Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
University of Florida, on 19 Oct 2017 at 16:34:56, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/aer.2017.108
Thermal characterisation
analysis and modelling
techniques for CubeSat-sized
spacecrafts
Anwar Ali
sa2000pk@gmail.com
Department of Electrical Technology
University of Technology (UoT)
Nowshera
Pakistan
Khalil Ullah
Department of Electrical Engineering
National University of Computers & Emerging Sciences
Peshawar
Pakistan
Hafeez Ur Rehman
Department of Computer Science
National University of Computers & Emerging Sciences
Peshawar
Pakistan
Inam Bari
Department of Electrical Engineering
National University of Computers & Emerging Sciences
Peshawar
Pakistan
Leonardo M. Reyneri
Department of Electronics and Telecommunications
Politecnico di Torino
Torino, Italy
ABSTRACT
Recently, universities and Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) have initiated the develop-
ment of nanosatellites because of their low cost, small size and short development time. The
challenging aspects for these satellites are their small surface area for heat dissipation due to
their limited size. There is not enough space for mounting radiators for heat dissipation. As a
result, thermal modelling becomes a very important element in designing a small satellite. The
paper presents detailed and simplified generic thermal models for CubeSat panels and also
for the complete satellite. The detailed model takes all thermal resistances associated with the
respective layers into account, while in the simplified model, the layers with similar materials
have been combined and are represented by a single thermal resistance. The proposed
models are then applied to a CubeSat standard nanosatellite called AraMiS-C1, developed at
Politecnico di Torino, Italy. Thermal resistance measured through both models is compared,
and the results are similar. The absorbed power and the corresponding temperature differences
between different points of the single panel and complete satellite are measured. In order to
verify the theoretical results, thermal resistance of the AraMiS-C1 and its panels are measured
through experimental set-ups. Theoretical and measured values are in close agreement.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
In recent years, there has been an increasing trend towards the design and development of
nanosatellites. They are cost effective and are often launched as secondary payloads with
larger spacecraft. The first nanosatellite, developed by California Polytechnic State University
(Cal Poly) in collaboration with Stanford University, is called CubeSat with dimensions
101010 cm3 and mass less than 1.33 kg(1) . This has opened a window of research for uni-
versities and Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) worldwide in the field of nanosatellites.
The Department of Electronics and Telecommunication (DET) at Politecnico di Torino has
been working on a comprehensive nanosatellite project called AraMiS (Italian acronym for
Modular Architecture of Satellites) since 2007(2) . The design process of AraMiS is based on
the concept of tiles and modules(3,4) . These modules can be reused for multiple missions,
which help to significantly reduce the overall cost, development and testing time(5) . One has
to just reassemble the required sub-systems to achieve the targeted specific mission. AraMiS-
C1 is a 1U CubeSat standard nanosatellite, developed by the DET as a demonstrator of the
AraMiS modular architecture. Six faces of the satellite are equipped with identical tiles
called CubeSat Power Management Tile (CubePMT). Inside the satellite, there is room for
batteries and payload boards. Solar panels are fixed and mounted on six external surfaces.
CubePMT is a power management, attitude determination and control tile of AraMiS-
C1(6,7) . It is built on eight layers of FR4 Printed Circuit Board (PCB) with dimensions
9882.51.6 mm3 , which also acts as the mechanical structure of the satellite. The solar
panel and sun sensor are mounted on the external side (layer 1) while power and attitude
sub-systems are mounted on the internal side (layer 8). A magnetorquer coil with 200 turns is
integrated within the PCBs four internal layers (layers 2, 3, 4 and 5)(8) . Layer 6 has the ground
plane while Layer 7 contains partial ground planes. Photographs of the CubePMT solar panel
and component side are shown in Fig. 1.
A comprehensive and precise thermal analysis is an essential element in the development
cycle of small satellites. Thermal control is critical to the success of any spacecraft mission,
and without a proper thermal control system, the extreme temperature variations during flight
may exceed component operating temperature ranges, leading to performance degradation
or even permanent damage. On the other hand, NASAs Guidelines for Satellites hardware
thermal analysis warns that a conventional thermal control system may need extra space,
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Florida, on 19 Oct 2017 at 16:34:56, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/aer.2017.108
power and, furthermore, to increase the overall weight of the satellite(9) . The CubeSats are
very attractive for universities and SMEs because of their short development times, lower
development cost and relative simplicity compared to big satellites. However, due to the
limited size, thermal control may be more difficult than with their larger counterparts. Smaller
surface area provides less space for radiators and solar panels, as well as less thermal paths
and interfaces for radiators or other thermal control hardware. It means that adding active
thermal control systems to small satellites is not a suitable solution for their thermal control.
The proper solution is the passive one, i.e. by making small satellite structure suitable for
efficient heat dissipation. This paper provides a thermal modelling technique for analysing the
satellites structure as a network of thermal resistances.
This paper includes the following sections. Section 2 discusses the background and
literature review while Section 3 discusses the methodology for detailed and simplified generic
thermal model of the CubeSat and its panels. In Section 4, the thermal modelling presented in
Section 3 is applied to AraMiS-C1 and its panels and their thermal resistances are measured.
In Section 5, the thermal resistances evaluated via the thermal models presented in Section 3
are verified through laboratory experiments. The measurements regarding the absorbed power
and the corresponding temperature differences between different points of the single panel
and complete satellite are described in Section 6. The last Section 7 concludes the paper. The
paper is basically based on the work Dr. Anwar Ali did during his PhD research(10) .
T C_material_1 C_material_2 T
(material_1 (material_1
Material_1
& &
material_2) material_2)
Figure 2. (a) Object composed of two materials (b) Transient thermal model (c) Steady state thermal
model.
P = Pd S, (1)
where is the absorption coefficient of the exposed surface, Pd is the solar power density, S
is the exposed surface area and P is the power absorbed by the surface.
When solar panels are exposed to the solar power, they absorb some portion of the incoming
solar power and the remaining power is transmitted to the satellite sub-systems. The power
absorbed by the solar panel is transformed to useful power where as the power transmitted to
the satellite is stored as unwanted heat power. The unwanted power (Pu ) depends on Pd , solar
panel conversion efficiency (), absorption coefficient (), and S, given by Equation (2).
Pu = Pd S (1 ) (2)
Based on the analogy between thermal and electrical networks with the respective
components and parameters, in thermal domain, Ohms law(12) is given by Equation (3).
T = P th , (3)
where T is the temperature difference across an object, P is the power dissipated and th is
the thermal resistance which can be found using the Fouriers Law for heat conduction(13) .
S2 A
S1
D
B
The transient thermal model is composed of both thermal resistances and thermal
capacitances of the respective materials. In the steady state model, when the power and
temperature reach the constant levels, the thermal capacitors are fully charged and can be
neglected from the thermal model as shown in Fig. 2(b).
Thermal modelling has immense importance in the structural design of small satellites;
therefore, various attempts have been made to accurately present thermal models of small
satellites. In Ref. 14, the Adaptive Thermal Modelling Architecture (ATMA) has been
discussed which focuses to bridge the gap between the commercially available thermal
modelling tools used for larger, more expensive satellites, and the low-fidelity algorithms and
techniques used for simple first order analysis. Work in Ref. 15 addresses thermal modelling
used during the design and analysis of the Combat Sentinel Satellite (CSSAT). An overview of
the analysis is used to make design decisions and create working thermal models. In Ref. 16,
thermal models of various spacecraft sub-systems have been created using MatLab and used
to simulate projected operational modes of the satellite and the effects on major satellite sub-
systems. As compared to all the previously developed models, our presented model is very
simple, accurate, and robust which requires no special tool. The model is composed of detailed
and simplified models for CubeSat and its panels.
3.0 METHODOLOGY
3.1 Thermo-mechanical model of the CubeSat panel
Normally on CubeSat, six faces are equipped with identical panels that are dual purpose:
generating power as well as providing mechanical structure of the satellite. These panels are
combined into a cube structure with the help of aluminum rails. The thermo-mechanical model
of the CubeSat panel is shown in Fig. 3.
The generalised thermal models have been presented for a generic CubeSat panel. The
composition of materials and dimensions of the CubeSat panel may vary from satellite
to satellite. Here, it is assumed that the CubeSat panel under discussion is composed of
solar cells, resin, FR4 and copper materials. For simplification and better understanding, the
thermo-mechanical model of the CubeSat panel shown in Fig. 3 is sub-divided further into
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Florida, on 19 Oct 2017 at 16:34:56, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/aer.2017.108
Top_Layer
s
R
R
F-1
Solar cell
Resin
Cu_b2_3 F_b2_3
Cu_d2_3 F_d2_3
Layer 1
F_a2_3
F_c2_3
F_e2_3
Layer 2
a b c d e
Layer 3
Cu_4
Layer 4
F_4
Bottom_Layer
(a) (b)
Figure 4. (Colour online) CubeSat panel (a) cross-sectional view (b) detailed model.
three portions and corresponding detailed and simplified thermal models for the three portions
of the CubeSat panel are presented.
Top_Layer
S
R
98mm
F_a
Cu_c
Cu_d F_b
a
b c b c b
d
Ground Plane
Coil traces combined Bottom_Layer
together
(a) (b)
Figure 5. (Colour online) (a) Panel top-to-bottom cross-sectional view and (b) panel simplified model.
(1, 2, 3, 4) represent the relevant layers. For example F_a2_3 represents the thermal resistance
of FR4 material in sub-section a of layers 2 and 3.
The thermal resistance of Fig. 4(b) is modelled as given in Equation (4).
th_S1S2 = S +
2
R
+ F _1 + F _a2_3 //(Cu_b2_3 + F _b2_3 )//
(4)
F _c2_3 //(Cu_d2_3 + F _d2_3 )//F _e2_3 + Cu_4 + F _4
F_a1_4
a
b
Cu_b3
Cu_b2
F_b3
F_b2
S
Layer 4
Layer 3
Layer 2
Layer 1
POS
F_c3
Cu_c3
Cu_c2
Cu_g4
F_f1
F_c2
g
F_f4
c
f
S
R
Cu_d3
Cu_d2
F_d3
F_d2
d
F_e1_4
e
Figure 6. (Colour online) Panel (a) internal view (b) side view (c) detailed thermal model.
consist of both FR4 and copper traces. In sub-sections b and d, the individual resistance of
the copper traces is in series with each other while in sub-section c, copper traces resistance
is in parallel with each other. Sub-section f has the FR4 material of layers 1 and 4, while sub-
section g has the ground plane. The thermal model is obtained by combining the thermal
resistance associated with each sub-section. The solar panel internal view, side view and edge-
to-edge detailed thermal model are shown in Fig. 6.
The thermal model of Fig. 6(c) is written in mathematical form as given in Equation (6)
where I represents the number of layers that have copper traces and j represents the
number of ground planes.
F _b //Cu_b +F _c //Cu_c +F _d //Cu_d
thBD = EE = (2(R //S ) + POS )// i
Cu_g4
(6)
//F _ f 1 //F _ f 4 + F _a1_4 + F _e1_4 )// j
F_a1_4
a
RCu_c2_3 Cu_b2_3
F_b1_4
b
d
S
Cu_d4
c
C=98mm
F_c1_4
POS/2
D
(a) (b)
Figure 7. (Colour online) (a) Panel shape after combining similar material; (b) Panel half portion simplified
model.
R1
R2
dR
The solar power (P) absorbed by the circle with radius R is given by Equation (8);
P = Pd R2 , (8)
where Pd is the solar power density and is the absorption coefficient of the circle with
radius R.
The temperature difference (T) of the length dR is given by Equation (9).
dT = Pd
dT = P K2R.h
dR
Pd
dT = Pd R2 K2R.h dR
= 2Kh RdR
R2
R2 (9)
RdR = (R4Kh
2 R1 )
2 2
dT = 2PPddKh
R1 R1
Pd
T = 4Kh
(R2 2 R1 2 )
Here, K is the thermal conductivity of the material and h is the thickness of the circular
section.
Thermal resistance of the section with length dR, as shown in Fig. 8, is given by Equation
(10).
T
= P
Pd RT 2 (10)
= 4Kh
Pd RT 2
= 4Kh
Therefore, the thermal resistance of a circular section depends on the thickness of that
section and the material absorption coefficient ().
Layer-1
Ali ET AL
Layer-1
Layer-2
Layer-2
(a)
Layer-3
(a)
Copper traces
Layer-3
Layer-4
Copper traces
Layer-4
Ground Plane
Ground Plane
(b)
R
1
R3
R
D
2
(b)
R0
R1
R3
R2
S
F_1_RoR3
Edge
F_4_R0R3 F_3_RoR3
Edge
Centre
Figure 9. (Colour online) Panel (a) side view (b) internal view (c) detailed model.
(c)
Figure 10. (Colour online) Panel (a) side view (b) internal view (c) simplified model.
F_3_RoR1 Cu_3_R1R2 F_3_R2R3
Cu_4_R0R3 F_2_3_R2R3
Cu_4_RoR3
(12)
11
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Florida, on 19 Oct 2017 at 16:34:56, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/aer.2017.108
ew
_
ail
ew
Ra
cr
R
cr
Screw
S
cre
S
w
cre
4CE 4CE Rail_2 1
S
_1 q_
E
1 il_
C
S
q q_
a il _ Ra
4
R Rail-2 a il_
E
2
Rail_1
w
Rail_2
Screw R
w
_
C
w ail
cre
cre
c re
S R
S
Rail_q_1 Rail-q-1 S
cre
Rail-2
w
ew
S
th_CE
cr
cre
S
w
Rail_1
Rail_1
_q
4CE CE
2 4
_ q_
ail q
R E_
Rail_q_2 4CE_q 4CE_q Rail-q-2 4
C
th_CE
Rail_1
4CE
S
Rail_1
cr
Rail_1
Rail_2
S
ew
cre
w
ew
S
cr
_1
S
cr
Rail_2
_q
ew
a il
Rail_q_1 R
Rail_q_1
=PS PC - PR
/6
4CE
4CE
4CE
4CE
Centre of the top tile
(C1)
re w
S c S w S rew S
Rail_2 Rail_2
Rail_2 Rail_2
w cr e
Rail-2 Rail_2
cre cre
Sc
Rail-2 Rail_2
Sc rew
S w S c re
w
cre
w
Rail_q_1 Rail_q_1 Rail_q_1 Rail_q_1 Rail_q_1 Rail_q_1 Rail_q_1 Rail_q_1
S r ew
Rail_1
Rail_1
Rail_1
S cre
w S rew Sc re w
cre
w Sc
Sc
Equipotential surfaces
cre
w S cre
w Sc rew
Rail_1
4CE
4CE
4CE
C3 C4
4CE
C2 C5
Rail_q_2 4CE_q 4CE_q 4CE_q 4CE_q 4CE_q 4CE_q 4CE_q
4CE_q Rail_q_2 Rail_q_2 Rail_q_2 Rail_q_2 Rail_q_2 Rail_q_2 Rail_q_2
4CE
4CE
/6
4CE
/6 /6 /6
4CE
Rail-1
Rail-1
Rail-1
Rail_1
w S w Sc S w S
cre cre r ew cre
Rail-2 Rail_2
cre
Rail-2
Rail-2 Rail_2
c re cre
S w S r ew Sc w S w
Rail_q_1 Rail_q_1 Rail_q_1 Rail_q_1 Rail_q_1 Rail_q_1 Rail_q_1 Rail_q_1
Rail_2
S cre
w S cre
w Sc cre
w
S
cre
w S cre
w S rew S cre
w cre
w
S
4CE
4CE
4CE
/6
Figure 12. (Colour online) CubeSat thermal model along with equi-potential surfaces resistors.
=PS PC - PR
Centre of the top tile /6
4CE Rail_2 Rail_2 4CE
4CE
w S S w S w S
c re
Rail_2 Rail_2 4CE
cre cre
cr e
w cre cre
Rail_2 Rail_2 4CE
cre cr e
S w
S w S w S w
S
cre Screw
Rail_1
Rail_1
Rail_1
S S w
cre
w
cre
w S cre w
cre
w S cre
w S cre
w
S
Rail_1
4CE
4CE
4CE
/6
4CE
/6 /6 /6
Rail_1
Rail_1
Rail_1
Rail_1
S S S S
w r ew w w
Rail_2 Rail_2
cre cre
Rail_2 Rail_2
cre cre
Rail_2 Rail_2 4CE
Rail_2 Rail_2
S cre
Sc cre cre
S w
w w S w
Rail-q-1
S cre
w S cre
w S cre
w
S
cre S cre S c re S c re w
w w w w cre
S
4CE
4CE
4CE
/6
Centre of the bottom tile
Figure 13. (Colour online) CubeSat thermal model without equi-potential surface resistors.
the same temperature level are termed as equi-potential surfaces. The resistors on the equi-
potential surfaces are represented with sub-script q. The temperature difference across the
equi-potential surfaces resistance is zero; therefore, these resistors do not contribute to the
thermal model and can be omitted from the CubeSat thermal model. The CubeSat thermal
model without equi-potential thermal resistances is shown in Fig. 13.
The only power source of the CubeSat is the six solar panels covering as many faces of the
satellite. By taking into account that only one panel is exposed at a time to sunlight, here are
two cases where the power absorbed by the panel may be different. When the solar panel is on,
it absorbs some portion of the incoming solar power (PS ) and the remaining power is reflected
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Florida, on 19 Oct 2017 at 16:34:56, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/aer.2017.108
(PR ) from the surface. The amount of absorbed power depends on the absorption coefficient
() of the exposed surface. Some portion of the absorbed power is converted to useful power
(PC ), which depends on the efficiency () of the solar panel. The remaining absorbed power
is transmitted to the satellite, which is the unwanted power (), as given by Equation (13).
= PS PR PC PS PR = Pd S
(13)
= Pd S (1 ) &PC = (PS PR ) = Pd S
Here, Pd is the solar power density at Low Earth Orbit (LEO) is about 1,366 W/m2 and S
is the area of the exposed surface.
When the solar panel is off, no power is converted to useful power and all the radiating
power is transferred to the satellite.
= Pd S (14)
The unwanted power () starts flowing to the coolest point on the satellite which is the
centre point on the opposite face, as shown in Fig. 13. This power tends to increase the overall
temperature of the satellite. The unwanted power () flows to all the six faces and is equally
distributed amongst them (/6 to each face).
The thermal model of Fig. 13 can be written in mathematical form as given in Equation
(15). The symbol abbreviations used in Equation (15) are given in Table 2.
1
4CE + Rail_2 // Screw 4 4
th = 2 2
+2 + (15)
4 4CE + Rail2 // Screw
2
Rail_1
Table 1
Thermal resistances for the AraMiS-C1 thermal model theoretical
measurements
Figure 14. (Colour online) Measurement arrangements of AraMiS-C1. (a) Power resistor attached with
CubeTCT through aluminum tile. (b) AraMiS-C1 with four CubePMT without solar cells and two CubeTCT
tiles.
=PS PC - PR
Centre of the top tile /6
4CE_C
4CE_C
AL
AL
AL
AL
w S S w S w S
cr e
Rail_2 Rail_2
cre w cre
Rail_2 Rail_2
cre cre
cre cre S cre
Rail_2 Rail_2
S w
S w S w w
S
Screw
Rail_1
cre
Rail_1
S S w
rew S cre
Rail_1
w w
cre c cre cre S
w S w S cre
w
Rail_1
4CE_P 4CE_P
4CE_P
4CE_P
/6 4CE_P
4CE_P
4CE_P
Rail_1
/6 /6 /6
Rail_1
Rail_1
Rail_1
w S w S w S w S
Rail_2 Rail_2
c re cre cre
Rail_2 Rail_2
cre cre
Rail_2 Rail_2
cre cre
S w S cre
w S w S w
S cre
w S cre
w S cre
w
S
cre S cre S cre S cre w
w w w w cre
S
4CE-C
4CE-C
4CE-C
/6
Centre of the bottom tile
Figure 15. (Colour online) Equivalent thermal model of the AraMiS-C1 measurement arrangement.
tile, and the thermal resistance from centre-to-edge (CE ) has been modified with (CE_C ) and
(CE_P ), which represent CubeTCT centre-to-edge thermal resistance and CubePMT centre-
to-edge thermal resistance, respectively, as shown in Fig. 15.
The equivalent thermal model of the AraMiS-C1 satellite with the measurement
arrangement is shown in Fig. 15.
4CE _C //4Al + Rail_2 // Screw 4CE _C + Rail_2 // Screw
th = 2
+ 2
4 4
1
4 4
+2 + (16)
4CE _P + Rail_2 // Screw
2
Rail_1
The thermal model of Fig. 15 is mathematically expressed in Equation (16). This model
is identical to that of the CubeSat thermal model except the aluminum resistor is in parallel
with the CubeTCT tile. In the CubeSat model, there is CubePMT thermal resistance instead
of CubeTCT and aluminum thermal resistances parallel combination.
In thermal measurements, the CubePMT was without solar cells and resins. Therefore,
these two resistors were omitted in the theoretical measurements. All the required resistors for
the AraMiS-C1 thermal model theoretical measurements are given in Table 1.
Inserting all the required resistors values in Equation (16), the equivalent thermal resistance
of AraMiS-C1 found is 2.86 K/W.
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Florida, on 19 Oct 2017 at 16:34:56, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/aer.2017.108
Figure 16. (Colour online) AraMiS-C1 thermal resistance measurement experimental set-up.
Figure 17. (Colour online) Thermal resistance and temperature difference between different faces of
AraMiS-C1 satellite.
Figure 18. (Colour online) CubePMT thermal resistance measurement experimental set-up.
temperature of tiles attained the steady state values, and data from the temperature sensors
became stable. All the sensors data was acquired and continuously recorded during the
experiment.
Figure 17 shows temperatures of top, middle and bottom tiles and their temperature
differences. It also shows thermal resistance between top and bottom tiles, which is 3.1 K/W.
The thermal resistance of AraMiS-C1, found through the CubeSat mathematical model and
experimental set-up, has almost the same value.
Practical resistance of CubePMT and CubeTCT modules are measured through the
experimental set-up shown in Fig. 18. Table 2 shows that there is very little difference
between the theoretical and measured values, which reflects the authenticity of the proposed
models.
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Florida, on 19 Oct 2017 at 16:34:56, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/aer.2017.108
Table 2
Thermal model application and measurement results
Theoretical Measured
Thermal Model Resistance Resistance
S. No. Resistance Application (K/W) (K/W) % Error
1 CubePMT Detailed Model 2.07 2.12 6
Top-to-bottom Simplified Model 2
2 CubePMT Detailed Model 3.31 3.4 3
Centre-to-edge Simplified Model 3.32
3 AraMiS-C1 CubeSat Model 2.86 3.1 9
t When the solar panel is on, it absorbs 26% of power and remaining 74% power is lost
through the CubePMT module. The power absorbed by the AraMiS-C1 is 5.1 W.
t When solar panel is off, all the radiating power is transferred to the CubePMT module.
The absorption area (A) is the CubePMT surface area (9882.5 mm2 ) and solar cell
efficiency () will become zero in Equation (2). The power absorbed by the AraMiS-C1
is 11 W.
In order to find the temperature difference (T) between different points of a spacecraft,
thermal resistance and solar power absorbed are required as given in Equation (3).
The temperature difference (T) between various sides of the CubePMT module can be
found using Equation (3) in two different cases:
t When the solar panel is on: T from the top-to-bottom layer of the CubePMT is (5.1 W
2 K/W) 10.2 K, while from centre-to-edge, the T is (5.1 W 3.2 K/W) 16.3 K.
t When the solar panel is off: T from the top-to-bottom layer of the CubePMT is
(11 W2 K/W) 22 K, while from centre-to-edge, the T is (11 W3.2 K/W) 35.2 K.
t In the case when the solar panel is on: T value is (5.1 W 3 K/W) 15.3 K.
t When the solar panel is off: T value is (11 W 3 K/W) 33 K.
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Florida, on 19 Oct 2017 at 16:34:56, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/aer.2017.108
7.0 CONCLUSION
In this paper, thermal models have been presented for the CubeSat compatible panels and
spacecrafts. The detailed and simplified models proposed for a single panel were presented.
The corresponding models were applied to the AraMiS-C1 panels (CubePMT) and the thermal
resistance values were found. The difference between the resistance values measured through
both models is low that verifies the verification of the proposed models.
The thermal resistance of the whole system was found by employing the presented CubeSat
thermal model. In order to verify the value of the thermal resistance measured through the
CubeSat model, the AraMiS-C1 thermal resistance was measured through an experimental
set-up. The minimum deviation of the theoretical and experimental results indicates the
verification of the model presented for CubeSat. In conclusion, the presented models are
reliable and can be applied to any CubeSat standard nanosatellites. The calculated and
measured thermal resistance values of our test spacecraft are very low which qualifies the
thermal design of our test spacecraft. The low thermal resistance ensures that the spacecraft
can easily dissipate heat from a hotter to a cooler surface.
The amount of power absorbed by the CubePMT module and AraMiS-C1 satellite under
different conditions is calculated. Temperature differences between different points of the
single tile and complete satellite were measured.
The presented models and measurement techniques can be used for the measurement of
thermal resistance, power absorption and temperature difference between different points of
the CubeSat standard nanosatellites.
REFERENCES
1. Munakata, R. CubeSat design specifications, Rev.12, California State Polytechnic University,
2009.
2. De Los Rios, J.C., Roascio, D., Reyneri, L., Sanso, C., Passerone, C., Del Corso, D.,
Bruno, M., Hernandez, A. and Vallan, A. Aramis: A fine-grained modular architecture for
reconfigurable space missions, 1st Conference on University Satellite Missions, 24 January 2011,
Rome, Italy.
3. Mughal, M.R., De Los Rios, J.C., Reyneri, L.M. and Ali, A. Scalable plug and play tiles for
modular nanosatellites, 63rd International Astronautical Congress, 15 October 2012, Naples,
Italy.
4. Mughal, M.R., Ali, A. and Reyneri, L.M. Plug-and-play design approach to smart harness for
modular small satellites, Acta Astronautica, February 2014, 94, (2), pp 754-764.
5. Speretta, S., Reyneri, L.M., Sansoe, C., Tranchero, M., Passerone, C. and Del Corso, D.
Modular architecture for satellites, 58th IAC, 2428 September 2007, Hyderabad, India.
6. Ali, A., Reyneri, L.M., De Los Rios, J.C. and Ali, H. Innovative power management tile for
nanosatellites, 63rd International Astronautical Congress, 15 October 2012, Naples, Italy.
7. Ali, A., Mughal, M.R., Ali, H. and Reyneri, L.M. Innovative power management, attitude
determination and control tile for CubeSat standard nanosatellites, Acta Astronautica, MarchApril
2014, 96, pp 116-127.
8. Ali, A., Mughal, M.R., Ali, H., Reyneri, L.M. and Aman, M.N. Design, implementation,
and thermal modeling of embedded reconfigurable magnetorquer system for nanosatellites, IEEE
Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, October 2015, 51, (4), pp 2669-2679. doi:
10.1109/TAES.2015.130621.
9. Thermal analysis of spacecraft hardware guideline. NASA Design Guidelines. GD-AP-2302.
10. Ali, A. Power management, attitude determination and control systems of small satellites, PhD
thesis, Politecnico di Torino, Italy Available at: http://porto.polito.it/2535715/.
11. Satellite thermal control engineering, prepared for SME 2004, European Space Agency, ESTEC,
Thermal and Structure Division, Available at: http://www.tak2000.com/data/Satellite_TC.pdf.
Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Florida, on 19 Oct 2017 at 16:34:56, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/aer.2017.108