THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A SIMULATION BASED CONCURRENT DESIGN TOOL FOR SPACE SYSTEMS APPLICATIONS

Niccolo Cymbalist (a), Marc-Andr Lauriault (b), Chah Adourian (supervisor) (c)
(a)Concordia University, Montreal QC niccolo.cymbalist@hotmail.com (514) 561-3886 (b)Universit de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC Marc.Andre.Lauriault@USherbrooke.ca (514) 582-4961 (c)Canadian Space Agency, Saint-Hubert, QC chahe.adourian@asc-csa.gc.ca (450) 926-4668

Abstract Concurrent design has been successfully implemented in various space agencies, notably at the European Space Agency, and is currently being considered for adoption at the Canadian Space Agency. We will introduce some of the tools and procedures being developed. These include the shared Excel spreadsheets to accept the critical design parameters from each specialist involved in the design session, the modeling and simulation software used to verify the design, and the functions to interface between the spreadsheets and modeling software. The modeling software is being developed in Modelica/Dymola while the interfacing functions are in Visual Basic and C. We will finally outline future avenues of development.

1. Introduction Integrated Concurrent Engineering (ICE), or concurrent design, is a method of designing a product which stresses the use of a multidisciplinary team of experts and clients to develop the product by working concurrently, usually in the same physical location [3]. The design exercise is conducted over a variable number of short, intense design sessions. The use of ICE in the aerospace sector, more specifically in government space agencies and affiliated laboratories, has promoted a large increase in the quality and number of the pre-phase A design studies (proposals). The cost of producing proposals has seen a corresponding decrease [1,2]. ICE was fully introduced to the aerospace sector in 1994, with the formation of the Product Design Center (PDC) supporting Team-X at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory at Caltech, as a result of the cheaper, faster, better paradigm introduced at NASA at the time [1]. It has since proliferated throughout private industry and government space agencies, notably the Concurrent Design Facility (CDF) at ESA [3,4]. One of the principal factors facilitating the implementation of successful ICE facilities in recent years has been the dramatic improvement in IT tools and infrastructure allowing for the efficient production and exchange of information which is critical in the fast-paced and low latency concurrent engineering environment [1,5]. In this paper we will illustrate a proof of concept implementation of an ICE enabling software tool, and the place it occupies in the concurrent engineering process. The tool and procedures we present are valid !

for both a fixed location concurrent design facility and a temporary concurrent design facility which can quickly be set up in a conference room or classroom, with the only requirements being a shared drive and projection screen. Ideally, the latter option will make the best of concurrent design practices without full commitment to a traditional full concurrent design facility, which may be unnecessary for smaller applications. 2. The Software The key to making this software useful as opposed to cumbersome is to attain the ideal balance between ease of use and fidelity. The way the spacecraft model is assembled must be intuitive and simple while the parameters describing the components or subsystems must be to the appropriate level of detail. Too much detail and the model becomes cumbersome. Too little and the fidelity becomes an issue. The software is divided into 3 general parts; the modeling and simulation software, the design spreadsheets which are shared by the individual experts, and the link between the two. 2.1 Simulation software The modeling and simulation software basically consists of an extensive library of spacecraft components categorized by Figure 1, assembled spacecraft model subsystem, in a modular drag and drop simulation environment (see figure 1). Each component is modeled closely after the physical component and can be assigned a size, orientation, mass, power generation/consumption characteristics, and other more specific parameters such as rate of data generation, solar cell technology and so on. These are assembled into a spacecraft of any configuration and placed into a high fidelity model of the space environment which includes an accurate orbit propagator, magnetic fields, eclipses and planet ephemerides. The modeling language of choice for this application is Modelica in a Dymola environment. It is easy to use, inexpensive, robust and ideally suited to our needs. It easily combines models of dynamic physical systems (for the orbit propagation and attitude control) with power consumption/generation, data flow and command network modeling. It also has a well developed visualization component, which allows the designers to visualize and explore the layout of the spacecraft in 3D (see figure 2).

Figure 2, visualization of small spacecraft

The model accepts a command list which is used to approximate the operating profile for a more accurate evaluation of the design. For example, if the spacecraft is required to change its attitude frequently and "

quickly, it will need suitable attitude control and power subsystem models, and a design capacity shortage will show in the simulation results. Some of the individual components of the software are outlined in further detail in [6]. 2.2 Design spreadsheets Excel spreadsheets currently act as a common interface between the subsystem experts and the simulation software. Each sheet of the workbook contains the system level parameters which define one aspect of the design, whether it be a subsystem of the spacecraft or information regarding the orbit and ground station. As such, each individual sheet is the responsibility of the appropriate expert, and is populated using the specialized tools and knowledge which each expert brings to the team. A more advanced custom interface is currently being developed. 2.3 Link In order to upload the contents of the spreadsheet to the spacecraft models, each system expert must press a send button which is located on each sheet of the workbook. This takes all the information in the Excel sheet and converts it into a suitable file in the Modelica language, which may then be used by the spacecraft models. This conversion is done using Excel VBA code. Once the files are generated, the simulation expert runs the simulation over an agreed number of orbits or time duration, using the parameters in the generated Modelica files. The way the software is set up gives a lot of latitude to the ICE team. The simulation can be run with the uploaded Excel parameters, with parameters defined in the simulation software itself, or with a combination of the two. This level of flexibility in the simulation software is in accordance with the overall effort to maximize the flexibility in the use of this tool, as will be illustrated in the next section. 3. The Process. 3.1 Physical setup While the software in question is not limited to one type of ICE process, we will illustrate how it may be used in a small ad-hoc ICE facility with limited number of specialists, a team leader and a simulation specialist. This type of facility can be set up anywhere that has a projection screen and network access to a shared drive, in this case a small conference room (see figure 3).

Figure 3, small ICE facility layout #

3.2 Procedure As is the case with established concurrent engineering facilities, the design session should last not more than 3 hours, and requires a certain amount of preparation [2,3]. Before the session the simulation specialist and team leader will assemble a template spacecraft with default or dummy parameters, which acts as a starting point for the iterative design process. Each subsystem of the assembled spacecraft is linked to the spreadsheet section belonging to the appropriate specialist, so that each specialist is directly responsible for his part of the spacecraft. Also, the orbit and operating profile (list of commands the spacecraft must perform) is in the hands of the appropriate specialist. Once the design session proper gets underway, each specialist will draw on their own experience and specialized tools to parameterize his/her section of the spacecraft and will enter the parameters to their spreadsheet, working with the rest of the team in a concurrent fashion to obtain a well integrated design. At consensual or set intervals the design is momentarily frozen, the model is updated with the design parameters from each specialist and the model spacecraft is simulated over a certain number of orbits at the given operating Figure 4, ICE process profile. The results are displayed for the team to examine and inconsistencies between subsystem performances are uncovered. For example, it may result that the power system is over/under designed, or the telecom system is over/under designed for the given rate of data generation. In this case the design team will adjust the design and iterate again, until the team is satisfied with the quality of the design (see figure 4). 4. Conclusion We have implemented a proof of concept software tool to be used for concurrent design, and a process which will maximize the benefits drawn from the software. Our implementation offers the advantages of being easy to use and accurate, and may be used in a small ad-hoc concurrent design facility, for example a conference room. As such it also has the potential of being used in a university environment. Ongoing work includes full validation of the spacecraft models and validation of the process by using the process and software in the conceptual design of a small spacecraft. The Excel based interface will be substituted by a more effective Eclipse generated application.

$

REFERENCES [1] Smith, J. L. !Concurrent Engineering in the Jet Propulsion Laboratory Project Design Center, SAE Transactions, 1998, VOL 107; NUMBER 1, pages 1106-1118 [2] Wall, S. D., "Use of Concurrent Engineering in Space Mission Design". EuSec2000 Proceedings, September 2000 [3] M.Bandecchi, S.Melton, F.Ongaro,Concurrent Engineering Applied to Space Mission Assessment and Design, ESA Bulletin 99,1999 [4] Shishko, R, The Proliferation of PDC-Type Environments in Industry and Universities, Proceedings of the 2nd EUSEC, Munich, 2000. [5] Chachere, John, Kunz, J., and Levitt, R., Observation, Theory, and Simulation of Integrated Concurrent Engineering: Grounded Theoretical Factors that Virtual Design and Construction Enable Radical Project Acceleration, CIFE WP 87, 2004 [6] Cymbalist, N.,Lauriault, M. A, Adourian, C.,Modelica Library for Improved Spacecraft Resource Budgeting, Proceedings 7th Modelica Conference, 2009