INTERNAL THALES ALENIA SPACE

Similar documents
Experiment Design and Performance. G. Catastini TAS-I (BUOOS)

GG studies at TAS-I: state of the art

I. APPENDIX: THE GG SIMULATOR. A. Motivation and Background

HYPER Industrial Feasibility Study Final Presentation Orbit Selection

Technology Readiness Level:

HYPER Feasibility Study

Received 29 June 1998, in final form 27 November 1998

A rotating differential accelerometer for testing the equivalence principle in space: results from laboratory tests of a ground prototype

Accurate measurements and calibrations of the MICROSCOPE mission. Gilles METRIS on behalf the MICRSCOPE Team

Experimental Analysis of Low Earth Orbit Satellites due to Atmospheric Perturbations

Optical Metrology Applications at TAS-I in support of Gravity and Fundamental Physics

From an experimental idea to a satellite

Design of the GG satellite

Optimization of Orbital Transfer of Electrodynamic Tether Satellite by Nonlinear Programming

Inertial Frame frame-dragging

Chapter 8 Part 1. Attitude Dynamics: Disturbance Torques AERO-423

TRAJECTORY SIMULATIONS FOR THRUST-VECTORED ELECTRIC PROPULSION MISSIONS

Control of the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna

Design of Attitude Determination and Control Subsystem

arxiv:gr-qc/ v2 16 Feb 2006

On Sun-Synchronous Orbits and Associated Constellations

Catapult tests for microgravity characterization of the MICROSCOPE accelerometers. Manuel Rodrigues On behalf ONERA & ZARM team

Satellite Orbital Maneuvers and Transfers. Dr Ugur GUVEN

CHAPTER 3 PERFORMANCE

Gravitational Waves & Intermediate Mass Black Holes. Lee Samuel Finn Center for Gravitational Wave Physics

arxiv:gr-qc/ v1 15 Nov 2004

AST111, Lecture 1b. Measurements of bodies in the solar system (overview continued) Orbital elements

A.M. Nobili, D. Bramanti, G. Comandi, R. Toncelli Space Mechanics Group, Department of Mathematics, University of Pisa, I Pisa, Italy

Lunar Satellite Attitude Determination System

Gravity Probe B Data Analysis Challenges, Insights, and Results

Lecture Module 5: Introduction to Attitude Stabilization and Control

MICROSCOPE. MICRO-Satellite pour l Observation du Principe d Equivalence. An Equivalence Principle test in space on the way to launch

Dynamical properties of the Solar System. Second Kepler s Law. Dynamics of planetary orbits. ν: true anomaly

Short note on the performances of Magnetic torquers (Magneto-torquers) MTQ

The Orbit Control of ERS-1 and ERS-2 for a Very Accurate Tandem Configuration

CHAPTER 3 PERFORMANCE

Passive Magnetic Attitude Control for CubeSat Spacecraft

From space-time to gravitation waves. Bubu 2008 Oct. 24

2 Each satellite will have two test masses, each being the end mirror for an interferometer.

Past and Future General Relativity Experiments: Equivalence Principle, Time Delay, and Black Holes. Irwin Shapiro 21 October 2005

ATTITUDE CONTROL MECHANIZATION TO DE-ORBIT SATELLITES USING SOLAR SAILS

Pulsars ASTR2110 Sarazin. Crab Pulsar in X-rays

Orbit Design Marcelo Suárez. 6th Science Meeting; Seattle, WA, USA July 2010

MODEL TEST - 1 PHYSICS

Physics 351, Spring 2017, Homework #2. Due at start of class, Friday, January 27, 2017

SPACECRAFT FORMATION CONTROL IN VICINITY OF LIBRATION POINTS USING SOLAR SAILS

UPPER ATMOSPHERIC DENSITIES DERIVED FROM STARSHINE SPACECRAFT ORBITS

Physics 53 Summer Final Exam. Solutions

FIBER OPTIC GYRO-BASED ATTITUDE DETERMINATION FOR HIGH- PERFORMANCE TARGET TRACKING

Hybrid (Ion and Chemical) GEO Stationkeeping Maneuver Planning Software

Precision Attitude and Translation Control Design and Optimization

AS3010: Introduction to Space Technology

Gravitational Effects of Rotating Bodies

The Stanford Gravitational Reference Sensor

Thermal Radiation Effects on Deep-Space Satellites Part 2

Satellite Attitude Control System Design Using Reaction Wheels Bhanu Gouda Brian Fast Dan Simon

LISA Pathfinder measuring pico-meters and femto-newtons in space

Pointing Control for Low Altitude Triple Cubesat Space Darts

Chapter 5 - Part 1. Orbit Perturbations. D.Mortari - AERO-423

6. STABILIZATION AND DRAG FREE CONTROL

CHAPTER 4 CONVENTIONAL CONTROL FOR SATELLITE ATTITUDE

AUTONOMOUS AND ROBUST RENDEZVOUS GUIDANCE ON ELLIPTICAL ORBIT SUBJECT TO J 2 PERTURBATION.

The Swarm Vector Field Magnetometer (VFM): instrument commissioning & performance assessment José M. G. Merayo

Onboard Maneuver Planning for the Autonomous Vision Approach Navigation and Target Identification (AVANTI) experiment within the DLR FireBird mission

Long-Term Evolution of High Earth Orbits: Effects of Direct Solar Radiation Pressure and Comparison of Trajectory Propagators

Sail-Assisted End-of-Life Disposal of High-LEO Satellites

Lecture 2c: Satellite Orbits

A non-linear simulator written in C for orbital spacecraft rendezvous applications.

Satellite Communications

Laser de-spin maneuver for an active debris removal mission - a realistic scenario for Envisat

End of Life Re-orbiting The Meteosat-5 Experience

APPENDIX B SUMMARY OF ORBITAL MECHANICS RELEVANT TO REMOTE SENSING

3D Pendulum Experimental Setup for Earth-based Testing of the Attitude Dynamics of an Orbiting Spacecraft

Relativistic theory of surficial Love numbers

The total luminosity of a disk with the viscous dissipation rate D(R) is

Astrodynamics (AERO0024)

1 The displacement, s in metres, of an object after a time, t in seconds, is given by s = 90t 4 t 2

A Regional Microsatellite Constellation with Electric Propulsion In Support of Tuscan Agriculture

MAE 142 Homework #5 Due Friday, March 13, 2009

Gravitation. Luis Anchordoqui

Lesson 9. Luis Anchordoqui. Physics 168. Tuesday, October 24, 17

X-ray polarimetry and new prospects in high-energy astrophysics

Probing planetary interiors by spacecraft orbital observations

P. Cipollini, H. Snaith - A short course on Altimetry. Altimetry 2 - Data processing (from satellite height to sea surface height)

Physics 105 Final Practice Exam

Thermo-Elastic Distortion Modelling for Drag-Free Satellite Simulations. Draft

[ 1 + α (1 + r/λ) e -r/λ ]

Satellite attitude control using electrodynamic booms

Overview and Innerview of Black Holes

Dynamics of star clusters containing stellar mass black holes: 1. Introduction to Gravitational Waves

Astrodynamics (AERO0024)

PC 1141 : AY 2012 /13

Information on internal structure from shape, gravity field and rotation

ASTRIUM. Interplanetary Path Early Design Tools at ASTRIUM Space Transportation. Nathalie DELATTRE ASTRIUM Space Transportation.

LISA Pathfinder Coldgas Thrusters

The Torque Rudder: A Novel Semi-Passive Actuator for Small Spacecraft Attitude Control

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY Department of Physics Physics 8.01T Fall Term 2004

Asteroid Impact Mission AIM Workshop. Electric Propulsion for Attitude & Orbit Control

Research Article Variation of the Equator due to a Highly Inclined and Eccentric Disturber

Chapter 13. Gravitation

Transcription:

Workshop Galileo Galilei (GG) and GGG lab prototype: state of the art and new possibilities Template reference : 100181670S-EN GG error budget from the end-to-end simulator developed at TAS-I Giuseppe Catastini ThalesAlenia Space Italia, Torino GG workshop, Pisa / S.Piero a Grado All rights reserved, 2/26/2010, Thales Alenia Space

GG: the signal Page 2 The Signal (1) Scientific objective: η = 10-17 Signal optimization: choice of the test masses materials Signal optimization: choice of the orbit TMs differential acceleration due to EP violation: a EP = g(h) 10-17 m/s 2 Orbit altitude h as low as possible to maximise g(h), but h as high as possible to match air drag reference acceleration (depending on s/c A/M ext and solar activity during flight) 2 10-7 m/s 2 a NG xy GG Phase A2 study spacecraft final configuration: m s/c = 346.21 kg (launch mass, no margin) A s/c = 2.9 m 2 h = 630 km ( GPB!) g(h) = 8.116 m/s 2

GG: the signal Page 3 The Signal (2) Signal optimization: equatorial orbit Inclination depends on the launch site latitude, Kourou I 5 Eccentricity is not zero: e 0.01 Period of longitude variation of ascending node T asc_node 48 days Spin axis initially aligned with the orbit angular velocity within δi 0 1 The angle between the spin axis and the orbit angular velocity changes also due to the gravity gradient and magnetic torque acting on the satellite: δi =δi 0 (launch) + δi orbit + δi Torques 15-20 after about 1-2 years But: angle is changing very slowly, each fundamental experiment is carried out with constant driving signal

GG: the signal Page 4 The Signal (3) Performance check vs. simulated results Signal to Noise Ratio The science measurement is: x EP = a EP (T diff ) 2 /(4 π 2 ) T diff according to the simulator, T diff =500 s Science measurements are affected by systematic errors d x (t) and by stochastic errors n~ (t) measurement x ' EP (t) = x (t) + d (t) n~ (t) Same allocation (50%) for deterministic and stochastic errors Error allocation such that SNR 2 EP x + EP violation signal, x EP 0.5 10-12 m The deterministic effects with the EP signature must be reduced as much as possible: spin modulation takes away a lot of disturbances due to the spacecraft (DC effects in the Body Fixed reference frame) The stochastic effects define T int : thermal noise (worst case) Tint 1 week Mission duration 2 years Number of Tint 100 (rich statistics!) x

GG: drag forces Page 5 Non Gravitational Forces Acting on the Spacecraft (1) Non-gravitational forces are sensed as inertial acceleration from test masses ideally pure common mode, but: test masses mechanical suspension is not ideal a fraction χ CMRRxy of common mode acceleration is sensed as differential one ext a NG xy Orbit altitude h = 630 km in order to have 2 10-7 m/s 2 The Drag Free Control partially compensates the non-gravitational ext forces (@ orbit frequency in IRF) a CMxy = χ DFCxy a NG xy reduced mechanical balance requirement for the capacitance bridge reduced inertial acceleration acting on PGB, i.e. smaller displacement reduced test masses common mode acceleration, i.e. smaller displacement

GG: drag forces Page 6 Non Gravitational Forces Acting on the Spacecraft (2) Main non-gravitational force component along Y LVLH difference wrt EP signal, SNR = 2 ext a NG xy χ DFCxy χ CMRRxy a EP 1/SNR 90 phase χ CMRRxy 10-5 χ DFCxy 2 10-5 Maximum inertial acceleration sensed from PGB a CMxy = 4 10-12 m/s 2 PGB XY plane oscillation period T PGBxy ~ 381.24 s displacement << capacitance gap, whirl period is slow TM XY plane common mode period T CM = 104.17 s TM displacement << capacitance gap, whirl period is slow Mechanical balance of capacitance bridge χ bridge (T CM = 104 s) = 6 10-4 a-b << 3 µm over a gap a 5 mm

GG: drag forces Page 7 Non Gravitational Forces Acting on the Spacecraft (in IRF) (3) Non-gravitational acceleration time series (frozen values for m s/c and A s/c ) Date: 2013 July 12 th GG altitude h = 630 km Atmospheric model: MSIS 86 (above 120 km MSIS 86 = MSIS2000) Solar radiation included (F10=180, F10B=160, Geomagnetic Index = 8)

GG: drag forces Page 8 Non Gravitational Forces Acting on the Spacecraft (in LVLH) (4) Main component along track (LVLH Y ) Radial NG X acceleration Along track NG Y acceleration

GG: drag forces Page 9 Non Gravitational Forces Acting on the Spacecraft (5) Main non-gravitational acceleration component along Y LVLH 90 phase difference wrt EP signal, but SNR = 2 The EP violation signal is always along X in the LVLH Frame and almost constant during an elementary science experiment. mean value of a LVLHx Like EP violation!! mean value of a LVLHy Like EP violation, but 90 out of phase!!

GG: drag forces Page 10 Non Gravitational Forces Acting on the Spacecraft (6) Main non-gravitational acceleration after DFC compensation and suspension rejection CMRR- fulfills the requirement dy ang =0.217 pm dx ang =0.011 pm

GG: gravitational forces Page 11 The Gravitational Forces TM higher mass moment coupling with Earth monopole TM quadrupole mass moment couples with Earth monopole Inner TM δj i /J i = -0.0116 Outer TM δj o /J o = -0.0065 Test masses quadrupole are both small and of the same order Differential acceleration = 9.3 10-18 m/s 2 0.1 a EP Tidal effects (displacements on XY plane) Gravity gradient T jj magnitude corresponding to the GG local gravity: T jj (h GG ) = 3 10-6 m/s 2 /m T jk (h GG ) = 3 10-7 m/s 2 /m (worst case) Signature difference with respect to EP signal During science measurement the TM whirl radius r w must not affect the EP signal detection (through T jj ): r w 5 10-10 m

GG: error budget Page 12 GG Error Budget (according to simulator parameters) (1) Amplitude Spectrum of EP signal and disturbing effects (affecting measurements in the XY plane) as observed in the IRF Signal and most effective deterministic disturbances (smallest frequency separation) Most effecting disturbances at ν EP, well below the signal One week duration of the elementary experiment ensures good frequency separation for all the competing lines, also the first one at 2 ν EP

GG: error budget GG Error Budget (2) Detailed error budget for the first lines of deterministic forces affecting GG. Page 13

GG: error budget Page 14 GG Error Budget (3) Acceleration (transverse plane) Frequency in IRF Differential Differential Frequency in BF (Hz) Phase due to: (Hz) acceleration (m/s 2 ) displacement (pm) EP signal νorb νs (wrt Earth) X LVLH 8.116 10-17 0.51 External non gravitational forces νorb νs Mainly along Y LVLH 1.7 10-7 - External non gravitational forces after DFC compensation and νorb νs Mainly along Y LVLH 3.4 10-17 0.22 CMRR Earth coupling with TMs quadrupole moments ν orb ν S X LVLH 9 10-18 0.06 Radiometric effect along Z coupled with Earth tide 2 νorb νs ± νorb X LVLH 6.3 10-16 4.0 Emitted radiation along Z coupled to Earth tide 2 νorb νs ± νorb X LVLH 4 10-17 0.11 Tide coupled to non grav. acceleration along Z 2 νorb νs ± νorb X LVLH 1.4 10-17 0.09 TM1 inner magnetic dipole coupled to B magnetized TM2 2 νorb νs ± νorb X LVLH 1 10-18 8 10-3 TMs inner magnetic dipoles coupled to B 2 νorb νs ± νorb X LVLH 6 10-21 4 10-5 TM1 and TM2 with B induced magnetization couple 4 νorb νs ± 3 νorb X LVLH 8 10-23 5 10-7 TM1 with B induced magnetization couples with B 4 νorb νs ± 3 νorb X LVLH 8 10-24 5 10-8 Whirl motion coupled to Earth tide νs ±νw ν w, ν w ± 2 ν orb (νorb << νw) X LVLH 6.9 10-14 440 Frequencies far from Higher frequencies ν S X LVLH

GG: error budget Page 15 GG Error Budget (4) Variation of line @ 2ν EP due to the change of the angle in between spin axis and orbit angular rate Variation very slow in time (signal and line are almost constant during one week) 11 pm can be distinguished very well with one week of continuous data Time elapsed: 2 years or more Error budget is here

GG: error budget Page 16 GG Error Budget (5) Thermal noise due to TMs spring dissipation (Q TM = 20000) directly affects the science measurement (it is the main stochastic disturbance): 4K BT DM SD(n ~ ω TM th) = T int 1 week m Q TM TM Overall dx LVLH takes into account deterministic and stochastic contribution ~ 14 2 SD( n ) = 3.2 10 m/s / Hz TM th Overall dx LVLH SD ( ~ n 2 2 2 TM th = (dx LVLH) + (dylvlh) + 4 Tint ωdm ) T int : elementary experiment duration

GG: Simulated Performance Page 17 Simulator for GG spinning @1 Hz (1) Spacecraft shell, PGB, TMi, TMo, dummy body for not solving the orbit motion in a rapidly spinning reference frame: 27 DoFs Gravity and gravity gradient are on Current mass/inertia properties for all bodies (included proof masses quadrupole moment) Orbit altitude h = 630 km to match the reference non gravitational acceleration 2 10-7 m/s 2 Stiffness are reproducing PGB modes and common and differential proof masses modes in the XY plane and along Z according to the mission requirements Mechanical quality factor is lowered for TMs in order to amplify whirl motion Environment fully modeled η = 10-17 for all the science simulations (science target) Quadruple precision simulations are carried out in order to predict science performance of the mission

GG: Simulated Performance Page 18 Simulator for GG spinning @1 Hz (2) DFC, AOCS and PGB-s/c control in open loop PGB and TMs whirl control in closed loop s/c to LVLH hinge attitude angle x time series s/c to LVLH hinge attitude angle z time series is ωt s/c to LVLH hinge attitude angle y time series

GG: Simulated Performance Simulator for GG spinning @1 Hz (3) TM4-PGB hinge attitude angle x time series Page 19 PGB-s/c hinge attitude angle x time series TM3-PGB hinge attitude angle x time series TM3-TM4 differential angle z time series

GG: Simulated Performance Page 20 Simulator for GG spinning @1 Hz (4) 1 Hz is better for the simulator CPU time is reduced by a factor 2 Changing spin frequency modifies dynamics, changing η modifies F EP strength but FEP Predicted value: x LVLH = 2 GM mtm ωdm 3 (R + h) Measured value: x LVLH = 5.25498 10-13 m!! Time series of the TMs differential displacement in the LVLH Reference Frame 3 = 5.25501 10 13 m Polar plot of the TMs differential displacement in the LVLH Reference Frame After a transient the TMs relative position has almost null mean value along Y LVLH and 0.525 pm mean value along X LVLH