29.12.2012 Views

4 Final Report - Emits - ESA

4 Final Report - Emits - ESA

4 Final Report - Emits - ESA

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

4 <strong>Final</strong><br />

<strong>Report</strong><br />

As secondary trade-off, the same architecture can be analysed by using HEMPT thrusters with 80 mN<br />

nominal thrust and an Isp of 3000 s.<br />

Following table summarises the results for mass and power<br />

Table 4.5-15: EPS Option 2 Mass Budgets for considered thruster options (figures in kg)<br />

SPT-100 80 mN HEMPT<br />

TOTAL EPS DRY MASS 92.8 103.2<br />

Total Propellant Load 83.0 41.1<br />

TOTAL EPS BOL MASS 175.8 144.3<br />

Table 4.5-16: EPS Option 2 Power Budgets for considered thruster options (figures in W)<br />

SPT-100 80 mN HEMPT<br />

Main Thruster(s) Assembly 2404 5553<br />

PCU & Ancillary 227 464<br />

Total 2632 6017<br />

Total (Including Margins) 2895 6619<br />

Although the system based on HEMPT technology is about 20% lighter, it needs twice the power to be<br />

run. Decreasing power to match the system based on SPT-100 technology could be achieved by:<br />

• either having a 30 mN HEMPT, but thrust times would increase around the nodes,<br />

decreasing the efficiency of firing and thus increasing the quantity of propellant to be used<br />

• or setting the HEMPT at a lower Isp, but being a more massive thruster of SPT for the same<br />

combination of Thrust and Isp, this would not be an option to be considered<br />

The final trade-off solution will depend on spacecraft level trade-off analysis.<br />

EPS for Option 3<br />

The EPS for Option 3 is based on the general architecture envisaged for carrying on AOCS<br />

simulations:<br />

• 8 Main (Attitude) Manoeuvre Thrusters (MMTs) of 30 mN each, Isp of 3000 s;<br />

• 12 Fine Pointing Thruster (FPT) providing down to 0.1 mN of thrust each<br />

The rest of the system has been completed as per Option 3 of Table 4.5-14.<br />

Two MMT options have been considered, namely HEMPT and GIT, while smaller GIT (Isp of 3000 s)<br />

and FEEP (Isp of 6000 s) have been considered as FPT, making four possible combinations for<br />

Option 3. There is little difference in propellant mass (between 574 and 578 kg); the overall EP mass<br />

and power budget are shown in Table 4.5-17and Table 4.5-18, respectively..<br />

Doc. No: GOC-ASG-RP-002 Page 4-71<br />

Issue: 2<br />

Date: 13.05.2009 Astrium GmbH

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!