White Papers
Rapid Space Architecture Development and Analysis Using an Integrated Toolset
Inki Min, Eric Mahr, Ryan Vaughan, Ivon Kelloggh
December 23, 2003
Abstract
Concurrent Engineering Methodologies (CEMs) have become standard practice for conceptual spacecraft design. These methodologies have been implemented in spacecraft design tools for use by single users as well as for multiple analysts linked over a network performing more complex or broader analyses. Along with the development of these tools, there has also been an increasing need to analyze future space system options at a broader, architectural level. The trade space for such an analysis may include constellation design (altitude, inclination, number), payload sizing, and spacecraft bus configuration. The goal is to be able to span a wide trade space while maintaining analytical fidelity, and arrive at an integrated solution in a short amount of time. This need was recently highlighted during Air Force Space Command’s Operationally Responsive Spacelift (ORS) Analysis of Alternatives (AoA) study, in which several different space architectures had to be generated to support a rather compressed study schedule. This paper will describe the development and utilization of the Space Architecture Development and Analysis Tool (SADAT) which allowed rapid generation of hundreds of system options and the finalselection of 30 different space systems to be included as part of the study. The extension of this tool to incorporate more models, such as launch vehicle sizing and cost estimation, extending automation and optimization, and its use as pre-study tool for The Aerospace Corporation’s Concept Design Center (CDC) will also be discussed.
Introduction
Recently, the Air Force completed the Operationally Responsive Spacelift (ORS) Analysis of Alternatives (AoA) study. The main purpose of this study was to investigate viable responsive spacelift and space system options for the 2017 to 2036 timeframe. A significant amount of effort during this study was devoted to developing space constellation concepts that provided the mission capabilities outlined in a military utility analysis (MUA) performed by the AFSPC/XPY organization. In order to select a spacelift architecture that was viable and robust with respect to the MUA, it was necessary to generate a large set of payload, spacecraft and ground support architectures that represented a wide spectrum of potential future space operational scenarios. These architectures had to be generated quickly but containing enough detail to accurately represent a future space system. In addition, the designs were expected to undergo several changes throughout the course of the study. There was a feedback loop with the military utility analysis driving the space architecture designs, and the refinement of the requirements was also likely to cause several iterations as our understanding of the problem evolved. This required flexibility in the modeling approach and implementation. Several system options were considered, including the trade between the individual spacecraft design life versus total number of spacecraft over the life cycle.
Download The Complete Paper
(A one-time registration will be requested)
