantities already determined, the model of the PCB and the PC104 connector can be built. For this purpose, we need a rst guess for the missing material properties which cannot be determined by testing. The value of the Youngs modulus of the PCB is rstly estimated to 20 GPa according to the CES software which provides values for E [15 28] GPa for GFRP materials. Always according to CES, the Poissons ratio , is xed to 0.315. The Youngs modulus for the PC104 connector is taken at 846 MPa as rst guess as chosen by Nicolas FRANCOIS. This model 1 is illustrated in Figure 2.18 . As boundary conditions, a node is placed at the centre of each corners holes and are linked to them
This model will be used for the determination of the equivalent properties for each electronic cards.
1

43

Figure 2.18: Finite element model of the PCB and the PC104 connector.
Mode FEA Eigen fraquencies [Hz] 1 456.66 2 3 771.59 828.03 4 1111.60 5 6 1493.71 1612.07 7 1783.35

Table 2.3: First set of eigen frequencies. by Mean2 connections. Then this central node is clamp to model the hard mounted conguration. The natural frequencies obtained are listed in Table 2.3.

2.4.2

Experimental modal analysis of the unpopulated OBC2

To validate the model, an experimental modal analysis is carried out on the PCB of the unpopulated OBC2. The identication process is performed with SSI and CMIF methods on the 98 impulse responses and FRFs, respectively. To represent the results, the CMIF curve is used as indication in the stabilisation diagram. To plot the latter, the SSI algorithm is launched with a series of increasing system orders. To evaluate if a pole is physical or not, its frequency and damping ratio are compared with an averaging of the nearest pole for all the smaller orders. An exponential moving average involving a shading factor is implemented to modify the weight to impose to poles of decreasing orders. This moving average is calculated as follow and illustrated
[A denition of a mean assembly is that it determines the mean rotation and displacement of the nodes concerned. The mean displacement and rotation of a set of master nodes is given by a slave node]. [22]
2

44

in Figure 2.19. pi = pi1 + (1 )pi2 + (1 )2 pi3 + (1 )n pin1 1 + (1 ) + (1 )2 + + (1 )n n j j=0 (1 ) pij1 = n j j=0 (1 ) (2.5) (2.6)

A null shading factor represents the simple arithmetic average. By increasing , greater importance is given to most recent poles.
Shading factor influence
0.35 0.3 0.25 Weight 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Previous datas 7 8 9 10 = 0.00 = 0.05 = 0.10 = 0.15 = 0.20 = 0.25 = 0.30

Figure 2.19: Shading factor for the exponential moving average. Figure 2.20 shows the stabilisation diagram obtained with the SSI algorithm up to the 22th order. With this order, the principal peaks are caught by the algorithm. The obtained frequencies and damping ratios are listed in Table 2.4. Mode 1 2 3 4 5 Frequency [Hz] 547.50 906.30 1037.90 1583.64 1934.20 Damping ration [%] 0.53 0.49 0.50 0.52 0.62

Table 2.4: Natural frequencies and damping ratios of the unpopulated OBC2.

On this diagram, we may see that some peaks seem to be doubled. This may be caused by very close modes not caught in by the FE model because of the applied simplications, but also by errors due to noise during the test. These double peaks make the algorithm also double its poles. In this case 45

Stabilisation diagram
22

10 10

20 10 18 Ordre oq 10 16 10 10 14 Not Stabilized Stabilized in frequency (1 %) Stabilized in damping (5 %) Stabilized 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Frequency [Hz] 1400 1600 1800 10 10 10 2000
3 7

12

10

Figure 2.20: Stabilisation diagram of the unpopulated OBC2. for example, if the algorithm is launched for higher orders, the rst pole of the rst couple close to 900 Hz converge to a non real mode as it can be seen in Figure 2.21 representing its Argand diagram. The same phenomenon does not occur with the rst pole of the second couple. For higher orders, it will converge towards a similar mode than its neighbour.
Order 28: f = 881.41 Hz, = 0.93 90 120 1 0.8 0.6 150 0.4 0.2 180 0 30 60

210

330

240 270

300

Figure 2.21: Argand diagram of the rs mode of the rst double peak. Finally, a small peak appears close to 1400 Hz, but when converged, it 46

CMIF (f)

seems to be a real mode. However the numerical model will not catch it even after the update process. This mode is illustrated in Figure 2.22.
Mode 9 : f = 1410.8331

1 0 1 0 60 50 20 100 0 40 100 80

Figure 2.22: Mode at 1400 Hz at the 30th order. Figure 2.23 shows the correlation between the numerical and experimental modes. We may observe that the mode shapes are well correlated, but the frequency discrepancies are important, which will lead to an update process.

2.4.3

Update of the unpopulated OBC2 model

Because of the dierence between numerical and experimental results, an update process is needed. In this case, only the frequencies need to be adjusted. In order to bring the numerical results closer to the experimental ones, the BOSS-Quattro software was used. In the latter, design variables are prescribed to be updated, and target values are given for a set of results. Based on the design variables, the software perform a sensitivity analysis by nite dierences. Then a series of iterations on the design variable(s) is performed to minimize the deviation between the calculated target variables and their target values. In a rst step, only the Youngs modulus of the PCB was taken as design variable. The goal of the update process was to minimize the frequency deviation between the 1, 2, 3 and 6th numerical frequencies and the 1, 2 ,3 and 5th experimental ones by looking at the MAC matrix between the two sets of modes. 47

Figure 2.23: Correlation between numerical and experimental modes of the OBC2s PCB. This method led to poor results. A value of 29.71 GPa was found for the Youngs modulus of the PCB but the frequency deviation, even if reduced, was still too large (up to 22% if we consider the correlation between the two fourth modes). Furthermore, the 906 Hz experimental mode still correlates with two numerical modes as illustrated in Figure 2.24. By plotting the experimental mode shapes, it appears that the numerical model of the PC104 was too exible and displayed a too large bending compared to the experimental mode shapes of higher frequencies. Therefore, a second update process was carried out. This time, the Youngs modulus of the PC104 connector was added as design variable too and just the four rst frequencies are taken as target because of the poor representation of higher modes. Not taking the higher modes into the update process proved to be a good choice. The fact is that trying to move the 6th numerical closer to the 5th experimental frequency based on their good correlation in the MAC matrix was an error and blindly trust in the update algorithm may be dangerous. In reality, during the update process, mode shapes are modied because of the modication of the design variables. Modes that appear to be paired with the initial set of parameters may no longer be with updated ones. So, taking such modes in the update process will not conduct to the optimal solution because these targets values are not the good ones. This fact is illustrated by the second update process applied on the PCB of the OBC2 card in which it is the two 5th are correlated instead of the 5th with the 6th. The nal values for the design variables are 48

Figure 2.24: Correlation between numerical and experimental modes of the OBC2s PCB (rst update). Mode 1 2 3 4 5 fF EA [Hz] fEM A [Hz] 557.91 547.50 961.67 906.30 992.47 1037.90 1529.70 1583.64 1923.80 1934.20 Relative error [%] 1.90 6.11 4.38 3.41 0.54

Table 2.5: OBC2s PCB frequencies comparison RP CB = 28.5 GPa EP C104 = 3.05 GPa and the correlation between simulation with the optimal parameters end the experiment is illustrated in Figure 2.25. The two sets of frequencies and the relative errors between them are listed in Table 2.5. Remark: The optimal values found in the update process were 28.51 and 3.036 GPa for EP CB and EP C104 , respectively. But, the similar update procedure for the xEPS card led to a value of 3.12 GPa for EP C104 . So the intermediate value of 3.05 GPa was chosen and xed for all the connectors. There is now only one design variable.

49

Figure 2.25: Correlation between numerical and experimental modes of the OBC2s PCB (second update).

2.4.4

Characterization of the PC104 connection

Before considering the electronic components of the OBC2 card, we may take a look at the connection between each pair of cards by their PC104 connector. Having a model of the unpopulated OBC2 card, and by superimposing two identical models, it is possible to approximate the equivalent properties of the connection through the PC104 connector. Several ways to model this connection were explored. The rst one was to delete the inferior connector and to replace it by a new one with the same base but its height was increased to go up to the superior card. The density was modied the get the actual weight of an entire PC104 connector (the plastic part plus the connection pins) into this new volume. The main default of this modelling was that it implied to delete the part corresponding to the PC104 connector in each electronic card model. To avoid this change in models, a new model was thought. In this one, the model of the PC104 plastic part on the card is not modied and an additional rectangular piece of material is added to ll up the clearance between the top of the inferior connector and the PCB of the superior card. The third modelling is based on the same principle but instead of creating a rectangular volume with the same base than the upper face of the connector, 50

the rectangular volume modelling the connection pins is designed with a reduced base corresponding to the outline of the pin grid. The nal model is so a rectangular volume of dimensions 7.62 63.5 5.55 mm. To preserve the actual weight of the hole connector, the mass of the cut o pins (3.14 grams) is concentrated in this volume. The density can be calculated and is xed at 1169.3 kg/m3. It remains to dene the Youngs modulus to complete the model, which is done by an updating process. Figures 2.26(a) and 2.26(b) illustrate the connection between two cards and the its model, respectively.

(a) Two connected unpopuleted OBC2 cards

(b) Modelling of the connection

Figure 2.26: Modelling of the PC104 connection pins. As previously, an EMA is performed and a subsequent update process led to a value for the Youngs modulus equal to EConnectionP ins = 777.47 MPa with an assumed Poissons ratio equal to 0.3. Figure 2.27 shows the obtained correlation between the numerical and experimental results. In Figure 2.27, we observe that experimental modes catch every times two numerical modes. This fact will often appear in the following results. Due to their high degree of similitude, the two cards have similar modes in close frequency ranges. In most cases, because the measurement is performed on the upper card, only one mode is viewed by the identication. These closed modes are illustrated in Figure 2.28 for the four rsts numerical modes. Mode shapes are similar for the two cards in a couple of modes, the dierence lies on the amplitude of the deections. During the MAC correlation for instance, the mode shapes are normalized and the two deections of the upper card 51 (2.7)

Figure 2.27: Cerrelation for a couple of unpopulated OBC2 cards. will be shown as the same mode shape when correlated with only DoF on the upper card.

2.4.5

Consideration of the electronic components

Once the model of the PCB validated by measurements and the connection between the cards being modelled, we may now model the components to get the nal model of the OBC2 card. The electronic components of the OBC2 card may be the simplest to consider because of their small number and sizes. Indeed, in the mass budget in [3], the card was weighed and its mass is equal to 50.47 grams. By weighing an unpopulated OBC2, a mass of 48.16 grams was obtained. So, we can deduce that the hole set of electronic components expected the PC104 connector have a mass of 2.31 grams which represent less than 5 percents of the total mass of the card. Since there is no heavy component, the global mass smearing method is chosen to consider their eect. The only parameter to be modied is the density of the PCB. The latter is updated by considering a global repartition of the weight of the electronic components over the whole surface. The new density is so calculated by

52

(a) Mode 1 : 624.11 Hz

(b) Mode 2 : 703 Hz

(c) Mode 3 : 980.12 Hz

(d) Mode 4 : 999.99 Hz

Figure 2.28: Similar numerical mode shapes examples.

updt = P CB

Mcard MPC104 Volumecard (50.57 15.83)103 = 1.43 105 = 2426.6 kg/m3

(2.8)

Once the nal model of the OBC2 card built, an EMA on the populated OBC2 card was performed. The measured frequencies and damping ratios are listed in Table 2.6. The stabilisation diagram and the MAC matrix for the correlation are illustrated in Figures 2.29 and 2.30, respectively. In the MAC matrix in Figure 2.30, we observe that two modes are not correlated with any numerical modes. The third experimental mode appears on a peak of the CMIF curve, but this peak is close to a second one which is well correlated. The fth mode is located close to the real mode at 1092 Hz. The 3rd and the 5th modes are represented in Figures 2.31. The 5th is clearly non physical, but the 3rd mode could be a real deformation of the PCB even if the model does no permit to catch it. 53

Mode 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Frequency [Hz] 601.68 695.10 876.27 928.11 1082.43 1092.26 1648.49 1736.87

Damping ration [%] 1.21 0.46 0.81 0.45 1.43 0.49 0.59 0.48

Table 2.6: Measured frequencies and damping ratios.

Stabilisation diagram
22 10
10

20

10

18 Ordre oq CMIF (f) 10 16 10 14 Not Stabilized Stabilized in frequency (1 %) Stabilized in damping (5 %) Stabilized 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Frequency [Hz] 1400 1600 1800 10
2 4 6

12

10

10 2000

Figure 2.29: Stabilisation diagram of the SSI identication on the OBC2 card measurements. Finally, the Table 2.7, whose the layout is inspired from [18], summarizes the results obtained for the corresponding modes between the FE and experimental models3 .

The mode shapes are represented in amplitude. The (dark) blue color corresponds to a null amplitude of deformation and the (dark) red one to a unitary amplitude. The deection map is a top view of the card and its orientations is the same that was drawn in Figure 2.14

54

Figure 2.30: Correlation between numerical and experimental results.

Mode 3 : f = 876.2652

Mode 5 : f = 1082.4317

1 0.5 0 0.5 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80

1 0.5 0 0.5 100 1 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100

(a) 3th experimental mode

(b) 5th experimental mode

Figure 2.31: 3th and 5th experimental mode shapes.

55

2.5

Modelling of the EPS card

Figure 2.32: Unpopulated and populated xEPS card

2.5.1

Modelling of the PCB

The PCB of the EPS card is the simplest one to model. Indeed, it is the only one which is totally unpopulated. Without the PC104 connector, it looks like a simple plate. A similar model to what was done for the acceptance of the shell elements assumption was made with a rene mesh. The experimental modal analysis was also simpler. A twenty-point measurement led to good results. The modelling step is the same as what is done for the OBC2 card, that is to say, modelling, comparison with measurements and update process. Details of these operations are described in the case of the OBC2 card, only the results are discussed here. The available PCB was rst weighed and a mass of 29.61 grams was found. Since the thickness of the PCB is no more 1.7 mm but 1.6 mm, a new volume was calculated and led to the following equivalent density: 29.6050 103 = 2203.5 kg/m3 1.3435 105 which is close to the expected value of 2200 kg/m3 found for GFRP. P CBEP S =

(2.9)

The identied frequencies and the damping ratios are listed in Table 2.8. An update process was performed with the rst four frequencies as target values, because of their good correlation in mode shapes with the numerical model. A rst guess of 20 GPa as Youngs modulus was considered. 56

Modes FEA EMA

FEA

Frequencies EMA Rel. error [%]

MAC

Mode shapes FEA EMA

652.12

601.68

8.38

0.98

707.45

695.10

1.78

0.99

1008.33

928.11

8.64

0.98

1025.07

1092.26

6.15

0.95

1683.17

1648.49

2.10

0.98

1785.59

1736.87

2.80

0.98

Table 2.7: General comparison of the OBC2 results.

57

Frequency [Hz] 468.39 765.07 890.30 971.81 1550.42 1564.16 1904.17

Damping ratios [%] 0.43 0.38 0.32 0.28 0.40 0.65 0.30

Table 2.8: Measured frequencies and damping ratios of the EPSs PCB The optimal value for EP CB found in the frequency discrepancy minimisation is 24.93 GPa. The Figure 2.33 represents the correlation between the updated model and the identied modes. We may note that, expected for the 5th frequency for which the relative error is 6.69 %, the natural frequencies are very well caught.

Figure 2.33: Correlation between numerical and experimental results for the unpopulated EPS card

2.5.2

Consideration of the electronic components

In this case, the electronic components may not be represented by a simple or global mass method, because of their size and mass. To include their local eects, some of them are modelled as rigid blocks with a given mass. The choice of the modelled components is rstly based on their sizes. Then, their 58

masses are gathered either by looking in their data sheet or by weighing them if an unmounted specimen is available. In these two cases, the task is dicult. Indeed, we do not dispose of many specimens for larger components. Beside, electronic components manufacturers do not often give the mass in the data sheets. If none of these ways provides the mass information, it may still be possible to nd the weight on on-line providers as Farnell for instance. The retained components with their dimensions and mass are listed in Table 2.9 and the EPS model is shown in Figure 2.34. In the model, the added components are rigidly xed to the footprint they form on the PCB. Component Inductor Inductor Self Tantalium capacitor Transistor Dimensions [mm] Weight [g] 10.4 10.4 4.8 2 7.3 7.3 4.8 1.5 6.86 6.47 3 1 7.3 4.4 4.2 1 = 8.51 ; h = 4.95 1

Table 2.9: List of considered components in the EPS model

Figure 2.34: FE model of the EPS card An EMA is performed on the populated card in order to correlate the model with the measurements. The obtained frequencies and the corresponding damping ratios are listed in Table 2.10. The stabilisation diagram issued from the identication process is illustrated in Figure 2.35. At the 24th order, we nd that the main frequencies are caught. The Figure 2.36 shows the MAC matrix obtained between numerical and experimental modes. In the MAC matrix, we may note that some modes are not well correlated. Firstly, concerning the 5th and 6th numerical modes, it appears that 59

Frenquency [Hz] 465.51 631.05 716.82 888.40 1193.56 1196.44 1662.00 1771.45 1803.64

Damping ratios [%] 0.80 0.67 0.54 0.61 0.48 0.42 0.98 0.59 0.94

Table 2.10: Measured frequencies and damping ratios for the EPS card

Stabilisation diagram
24 22

10

10

10 20 18 16 14 12 10 10

Ordre oq

10 Not Stabilized Stabilized in frequency (1 %) Stabilized in damping (5 %) Stabilized 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Frequency [Hz] 1400 1600 1800

10

10 2000

Figure 2.35: Stabilisation diagram from the EPS identication

Figure 2.36: Correlation bewteen numerical and experimantal modes of the EPS card 60

CMIF (f)

they are mainly deections involving the inferior card, the EPS card is still undeformed. Since the measurements are only made on the superior card, these modes cannot be caught. Two experimental modes, the 5th and 6th ones, are also not well represented by the numerical model even with an higher order in the SSI method. In this case it is certainly due to too many approximations in the numerical model. As for the OBC2 card, we may draw up a summary table of the obtained results for the correlated modes. This is done in Table 2.11.

61

Modes FEA EMA

FEA

Frequencies EMA Rel. error [%]

MAC

Mode shapes FEA EMA

474.81

465.51

2.00

0.97

711.11

631.05

12.69

0.67

798.50

716.82

11.40

0.95

886.41

888.40

0.22

0.97

1328.69

1193.56

11.32

0.91

10

1832.90

1771.45

3.47

0.83

Table 2.11: Summary tabular of the EPS results

2.6
2.6.1

Modelling of the xEPS card

Modelling of the PCB

The methodology to model the PCB of the xEPS card is the same as what was done for the OBC2 card, that is to say a model of the PCB in shell elements and a model of the plastic part of the PC104 connector in volumes elements. The thickness of the PCB is 1.6 mm and a weighing of the card gave a value of 30.59 grams for the PCB after the subtraction of the mass of the plastic part of the PC104 connector. The equivalent density was so 62

Figure 2.37: Unpopulated and populated xEPS card calculated by: P CB = 30.59 103 1.3435 105 = 2276.9 kg/m3 (2.10) (2.11)

The PCB of the xEPS is the most complicated one. Indeed, besides the four holes that were already present in the PCB of the EPS card, three additional ones are present to allow the xation of the planar transformer that pass through the thickness of the PCB. In the model, these holes are not taken into account for simplication reasons. As previously, an EMA is performed on the unpopulated xEPS for comparison purpose. The obtained stabilisation diagram shows the poles retained by the SSI algorithm. Figure 2.38 represents this diagram. On this diagram, we observe the main peaks are caught at the 24th system order. The MAC matrix between numerical and experimental modes can be calculated and is represented in Figure 2.39. We may observe that two experimental modes correlate themselves with a single numerical mode (the third one at 785.14 Hz). Figure 2.40 represents the third numerical mode at 785.14 Hz, condensed into the measurement points, surrounded by the two experimental modes at 877.36 and 1003.65 Hz. We observe that their mode shapes look quite similar. By calculating the MAC value considering the two experimental modes, we nd a value of 0.7. The fact that they both correlate themselves with only the third numerical mode with a MAC value of 0.89 indicates a limitation of the model: this one is not complex enough to distinguish them. We can see that the third experimental mode shape has a well deformed bulge 63

Stabilisation diagram
24 22 20 Ordre oq

10

10

10

16 14 12 10

10 Not Stabilized Stabilized in frequency (1 %) Stabilized in damping (5 %) Stabilized 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Frequency [Hz] 1400 1600 1800

10

10 2000

Figure 2.38: Stabilisation diagram for the PCB of the xEPS card of the x edge, but does not represent the deformation of the +y edge. Conversely, the fourth experimental mode represents well the deformation of the +y edge, but the bulge is quite less precise. Finally, if we look at the third numerical mode shape, we may observe that it possess both these characteristics and so represents an intermediate deformation between the two consecutive experimental modes. The fact that the MAC value is equal for each experimental mode, compared to the numerical one, indicates that this deformation is equally dierent from each experimental mode shape. Because of this inaccuracy in the numerical model, the third and fourth experimental frequencies will not be considered in the update process. The latter nally led to a value of 26.33 GPa for the Youngs modulus of the PCB of the xEPS card. The MAC matrix between the updated model and the experimental modes is illustrated in Figure 2.41.

2.6.2

Consideration of the electronic components

As previously made for the EPS model, some electronic components are modelled by rigid blocks to take their local eects into account. The considered components are listed in Table 2.12.

64

CMIF (f)

18

10

Figure 2.39: Correlation between the initial of the PCB of the xEPS compared to the experimental modes
Mode 3 : f = 877.36 Hz Samcef Mode 3 : f = 785.14 Hz Mode 4 : f = 1003.65 Hz

1 0.5 0 0.5 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80

1 0.5 0 0.5 1 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80

1 0.5 0 0.5 1 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80

100

Figure 2.40: Comparison between the 3th and 4th experimental mode shapes with the 3th numerical one

Figure 2.41: Correlation between the updated model of the PCB of the xEPS compared to the experimental modes 65

Component Dimensions [mm] Weight [g] Planar transformer 15 5 5.5 1.4 RJ11 connector 15.1 13.2 12.7 2 Two 1 14 connectors 2.54 2 (35.6) 2.54 0.78 Pic 18F2331 18 7 2.5 1.33 Table 2.12: Electronic components considered in the xEPS model The total mass of the considered components is 5.513 grams. Subtracting this mass and the mass of the PC104 connector from the mass of the xEPS card which is 42.87 grams lead to the calculus of the equivalent density of the PCB:

P CB =

30.357 103 1.3435 105 = 2795.7 kg/m3

(2.12)

From the four considered components, the planar transformer and the RJ11 connector are modelled as rigid blocks with the appropriate mass. This is not the case for the double 1 14 connector and the PIC 18F2331. Indeed, even if its mass is less than one gram, the geometry of the double 1 14 connector will have a sensitive eect on the behaviour of the card. It acts like a stiener in the y direction. The PIC 18F2331 is considered because its mass is more important than those of the other surface mounted components. To take its eect into account, the footprint it forms on the PCB is drawn and an increment in density is brought to the PCB. This new additional density is calculated by the mass of the component over the volume of the PCB that support it: add = 1.333 103 (18 7 1.6) 109 = 6612.1 kg/m3

(2.13)

No increase in stiness is done on the area delimited by the component, only the local mass smearing is applied for the PIC 18F2331. Figure 2.42 illustrates the nite element model of the xEPS card. To validate the model, an EMA is performed ont the xEPS electronic card. The resulting stabilisation diagram is shown in Figure 2.43. Note 66

Figure 2.42: Finite element model of the xEPS card

Stabilisation diagram
24 22 20 Ordre oq CMIF (f) 18 16 14 12 10 Not Stabilized Stabilized in frequency (1 %) Stabilized in damping (5 %) Stabilized 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Frequency [Hz] 1400 1600 1800 10
2

10

10

10

10

10

10 2000

Figure 2.43: Stabilisation diagram of the xEPS card that this time, the four measurement points numbered 56, 74, 84 and 85 are not accessible because of the presence of electronic components. The measurement is so performed on 94 points. The order 24 catches the main peaks present on the CMIF curve. The obtained results in terms of frequencies and damping ratios are listed in Table 2.13. Figure 2.44 shows the correlation between numerical and experimental modes. As previously seen in the case of the EPS, two adjacent numerical modes (107.37 and 1084.08 Hz) do not correlate themselves with experimental ones. The explanation is identical as previously, the response of the structure at these frequencies is mainly a deformation of the unmeasured bottom card. 67

Frequency [Hz] 518.98 662.47 752.71 936.17 940.38 1309.99 1311.68 1837.51 1916.02

Damping ratio [%] 0.87 0.98 0.45 0.73 0.33 0.84 0.56 0.61 0.66

Table 2.13: Frequencies and damping ratios from the identication process of the xEPS card

Figure 2.44: MAC matrix between numerical and experimental modes of the xEPS card This is illustrated in Figure 2.45. Therefore, since no measurement on this card is performed, the identication process does not match these two modes. The second thing that can be observed is that the identication process double two experimental modes. The identied poles are very close in frequency : 0.45% for the modes at 936.14 and 940.38 Hz and 0.13% for the modes 1309.99 and 1311.68 Hz. The crossing MAC between the two modes of each couple are 0.85 and 0.98, repectively. These values indicate that both their frequency and mode shape are similar and thus that they represent the same mode. Finally, as previously made in the other cases, a summary tabular is lled with the numerical and experimental results in Table 2.14. Note that the nu68

(a) 1007 Hz mode

(b) 1084 Hz mode

Figure 2.45: Nmerical modes involving only the bottom card merical frequencies are always greater than the identied ones. The increase in stiness by rigidly xing the planar transformer and the RJ11 connector is an extreme case. So, a subsequent update process of the Youngs modulus of the PCB could be made to compensate this simplication assumption in order to get an equivalent global model of the card.

2.7

Modelling of the FM430

Figure 2.46: FM430 Flight Module Now, pass to the last electronic card to model, the FM430 Flight Module (FM430) bought with the CSK structure. This electronic card is the most complex of all the electronic cards aboard OUFTI1. It is the heaviest one and it has the most components both above and below the PCB. In this case we do not have at our disposal a specimen of the PCB of this card. The PCB update step is no longer applicable. Therefore, the 69

Modes FEA EMA

FEA

Frequencies EMA Rel. error [%]

MAC

Mode shapes FEA EMA

532.21

518.98

2.55

0.96

706.17

662.47

6.60

0.73

787.81

752.71

4.66

0.98

906.70

936.17

3.15

0.96

906.70

940.38

3.58

0.92

1406.04

1309.99

7.33

0.95

1406.04

1311.68

7.19

0.97

Table 2.14: Summary tabular of the xEPS results

70

methodology to model this card is slightly dierent and it is made up with the following step: select the components to model, weighing the card and the selected components to get a value of the equivalent density of the PCB, include the retained components in the model with a rst guess of 20 GPa for the Youngs modulus of the PCB, perform an update of the Youngs modulus of the PCB to get closer to the identied experimental frequencies. From all the electronic components populating the card, the retained ones are listed in Table 2.15. Component USB B Remove Before Flight Power Jack 1 17 connectors 1 13 connectors Dimensions [mm] 12 16.6 11 20 12.5 6.7 9 14 11 2.54 43.69 8.51 2.54 33.53 2.54 Weight [g] 3.71 5.07 2 1.6 1.2

Table 2.15: Electonic components considered in the FE model of the FM430 card The total mass of the card is 66.85 grams. Subtracting the weight of the considered components and of the plastic part of the PC104 connector, we can calculate an equivalent density of the PCB in a global smearing approach to consider all the other components. We have:

P CB =

(66.85 12.69 13.58) 103 1.3435 105 = 3020.5 kg/m3

(2.14)

The nite element model of the FM430 is build and is illustrated in Figure 2.47. An EMA is then performed on the card to get its modal parameters. Note that in this case, the FM430 being the bottom one, no connection pins are 71

Figure 2.47: FE model of the FM430 card

Stabilisation diagram
28 26 24 22 Ordre oq 20 18 16 14 12 10 0 200 Not Stabilized Stabilized in frequency (1 %) Stabilized in damping (5 %) Stabilized 400 600 800 1000 1200 Frequency [Hz] 1400 1600 1800 10
3

10

10

10

10

10

10 2000

Figure 2.48: Stabilisation diagram of the FM430 present under the PCB. Therefore, contrary to the other electronic cards, it can be tested without a second card below it. The results of the experimental and identication process are illustrated in the stabilisation diagram shown in Figure 2.48. As an image of the complexity of the structure, we may note that the obtaines CMIF curve is the most uneven one. At the 26th system order, the main peaks are caught by the SSI algorithm. For this order, the stabilized natural frequencies and damping ratios are listed in Table 2.16. Numerical and experimental modal parameters obtained, we can proceed to the comparison between the two sets of modes. The cross correlation MAC matrix between numerical and experimental modes is illustrated in Figure 72

CMIF (f)

Frequency [Hz] 355.00 527.92 760.64 854.52 988.29 1218.94 1583.26

Damping ratio [%] 1.27 1.04 1.10 0.75 1.34 0.88 0.70

Table 2.16: Frequencies and damping ratios from the identication process of the FM430

Figure 2.49: Correlation between the FM430 model and experimental results 2.49. In this gure, we may see the same phenomenon that was previously observed during the study of the xEPS card, the 3th and 4th experimental modes are approximated by only one numerical mode. Then if we look at the frequency deviation between the fourth and third rst experimental and numerical modes, respectively, we get the following relative errors: EM A1 vs. F EA1 : 20.87 %, EM A2 vs. F EA2 : 29.11 %, EM A3 vs. F EA3 : 27.69 %, EM A4 vs. F EA3 : 13.66 %.

73

Figure 2.50: Correlation between the updated FM430 model and experimental results An update process is therefore required which will results in a softening of the PCB. As they are represented by only one numerical mode, the 3th and 4th experimental modes are not taken as target values to not mislead the optimisation. After update, a value of the Youngs modulus of the PCB was found equal to 19.2 GPa. The updated numerical modal parameters are obtained and compared with the experimental results. This is illustrated in Figure 2.50. In this gure, we may see that it is now the fourth experimental mode which is closer to the third numerical one. Further, the update procedure increased the correlation level between the fth experimental and the fourth numerical modes to a value of 75%. Finally, Table 2.17 summarises the obtained results concernig the FM430 modelling and testing.

2.8

Global nite element model of the satellite

Now that the cards are modelled, we are able to construct a global model of the satellite based on the one of N. FRANCOIS. Its model was itself based on the external aluminium structure and the four endless screws modelled by 74

Modes FEA EMA

FEA

Frequencies EMA Rel. error [%]

MAC

Mode shapes FEA EMA

338.85

355.00

4.55

0.98

578.84

527.927

9.64

0.98

805.61

760.64

5.91

0.79

805.61

854.52

5.72

0.95

945.98

988.29

4.28

0.75

Table 2.17: Summary tabular of the FM430 results

75

Figure 2.51: Starting point for the global model G. PIERLOT. In that model, he added its new battery support, the antenna support and the solar panels. In addition, he inserted simple models of electronic cards too, using the global mass smearing to model the electronic component expect for the PC104 connector. Note that these cards were just xed to the endless screws modelled by four beams and that they were not connected together through their PC104 connector. From this model, only the external structure, the screws and the battery model were kept, as illustrated in Figure 2.51. In this main model, each electronic card is imported as a Samcef Part and positioned at its right place. Since the COM card does not exist yet in the PC104 format, it is replaced by the model of the unpopulated OBC2 card. Then, they are linked to the four beams modelling the endless screws. In the last years model, these links were locking in the three directions. In this model, only the lateral displacements along the X and Y axes are locked, the vertical motion along the Z axis is left free expect for the two extreme cards i.e. the FM430 and the card representing the COM card which are also locked along the vertical direction. The connection between each pair of cards is made by importing several Samcef Parts modelling the PC104 connection pins, as what was illustrated in Figure 2.26 on page 51. Note that a piece of material is added above the 76

PC104 connector of the EPS card with identical material properties in order to ll the clearance due to the presence of the battery support. Indeed, in the actual model, the PC104 of the EPS card must to be higher. To consider the aluminium spacers, equivalent springs are added between each layer. These spacers have the following properties: Height : 15 mm (12 spacers), 19 mm (4 spacers) and 4 mm (4 spacers), External diameter : ext = 4.5 mm, Internal diameter : ext = 3 mm, Youngs modulus : [68 74] GPa, 70 GPa is assumed. From these characteristics, equivalent stinesss are calculated by keq = EA L (2.15)

in which A is the cross section of the spacers and L is their length. After calculus, we have: k15 mm = 4.12 104 N/mm k19 mm = 3.26 104 N/mm k4 mm = 1.55 105 N/mm (2.16) (2.17) (2.18) (2.19)

After, the eight feet are also added as rigid bodies and are meshed by only one node. The equivalent connection between paired cards (equivalent PC104 pins and equivalent spring for the spacers) is illustrated in Figure 2.52(a). Figure 2.52(b) illustrates an added foot. Finally, a small clearance exist between the feet and the chassis. However, applying a very light pressure (Figure 2.53) on the foot is sucient to have a contact between these two parts. Since the CubeSat will be compressed in the P-POD two rigid links are made on each corner between two nodes on the chassis and two on the Base/End plates. The global nite element model of OUFTI1 is illustrated in Figure 2.54.

77

(a) Equivalent PC104 pins and spacer

(b) Added foot

Figure 2.52: Equivalent connection between cards and feet added to the model

Figure 2.53: Clearance between feet and the chassis

Conclusion
In this chapter, the already existing models were described. Then, to model the electronic cards, a short review of the literature was summarized and a test set-up for experimental modal analyses in order to validate the models was presented. To model the PCB of the electronic cards, a rst simulation validated the use of shell elements. On the PCBs , the electronic components were applied using the simplication techniques previously presented. These techniques have proven their usefulness because of the high complexity of the structure of electronic cards, but also because of the important lack in mass information concerning electronic components. An important simplication of the connection through the PC104 connector has also been made. The model being created and updated, the comparison with experimental measurements provide a good matching between FEAs and EMAs. We may note that the greatest discrepancy occurs in the EPS card with a relative 78

Figure 2.54: Global model of the satellite error in frequency of 12.69% and a MAC value of 0.67. With all the card models, a global nite element model of the satellite was created. The latter will allow us to perform a series of numerical simulations to study the eect of the prescribed external loads on the CubeSat. This leads to the next chapter in which such studies are performed.

79

3
Numerical testing
Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1 3.2 3.3 Modal analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1.1 Quasi static accelerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sinusoidal vibrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3.1 3.3.2 3.3.3 3.4 3.4.1 3.4.2 81 81 85 89 Boundary conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 Boundary conditions and applied loads . . . . . . . 91 X direction loading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 Y and Z direction loadings . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 98 Transformation of the prescribed PSD . . . . . . . 99 Adding SPECTRAL commands . . . . . . . . . . . 100 101

Random vibrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

80

Introduction
A global nite element model being created and described in the previous chapter, we can now apply all the loading cases prescribed by ESA to verify that the structure is strong enough to withstand the launch phase. In the present case, the use of the FEA has several goals. Firstly, it allows nding the natural frequencies of the CubeSat. Then, applying loads representative of the launch environment will provide estimates of static and dynamic stresses and strains inside the model. Then, knowing the material properties, margins of safety can be calculated and provide information on how much greater loads the satellite can undergo. Finally, based on the obtained results the current design can be adopted or modied.

3.1

Modal analysis

The modal analysis has two purposes. The rst one is to verify the fullment of the requirement which imposes a lower limit for the rst natural frequency of the structure to avoid dynamic coupling between the satellite and the LV. This requirement was presented in Section 1.2.1 and imposes a minimal value of 120 Hz for the rst natural frequency in hard mounted conditions. In addition to the study of the dynamic behaviour, the modal analysis is used to construct a modal base for subsequent dynamic simulations as sine and random dynamic simulations. Based on the global model described in Section 2.8, the modal analysis is performed. The results of this analysis are a set of eigen frequencies and mode shapes, solutions of the eigen problem (K 2 M )q = 0 are obtained by resolving the motion equations Kq + M q = 0 with the assumption of synchronous motion. 81 (3.2) (3.1)

3.1.1

Boundary conditions

In order to simulate the xation of the CubeSat in the P-POD, boundary conditions have to be applied. In this structure, the lateral faces of the chassis will be in contact with rails close to the vertical edges of the cube. On the actual structure, the portion of the lateral faces in contact with these rails are hard anodized. In the nite element model of OUFTI1, each lateral face is divided into the central part of the face and two faces corresponding to the hard anodized areas (Figure 3.1).

(a) Hard anodized zones on lateral faces

(b) Subfaces equivalent to the rails areas

Figure 3.1: Rails on the structure. Then, the nodes of these sub faces are gathered into Mesh Groups to make their handling easier. For each lateral face, a group is made with the nodes of its two rails. Altogether, six groups are built and they are referred similarly to the names of the faces. For instance, the nodes of the rails of the +X face are gathered in the mesh group Rails +X. Concerning the lateral boundary conditions, only the nodes belonging to the rails are constrained. For each one, the only xed component is the direction perpendicular to its plane. At this stage, the CubeSat is laterally constrained, the only possible rigid motion is along the Z axis. In the same manner than for the rails, the eight feet are also constrained. In the P-POD, the feet of the satellite are in contact with either the bottom or the top of the 82

Mode 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Frequency [Hz] Description 330,82 Global lateral motion along the Y direction plus a bulging of the xEPS card 363,32 Lateral translation and rotation along the Z axis of the EPS card 377,88 Bulging of the EPS card 421,66 Bulging of the FM430 455,56 Bulging of the xEPS 526,07 Bulging of the OBC2 card 599,28 Second bulging of the FM430 644,87 Asymmetric bending of the EPS card 656,46 Bulging of the unpopulated OBC2 card replacing the COM card 669,75 Bulging of the +X face oof the chassis

Table 3.1: Ten rst modes with their frequency and description. structure, or with the feet of adjacent CubeSats. Therefore, the boundary condition applied to the feet is simply a locking along the Z direction. The boundary conditions xed, the modal analysis can be performed. The ten rst exible modes are listed in Table 3.1 with their frequencies and a short description of their mode shapes. The latter are illustrated in Figure 3.2. After the 9th mode, a series of modes involving deections of the external structure follow, before a new series of electronic cards deections. Note that the rst mode has a frequency at 330.82 Hz, that is, more than 175% higher than the 120 Hz of the rst requirement. The latter is so fullled. The modal analysis is performed up to the 150th mode to comply with the sine and random analysis which need a solid modal basis. The sine acceleration spectra and the random PSD go up to 2000 Hz, so the modal basis has to include enough modes to sweep this frequency range. The 57th mode has a frequency of 2013.14 Hz. Fifty-seven modes have to be calculated at the minimum. However, to solve accurately the dynamic problem by mode superposition, 90% of the structure mass should be include in the modal basis. In the three directions, the cumulated eective modal masses with the 150 rst modes are :

83

(a) Mode 1: f = 330,82 Hz (b) Mode 2: f = 363,32 Hz (c) Mode 3: f = 377,88 Hz

(d) Mode 4: f = 421,66 Hz (e) Mode 5: f = 455,56 Hz (f) Mode 6: f = 526,07 Hz

(g) Mode 7: f = 599,28 Hz (h) Mode 8: f = 644,87 Hz (i) Mode 9: f = 656,46 Hz

(j) Mode 10: f = 669,75 Hz

Figure 3.2: Graphical representation of the ten rst modes.

84

 Cumulated eective modal masses in the X direction : 82.7% Cumulated eective modal masses in the Y direction : 79.9% Cumulated eective modal masses in the Z direction : 93.7% The 90% are reached only in the Z direction but not in the X and Y ones. However, going further gives very small increment of eective masses by additional modes. Therefore, the modal basis is limited to these 150 modes.

3.2

Quasi static accelerations

Now, we consider the quasi-static loads requirement described in Section 1.2.2. For reminder, the QSL are prescribed in the VEGA coordinate system and the maximum acceleration levels that the CubeSat will encounter are: Maximum compression: 6.7 g Maximum in tension: 3.0 g Maximum in lateral direction: 1.2 g

Aboard VEGA, OUFTI1 will be placed in one of the three P-POD tilted of 10to the longitudinal axis of VEGA. The CubeSats are placed in the PPODs by inserting them in such a way that the Z face of the CubeSats facing the +Z face of the P-POD [3]. To perform the quasi-static acceleration analysis and taking into account that lateral loads can act simultaneously with longitudinal ones, a series of critical load cases are studied and compared. Because of the tilted orientation of the P-POD, the loads dened in the VEGA frame have to be projected in the OUFTI1 frame. The worst case loads to apply in both longitudinal (in compression and tension) and lateral directions are calculated by adding the projections of the loads in the VEGA frame to the OUFTI1 frame. In the OUFTI1 frame, we have then:

85

(a) Worst case in tension

(b) Worst case in compression

Figure 3.3: Worst cases in longitudinal loading. Maximum longitudinal load in compression (along Z) : acomp = 6.7 cos(10) + 1.2 sin(10) = 6.8066 [g] Maximum longitudinal load in tension (along Z) : atens = 3 cos(10) + 1.2 sin(10) = 3.1628 [g] Maximum lateral load (along X and Y ) : alat = 1.2 cos(10) + 6.7 sin(10) = 2.3452 [g] (3.5) (3.4) (3.3)

The external loads considered, it remains to take the eect of the two other CubSats in the P-POD. They will apply their weight, under the longitudinal acceleration levels, on OUFTI1 by the means of their feet. Besides considering the worst case in loading, we have also to consider the worst position inside the P-POD. To do so, longitudinal loading in tension and compression are divided into two sets of loading cases with two dierent congurations. Figure 3.3 shows these two extreme positions. In the tension case, the weight of the two other CubeSats is applied on the four +Z feet, that is for each one: 2 1 3.1628 9.81 = 15.5135 N (3.6) Wtens = 4 In the compression case, the weight of the two other CubeSats is applied on the four Z feet, that is for each one: 2 1 6.8066 9.81 = 33.3864 N (3.7) Wcomp = 4 86

Tension in the VEGA frame

Load case 1 Load case 2 Load case 3

Load case 4

OUFTI-1 frame

Load case 5

Load case 6

Load case 7

Load case 8

Compression in the VEGA frame

Figure 3.4: Load cases for the QSL study. Now that all the loads are dened, we may form the eight combinations they can have and then perform a static analysis of each load case. These eight load cases are illustrated in Figure 3.4 with the values previously calculated for the acceleration levels. Concerning the boundary conditions to take into account, in each case, the support facing each load is locked. For instance, if the lateral load in the +X direction is active, the nodes of the rails on the +X face are locked but not those on the X face. During each analysis, the equivalent Von Mises stresses are studied in each part of the model and their amplitude are compared with the yield limit of the dierent materials. A Safety Factor (SF) is also considered to ll in the modelling assumptions and simplications. The value of this SF is prescribed in [9] and is equal to 1.5. The latter reference also gives the way to calculate the Marging of Safety (MoS). Applied to the yield limit of the

87

Element Structure Chassis Base plate End plate Screws PCB PC104 Flexible connectors PCB PC104 PCB PC104 Support PCB PC104 Flexible connectors

Material Al - 5052 H32

Yield limit [Mpa] 152,00

SF 1,50

Endless screws FM430

Inox FR4 Nylon FR4 Nylon FR4 Nylon Al - 7075 T6 FR4 Nylon

170,00 110,00 86,40 110,00 86,40 110,00 86,40 359,00 110,00 86,40

1,50 1,50 1,50 1,50 1,50 1,50 1,50 1,50 1,50 1,50

OBC2 EPS Battery support xEPS

Table 3.2: Yield limits and safety factors used in the quasi-static analyses. material, it is equal to M oSy = where y is the yield strength of the material, SFy is the safety factor for yield strength, load is the maximum Von Mises equivalent stress due to external loads. The yield MoS indicates how many times the external loads can withstand by the structure before entering in plasticity. It should be noted that, because of the use of shell elements, the equivalent Von Mises stresses have to be studied in both lower and upper skin in addition to the neutral bre. Concerning the material properties, a conservative approach is also followed by always taking the lowest values found, if intervals are available for the yield strength of materials. Table 3.2 gives the used values for the calculus of the MoS. The material considered for the PC104 and similar connectors is Polyamide (Nylon) (Type 46, 15% Glass Fibre, V-0), based on [23] and CES sofware. 88 y 1, SFy load (3.8)

Figure 3.5: Stress concentration in the linked elements between the chassis and the End plate. After the study of each load case and considering the values in Table 3.2 we can summarise all the results in a single tabular, which is done in Table 3.3. On this table, we nd that the minimum margin of safety occurs in the structure for the sixth load case. However, it should be noted that the maximum Von Mises stresses appears at each corner of the chassis, exactly where links were added to take into account the contact between the End and Base plates with the chassis (Figure 2.53 on page 78). Figure 3.5 shows this stress concentration. Note that the maximum displacements occur already in the EPS card and do not exceed 0.026 mm. Concerning the displacements, Figure 3.6 illustrates the deections encountered during the sixth load case where the minimum MoS was found. Finally, because all the MoS are positive, we may conclude that the QSL requirement is fullled.

3.3

Sinusoidal vibrations

The aim of the sinusoidal vibrations analysis is to verify if the structure can withstand the sinusoidal acceleration levels prescribed in the sine vibrations requirement. To this end, the REPDYN module of Samcef is used, preceded by the DYNAM module for the calculus of the modal basis (150 modes are retained). The sine vibrations analysis is composed of three harmonic 89

Structure 10,90 9,40 10,91 9,39 11,05 9,26 10,87 9,43 21,73 4,22 29,56 2,83 20,77 4,46 27,9 3,06 2,06 34,60 0,33 173,55 0,54 134,80 0,13 442,08 2,5 28,33 2,35 30,21 0,41 139,49 1 72,33 0,29 197,62 2,61 27,10 0,18 319,00 0,24 239,00 2,27 31,31 0,3 191,00 0,56 129,95 0,3 191,00 2,69 26,26 0,24 239,00 2,5 28,33 0,42 136,14 1,1 65,67 0,3 191,00 2,77 25,47 0,18 319,00 2,08 114,06 1,93 123,01 2,2 107,79 2,37 99,98 2,03 35,12 0,32 179,00 0,72 100,85 0,19 302,16 1,31 54,98 0,07 821,86 1,11 214,62 0,53 137,36 0,87 83,29 1,16 62,22 0,94 77,01 1,19 60,62 1,54 46,62 0,18 319,00 0,3 243,44 0,06 959,00 1,31 54,98 0,14 410,43 0,99 240,75 0,83 87,35 1,89 37,80 0,32 179,00 0,71 102,29 0,2 287,00 1,21 59,61 0,07 821,86 1,16 205,32 0,51 142,79 0,1 575,00 0,24 239,00 0,1 575,00 0,09 639,00 0,34 168,41 0,1 575,00 0,33 173,55 1,39 51,76 0,19 302,16 0,28 260,90 0,06 959,00 1,14 63,33 0,13 442,08 1,30 183,10 0,83 87,35 0,23 249,43

Endless screws

FM430 PCB PC104 9,40 9,39 9,26 9,43 2,92 2,51 2,92 2,66

OBC2 PCB PC104

EPS PCB PC104

Battery suppoort

xEPS PCB PC104

Min. M oS

Max. displ. [mm] 0,012 (EPS) 0,013 (EPS) 0,013 (EPS) 0,013 (EPS) 0,026 (EPS) 0,025 (EPS) 0,026 (EPS) 0,025 (EPS)

LC1

max [Mpa] M oS

8,73 10,61

LC2

max [Mpa] M oS

9,27 9,93

LC3

max [Mpa] M oS

8,47 10,96

LC4

max [Mpa] M oS

8,55 10,85

LC5

max [Mpa] M oS

25,82 2,92

LC6

max [Mpa] M oS

28,85 2,51

LC7

max [Mpa] M oS

25,84 2,92

Table 3.3: Summarise of the margins of safety for the eight load cases considered. 90

LC8

max [Mpa] M oS

27,66 2,66

Figure 3.6: Maximum displacements in the worst load case. response analyses, one in each direction, with the qualication levels given in Section 1.2.3.

3.3.1

Boundary conditions and applied loads

The boundary conditions applied on the structure are the same as for the modal analysis, that is, locking of each rail in the direction orthogonal to it and locking of the eight feet in the Z direction. The applied loads are subsequently the qualication spectra represented in Figures 1.6, 1.7 and 1.8, on pages 19, 1.7 and 1.8 for the loading along the X, Y and Z axes, respectively. Conversely to the quasi-static loading, the accelerations are this time given in the OUFTI1 coordinates system. For all the studies, the assumption of viscous damping is made and a 1% modal damping ratio is applied to all the modes of the modal basis. As expected for the FM430 all the measured damping ratios of the electronic cards were under 1%. However these damping ratios were found for a light impact solicitation. With the increase in acceleration levels injected to the

91

Maximum displacement in the structure (X direction loading)

0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0

Displacement [mm]

50

100 Frequency [Hz]

150

200

Figure 3.7: Maximum displacement during the sine vibration analysis in the Xdirection. structure, damping ratios will increase too. In order to stay in a conservative approach the modal damping ratios are not increased above 1%.

3.3.2

X direction loading

Since the problem is linear and the higher frequency of the input spectrum is far smaller than the fundamental frequency of the structure, the most important response will appear at the maximum level with the higher frequency. In each case, this appears at 110 Hz and in the case of X direction solicitation, this occur with an acceleration level of 28 gs. To be convinced, Figure 3.7 represent the amplitude of the maximum displacement in the structure versus the frequency. Note that all the other quantities have the same comportment. Saving all the results for the whole structure for multiple frequency steps quickly becomes heavy in memory and causes problems. Therefore concentrates ourselves in just the 110 Hz frequency is sucient.

Displacements Under sine vibrations in the X direction, because of the additional xation caused by the PC104 connectors close to the Y face, the greater displace92

Figure 3.8: Global displacements under sine vibrations along the X direction. ment occur at the opposite, that is, close to the +Y face as illustrated in Figure 3.8. The EPS card undergoes the greatest displacement amplitudes. The main eect is an in-plane rotation of the card, as shown in Figure 3.9 in which only the EPS card and the endless screws are represented.

Stresses The stresses are evaluated at a frequency of 110 Hz, whereas they are at their maximum value. Figure 3.10 shows the stress repartition in the external structure. We may observe that the higher amplitudes are reached in the Base plate where endless screws are xed, and in the chassis where these same screws are xed by the midplanes standos. Concerning the screws, the same stress concentration can be observed at their xation points as illustrated in Figure 3.11. It is interesting to note that when G. PIERLOT preformed a sine test, an unscrewing of midplane stando occurred. So these zones should be particularly inspected when performing new tests. 93

Figure 3.9: Displacements of the EPS card under sine vibrations along the X direction.

Figure 3.10: Stress repartition inside the structure under sine acceleration along the X direction.

94

Figure 3.11: Stress repartition inside the screws under sine acceleration along the X direction. In the PCBs and in the battery support, the stress concentrations are located close to the xation points. Figures 3.12 and 3.13 show these concentrations in the battery support and in PCBs, respectively.

3.3.3

Y and Z direction loadings

Displacements The displacements occurring during the Y and Z loading cases are shown in Figures 3.14 and 3.15. The Y direction accelerations result in a global motion in the Y direction of all the components. Conversely to the previous case, the PC104 connectors follow the displacement with the same amplitude. Because of its central position, it is the EPS which has the greater displacement amplitude. As expected, the acceleration along the Z axis involves vertical deformations of the internal components except the battery support due to its more important rigidity. Once again, we may remark that the EPS card is the most deformed under loading.

95

Figure 3.12: Stress concentration in the battery support under sine acceleration along the X direction

Figure 3.13: Stress concentration in the PCBs under sine acceleration along the X direction

96

Figure 3.14: Internal displacement under sine loading along the Y axis

Figure 3.15: Internal displacement under sine loading along the Z axis

97

Stresses Concerning the stress concentrations during the loadings, the same conclusions as for the X direction case can be done, that is: In the structure: concentration around the xations of the endless screws on the base plate and around the midplanes standos which hold the screws to the chassis. In the screws: concentrations at each extremity. In the battery support and the PCBs: concentrations around the xation points on each corner.

3.4

Random vibrations

In order to full the requirement relative to random vibrations, a numerical random analysis has to be performed. Random vibration analysis are carried out by the SPECTRAL module of the Samcef solver. Similarly to the calculus of a harmonic response, the random analysis is based on a mode superposition method. The loading in a SPECTRAL analysis is given by an input PSD and the results are also given in terms of PSD. In this case, the loading is the qualication level random vibration PSD described in Section 1.2.4. The PSD has to be applied in the three directions of the CubeSat. Unfortunately, it is not possible to launch the simulations, apparently due to memory problems, even by reducing the modal basis to 50 modes. The followed procedure is still described. Firstly, as for the harmonic response calculation, a modal analysis is needed to build a modal basis. Here too, 150 modes are initially chosen to cover the frequency range of the input PSD but also to have a sucient representation in terms of eective modal masses. Then, a PSD is needed for the problem as loading. The prescribed PSD is given in terms of g2/Hz versus Hz.

98

3.4.1

Transformation of the prescribed PSD

Before running the simulation, the input PSD has to be transformed. The frequencies expressed in hertzs have to be transformed in rad/s. The acceleration must also be modied from gs to mm/s2. Therefore, the input PSD to provide to the solver is expressed in terms of
mm s2 rad s 2

versus

rad s

Then, the PSD, which can be described with few points in log-log scale, has to be interpolated in several other points for accuracy reasons since SPECTRAL will interpolate the curve in a linear scale. Between two points [x1 y1 ] and [x2 y2 ], the interpolation at an intermediate point x is given by log(y2 /y1 ) x log(x2 /x1 ) y = y1 (3.9) x1 Figure 3.16 illustrates the transformation of the given PSD the right form demanded by the software.
10
1

Prescribed random PSD

6 PSD [(mm/s2)2 / (rad/s) 5 4 3 2 1 0

x 10

Random PSD for SPECTRAL

PSD [g2 / Hz]

10

10

10

10 10 Frequency [Hz]

10

5000

[rad / s]

10000

15000

Figure 3.16: Prescribed PSD and PSD required by SPECTRAL The PSD has to be written in a specic format and it must have the same name than the problem with the .psd extension.

99

3.4.2

Adding SPECTRAL commands

To perform the random analysis, the DYNAM data code has to be lled with SPECTRAL commands. This can be done in the Epilogue of the solver menu. These commands describe the analysis and they provide information such as: The type of load Boundary conditions Nodes on which the excitation is applied Frequency range and number of control frequencies Time of simulation Damping ratio Results to archive

100

Conclusion
In this chapter, the use of the nite element model of OUFTI1 under several studies has provided results overcoming the requirements. The rst requirement concerns the fundamental frequency of the CubeSat. This frequency shall be greater than 120 Hz in hard-mounted conditions. The modal study in the DYNAM solver led to a fundamental frequency equal to 330.82 Hz. This dynamical requirement is therefore fullled. The second requirement concerned quasi-static loads encountered during the ight because of the thrust and roll motion of the launcher. Eight cases representing all the possible congurations of loading have been studied. In each case, the most critical amplitude for each acceleration was considered. The criteria to deduce if the structure passes or fails the test is the calculus a margin of safety. The latter involves material properties and safety factors. Margins were calculated with the yield limit of the dierent materials. To stay in a conservative approach, when this property was given in an interval of values, the lowest one was always considered. Concerning the safety factor, it is prescribed equal to 1.5 in the ICD. For all the cases, it was in the sixth one that the lowest margin was found. The latter being positive, the quasi-static loads requirement is therefore fullled. Then, the following requirement concerns sine acceleration loadings. The simulation was performed taking into account the qualication levels prescribed in the ICD. Here again, all the margins of safety were found positive, the requirement is then fullled. Note that the greatest stress concentration was this time found in the endless screws, at the level of their connection to the chassis via the midplane standos. Unfortunately, concerning the random vibration requirement, it is not possible to run the models, the problem remains unresolved. The numerical results have now to be conrmed by testing. With the little time remaining, tests could not be performed, but testing procedures are already drawn up in the next chapter.

101

4
Testing procedure
Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1 4.2 4.3 Needed facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Test set-up . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2.1 4.3.1 4.3.2 4.3.3 4.4 Sinusoidal and random acceleration tests . . . . 103 103 104 106 Accelerometers placement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 Objectives of these tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 Test sequence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 Pass criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 107

Shock tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

102

Introduction
The aim of this chapter is to draw a test procedure for intermediate testing. Note that operations that have to be followed for the qualication tests on the ight model are described in [24]. For the qualication tests, an ocial TestPOD must be requested to ESA or directly to Cal Poly. In the following, the available Test-POD built by Artur Scholz (COMPASS1) for intermediate tests is sucient. Hereafter, the needed facilities to perform the tests are rst listed and then objectives and step by step procedure to perform sinusoidal and random vibrations tests are described.

4.1

Needed facilities

To perform the vibration tests, the following facilities are needed: A shaker: we may have at our disposal the electrodynamic shaker installed in the vibration laboratory at the University (B52). This shaker is a Gearing & Watson V2664 with the following characteristics: Maximum force: 26 kN (sinus and random) Maximum displacement: 50 mm (peak to peak) Maximum velocity: 1.52 m/s Figure 4.1 illustrates this shaker. The interface aluminium plate: this plate is needed to interface the the shake table and the Test-POD. The Test-POD: to simulate the actual behaviour of the CubeSat in the P-POD. The test article: the CubeSat in its current conguration. Accelerometers: to measure the response of the CubeSat and control the input acceleration. Two accelerometers are used:

103

Figure 4.1: Shaker installed in the laboratory The rst one is used to control the input acceleration level (control accelerometer). Several PCB Piezotronics accelerometers are available and, in particular, an accelerometer Model 352C661 can be used as control accelerometer: Frequency range: 0.5 to 10000 Hz Measurment range: 50 gs The measurement accelerometer is also a PCB Piezotronics one, but for weight and cluttering reasons, it should be as small as possible. An accelerometer Model 352A732 will be used: Frequency range : 2 to 10000 Hz Measurment range : 1000 gs Note that only one specimen is available, so it must be moved between each direction loading. The acquisition system: the hardware and software. The LMS software is used.

4.2

Test set-up

The test set-up is the same for the sine and random accelerations tests for each direction.
1 2

http://www.pcb.com/spec_sheet.asp?model=352C66&item_id=11988 http://www.pcb.com/spec_sheet.asp?model=352A73&item_id=5963

104

1. Follow the integration procedure [25] to assembly the CubeSat up to the positioning of the accelerometer, place the accelerometer (see below) and continue the integration procedure. Important remark: Some electronic components, precisely the jumpers are not hardly xed on their cards (EPS and xEPS). They must be removed to prevent their ejection and collision with other components. Figure 4.2 shows this kind of components.

Figure 4.2: Jumper components to be removed 2. Introduce the CubeSat in the Test-POD. The integration procedure concerning the integration of a CubeSat in a Cal Poly Test-POD could be used as a basis to adapt to our Test-POD [26]. 3. Fix the interface plate on the shaker table, parallel to the loading direction for the X and Y axes testing and perpendicular to the loading direction for the Z axis testing. Fix the Test-POD on the interface plate. Figure 4.3(a) and 4.3(b) illustrates the conguration of the Test-POD for X and Y axes, and Z axis testing, respectively.

Excitation direction
Excitation direction

(a) Set-up for X and Y axes testing

(b) Set-up for Z axis testing

Figure 4.3: Test-POD conguration for X, Y and Z directions testing

105

4.2.1

Accelerometers placement

First, the control accelerometer can be glued on the interface plate in a direction which is aligned with the loading direction. Concerning the measurement accelerometer, it must be glue on a facet perpendicular to the loading direction. For the X and Y loading directions, the suggested positioning is illustrated in Figure 4.4, where vertical facets of the battery support are used.

Figure 4.4: Accelerometers placement for X and Y axes loading For the Z loading direction, since the greater amplitude is reached on the EPS card, the point number 41 (Figure 2.14 on page 39) is suggested as position for the accelerometer. Strips of Kapton tapes should be adhered on faces at these positions before gluing the accelerometer, in order to avoid glue residues after testing.

4.3
4.3.1

Sinusoidal and random acceleration tests

Objectives of these tests

The goal of the vibration tests is to prove that the structure is able to withstand the acceleration levels prescribed in the ICD [9] and presented in Sections 1.2.3 and 1.2.4.

106

4.3.2

Test sequence

For each test, the following sequence is to be applied: 1. Perform a low level sine sweep test in the range [0.5 2000] Hz with a sweep rate of 2 octaves per minute and an amplitude included between 0.2 and 0.5 g. Perform this sweep up and down and identify the natural frequencies ([24]). 2. Perform the test with the qualication level and the sweep rate prescribed in the requirements (Sections 1.2.3 and 1.2.4). 3. Perform a new low sine sweep and check if there is a deviation compared with the rst one. A discrepancy may indicate some damage or modications in the xing conditions of the internal elements. 4. Perform a visual inspection. Pay a particular attention to the fasteners and electric cables connections.

4.3.3

Pass criteria

The test is considered successful if: No damage or default is identied by visual inspection. Discrepancies between the surrounding low sine sweep are less than 5% in frequency and 3 dB in amplitude ([24]).

4.4

Shock tests

Shock tests have to be performed along each axis of the CubeSat considering the plus and minus directions. Currently, the test facilities are not yet identied. The V2is shakers are not sucient to simulate the SRS of the shock load requirement. Pyrotechnic or free fall shock tests facilities have to be found to performed these tests. Pass criteria are also visual inspection and functional test. 107

Conclusion

In this master thesis, several aspects of the qualication process of OUFTI1 were swept through dynamic analyses. In the rst part, the problem to be encountered, i.e. the launch phase and its various load cases, were exposed and quantitative mechanical requirements imposed by ESA in an in the Interface Control Document were reported. Then, based on the previous work of Gauthier PIERLOT (20082009) and Nicolas FRANCOIS (20092010), the building of the global nite ele ment model of the CubeSat continued. Starting with the external structure, the endless screws and the battery support, the model was completed by importing models of each card. In Chapter 2, the complete procedure to model electronic cards was presented and comparison with experimental measurement led to acceptable correlation between numerical and experimental results. The global model built up, numerical tests were launched. In chapter 3, these numerical testing led to a fullment of all the requirements except the random vibration requirement for which it is unfortunately not yet possible to run the analysis. Finally, in Chapter 3, testing procedures were drawn up, but facilities to perform the shock test still need to be found to full this requirement.

108

The qualication process is obviously not yet nished. First, modelling both the COM card which is not already built, and the new antenna support still remain. The latter and the ve solar panels will have to be taken into account in the last model, when the ight model of OUFTI1 will be assembled and tested. Correlation between measurement and the nal model should be done to validate it.

109

Bibliography

[1] Fortescue Peter, John Stark, and Graham Swinerd, editors. Spacecraft Structures Engineering. Wiley edition. [2] Adriano Calvi. Spacecraft structural dynamics & loads. an overview, November 2009. Lecture notes. [3] Nicolas FRANCOIS. Dynamic analysis and launch qualication of oufti 1 nanosatellite. Masters thesis, University of Li`ge, 2010. e [4] Gauthier Pierlot. Oufti-1 : ight system conguration and structural analysis. Masters thesis, University of Li`ge, 2009. e [5] Alastair Amy Robin, Aglietti G.S., and Richardson Guy. Sensitivity analysis of simplied printed circuit board nite elements models. ELSEVIER, 2009. [6] Arianespace. Vega users manual, March 2006. [7] DREVON Claude and ALDEGUER Jod. Conception de cartes pour e quipements spacialisables. Techniques de lingnieur. e e [8] Pierre Rochus. Conception dexpriences spatiales. Lecture notes. e [9] ESA. CubeSat Educational Payload on the Vega Maiden Flight. Interface Control Document, March 2011. Issue 0 - Revision 7. [10] Cal Poly. CubeSat Design Specication, Jan 2009. 110

[11] ESA-ESTEC. March 2009.

ECSS-E-ST-10-02C : Space engineering-Verication,

[12] Alastair Amy Robin, Aglietti G.S., and Richardson Guy. Accuracy of simplied printed circuit board nite element models. ELSEVIER, 2009. [13] D.WATTIAUX, O.VERLINDEN, and Ch. DE FRUYTIER. Modelling of the dynamic behaviour of modular equipments designed by thales alenia space etca. [14] Alastair Amy Robin, Aglietti G.S., and Richardson Guy. Simplied modelling of printed circuit boards for spacecraft applications. Acta Astronautica, 2009. [15] Alastair Amy Robin, Aglietti G.S., and Richardson Guy. Analysis of simplied fe models of pcbs exposed to random vibrations. [16] J. Pitarresi, Phil Geng, Beltman Willem, and Yun Ling. Dynamic modeling and measurement of personal computer motherboards. Electronic Components and Technology Conference, 2002. [17] Zhang Bo, Liu Pin-kuan, Ding Han, and Cao Wenwu. Modeling of broad-level package by nite element analysis and laser interferometer measurements. ELSEVIER, 2008. [18] Lee Ying-Chih, Wang Bor-Tsuen, Lai Yi-Shao, Yeh Chang-Lin, and Chen Rong-Sheng. Finite element model verication for packaged printed circuit board. ELSEVIER, 2008. [19] J.-C. Golinval. Vibration testing & modal identication. Lecture notes. [20] J.-C. Golinval and Gaetan Kerschen. Experimental modal analysis. Lecture notes. [21] Ewins D. J. MODAL TESTING theory,practice and application. Research Studies Press, john wiley & sons, inc. edition, 2000. second edition. [22] Samcef Field html documentation. [23] Tyco electronics. PC/104 and PC/104-Plus Connectors. [24] Galeone P. C. Approach for the structural tests for the qualication of the CubeSats/P-PODs, April 2009.

111

[25] Pierre Martinelli. Integration procedure for the engineering model of OUFTI1, 2011. [26] California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, CA 93407. Test Pod Users Guide, June 2006. Revision 6.

112