Special Characteristics of Concurrent Engineering Studies dealing with Cubesat missions and their impact on the CE process

Kurzfassung

The continuously growing commercial and scientific relevance of nanosatellite missions, especially Cubesats, is clearly discernible in the space community. Due to this, it is important to analyse the special characteristics and demands of early phase studies for such missions to consider them in the Concurrent Engineering Facility (CEF), DLR Bremen’s system analysis laboratory. Within such studies, various differences have been observed which make it necessary to adapt the established CE process for study preparation, conduction and post-processing to meet the specific demands of these well-constrained systems, and thereby create the optimal study results together with the design team. On the design level, the major differences can mainly be traced to two closely connected peculiarities of CubeSat design. First, the targeted system is strictly limited in size, mass and form factor by the associated standard. Because of this, and the growing acceptance of Cubesats, a wide set of highly integrated COTS components and complete subsystems exists on the market with detailed datasheets, and even 3D models freely available on the internet. Secondly, this pool of applicable hardware increases the level of detail the study team has to deal with in a CE study, sometimes even down to connector and harness layout. In a nutshell, the process of CE studies has to be adapted for these small systems towards a later-phase like level of detail, while preserving the creative and efficient way of solution finding traditionally associated with the CE process, including known benefits such as time and cost savings, and design quality improvement. Based on conducted CE studies for CubeSat missions, this paper points to some of the most noticeable and important lessons learnt and derives suggestions for possible process adaptations. One of a CE study’s team leader’s main tasks is to make sure the design process is followed in the most efficient way possible. However, different activities or designs require at times a different approach and ad hoc modifications to the traditional CE process. Starting with the findings from the Cubesat experience, it becomes more and more obvious that the proven process and work approach has to be adapted not only depending on the type of activity conducted in the CEF but also on the design team’s background and composition. To exemplify this, the differences for “regular” and CubeSat studies, plus less strictly defined moderated workshops, are analysed in this paper with a special focus on the most promising particular respective communication and guidance styles of the team leaders, as experienced in the CEF.