PAYLOAD PROPOSAL: VETS CHIPSAT

mael

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2021
Messages
77
Reaction score
5
Hello all, hope you are well !

I would like to introduce you the work of a friend of mine which is a chipsat. This shipset must handle most of the caracteristic of a satelite as the comunication
He is searching for an experimental rocket that will show him if the payload could resist to the high stress of a flight. This will be the prototype of what will be sent to orbit.
So if anyone has planed to launch a rocket and that still has the place for a little payload that would be incredible !

Have a good day
 
Last edited:

heada

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
5,445
Reaction score
2,823
Location
Indianapolis, Indiana
I've never launched anything to orbit. Not even close. From what I understand of real payloads to space, and I could be wildly wrong here, but there are 3 major forces that could cause failure

- g-loading on launch
- vibration
- radiation

For g-loading, you should be able to look up the max G loads expected for the launch vehicle. I'd then increase them by a order and check against that. e.g. expected g-load is 6G, so ensure that everything can withstand 60G

For vibration, and I think this is the highest failure point, there are shaker tables designed to test for failure just for this. I thought all launch providers required a passing shaker table test before they'd allow the payload to fly.

Radiation isn't as big a concern for LEO and short-life payloads.

Launching on a hobby rocket will expose it to g-loads similar to the real one but much shorter duration. Same with vibration but not as long or as intense I think. Hobby rockets come nowhere near the altitude for radiation to be a concern (only about half dozen flights above 100k feet in the last 20 years or so)

In the end, use the right g-load rated items and attachment methods, test on a shaker table and let it fly!
 

mael

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2021
Messages
77
Reaction score
5
I've never launched anything to orbit. Not even close. From what I understand of real payloads to space, and I could be wildly wrong here, but there are 3 major forces that could cause failure

- g-loading on launch
- vibration
- radiation

For g-loading, you should be able to look up the max G loads expected for the launch vehicle. I'd then increase them by a order and check against that. e.g. expected g-load is 6G, so ensure that everything can withstand 60G

For vibration, and I think this is the highest failure point, there are shaker tables designed to test for failure just for this. I thought all launch providers required a passing shaker table test before they'd allow the payload to fly.

Radiation isn't as big a concern for LEO and short-life payloads.

Launching on a hobby rocket will expose it to g-loads similar to the real one but much shorter duration. Same with vibration but not as long or as intense I think. Hobby rockets come nowhere near the altitude for radiation to be a concern (only about half dozen flights above 100k feet in the last 20 years or so)

In the end, use the right g-load rated items and attachment methods, test on a shaker table and let it fly!
Heyyyyy thanks for your answer !
I'll will submit him the idea, I've not think about it before lol
 

Grog6

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Jul 18, 2021
Messages
771
Reaction score
643
Location
Oak Ridge TN
Something you may not be aware of. You need a way to power off reboot your system. Hot carrier injection can turn on all the transistors in a chip, until the charge bleeds off. This crowbars the batteries.
Powering off lets the transistors come out of latchup.
 

OverTheTop

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Jul 9, 2007
Messages
7,674
Reaction score
5,868
Location
Melbourne Australia
Hi Mael. Keep in mind that our HPR launches generally exhibit much higher gee loadings than regular orbital launch vehicles do. This is particularly the case as the altitude gets higher. By burning the fuel quicker the gravity loss (energy required to lift the fuel to the height where it is burned) is reduced. Our HPR flights typically run in the region of around 5-15 gees, but flights of 50 or more gees are not uncommon.

Also, what are the payload approximate size and mass please? These are important in considering the launch vehicle capabilities.
 

mael

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2021
Messages
77
Reaction score
5
here you go
 

Attachments

  • Venus_TinySat_VETS.pdf
    938 KB · Views: 9

cls

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
2,636
Reaction score
337
As noted above, g loads, vibration, and radiation which is not much of an issue.

Also consider the acoustic environment, can be 150dB SPL! And, temperature environment, at the pad, then extended cold soak. High humidity on the pad for some time before launch. Also, high RF from the other satellites being launched.

All launch vehicles have a payload manual. For example, here's the one for Falcon 9.

https://spacex.com.pl/files/2017-10/falcon-9-users-guide-rev-2.0.pdf?4f8d2248dc

That would tell you what to expect for a Falcon 9 ride. Other vehicles will be similar in many ways...

Qualifying a cubesat for launch is a vast, costly endeavor. Like, a million dollars.

I suggest you contact AMSAT DK or AMSAT UK and find out what they do to qualify a cubesat.
 
Top