Big Hopes for Tiny Satellites 152
shelflife writes: "ST5, according to NASA, will usher in a new era of small, smart spacecraft. Why send a human into space when you can send a computer? And why send something almost as heavy as a UNIVAC if a laptop will do? Compact nanosatellites will have everything you'd want in a full-size, luxury satellite. They will have the attitudinal and navigational capabilities needed to maintain proper orbits, and they will be capable of complex, high-bandwidth communications functions."
Microsats flew some years ago (Score:3, Informative)
With today's smaller and more powerful chips, of course, it's a lot easier to do more in a small package.
Radiation is a big problem, heat too (Score:5, Informative)
Solar radiation is an extremely serious problem for any computer in space. To be rad-hard, chips need to be made of silicon on sapphire, which means a $1 embedded processor suddenly costs twenty thousand dollars. This is not material cost, it's because the economies of scale in production of terrestrial processors are what drives the cost down. Nobody can afford sapphire RAM banks, and thus memories get a flipped bit per orbit, in general. The only way they keep working is that there is a "washing" process that scans memory and does ECC correction continuously. Shielding is simply too heavy to be practical (send up a lead-clad satellite, and your rocket becomes 10 times as large to boost the weight).
Because it's available in sapphire and is flight-proven, the microprocessor of choice for controlling satellites is the 1802. Remember the RCA Cosmac Elf? Most of you weren't born when that was a popular hobby computer
I was surprised to find that the Phase 3D satellite [amsat.org] boots up with no ROM. Hardware loads RAM directly from a radio modem. They couldn't afford a ROM they could trust.
Heat is a problem, too. Heat sinks don't work so well without an atmosphere to carry away heat. You have to pipe heat around with heat-pipes filled with a phase-change gas, and then radiate the heat away.Bruce
Re:Microsats flew some years ago (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Radiation is a big problem, heat too (Score:3, Informative)
Thanks
Bruce
Re:Another good thing about being small (Score:3, Informative)
Satellite Page (Score:1, Informative)
http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/SSC/SSHP/
AW
Re:Lots of advantages to being small (Score:2, Informative)
As far as I know the best for doing that are not US built which is why Surrey Space [sstl.co.uk] over in England are making a killing right now in the nanosat category.
Jedidiah
Re:Lots of advantages to being small (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Radiation is a big problem, heat too (Score:1, Informative)
As for ROM vs RAM, wouldn't a Mask ROM be more reliable than RAM ? I would assume you mean 6T or 8T SRAM not those 1T DRAM cells.
Re:Space-qualified electronics. (Score:1, Informative)
I believe that SEi (now Maxwell) produces a rad-hard 486 also.
Re:Radiation is a big problem, heat too (Score:1, Informative)
I would like to add that it is quite possible to fly commercial processors in space. It merely requires good system engineering. Space radiation is merely another source of faults. A number of techniques can be used to get much better performance out of the commercial processor than the rad-hard processor while keeping it free from errors and up in terms of availability.
For instance the Iridium constellation uses Power PC 603s. In side by side comparisons, most of the time, the commercial processor is the better choice.
Besides performance and price, schedule is the big concern for using rad-hard parts. Most rad-hard processors that are being developed now (Rad-hard Pentium by Sandia, Rad-750 by BAE Systems, etc.) are way behind schedule and their performance by the time their designs are finished will be too far behind what is current to be useful.