ai-aerospace/ams_data_full_2000-2020 huggingface dataset:
ix 12:30  SESSION II – BEARINGS & TRIBOLOGY   Michael Dube, Session Chair NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 

• Launch Load Resistant Spacecraft Mechanism Bearings Made From NiTi Superelastic  Intermetallic Materials  Christopher DellaCorte, NASA Glenn Research C enter, Cleveland, OH; Lewis E. Moore III, NASA  Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL 

• Reducing Wear of Steel Rolling Agai nst Ti6Al4V Operating in Vacuum  Timothy Krantz, NASA Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, OH 

• Wear Potential due to Low EHD Films during elevat ed Temperatures  Alan Leveille, consultant, Las Vegas, NV; Peter Wa rd, The Aerospace Cor poration, El Segundo,  CA 

• Observations of Spacecraft Bearing Lubricant  Redistribution Based on Thermal Conductance  Measurements  Yoshimi Takeuchi, Peter Frantz & Michael Hilton,  The Aerospace Corpor ation, El Segundo, CA 

• A Study on the Effects of Ball Defects on the Fatigue Li fe in Hybrid Bearings  Ching-Yao Tang, Chad Foerster, Michael O’Brien, Br ian Hardy, Vinay Goyal, Benjamin Nelson,  Ernest Robinson, Peter Ward & Michael Hilton,  The Aerospace Corpor ation, El Segundo, CA   3:00  BREAK    3:15  SESSION III – POTPO URRI OF POSTERS   Don Sevilla, Session Chair  Jet Propulsion Laborator y, Pasadena, CA 

• Design and Test of a Deployable Radiation Cover for the REgolith X-ray Imaging Spectrometer  David Carte, Niraj Inam dar, Michael Jones & Rebecca Master son, Massachusetts Institute of  Technology, Cambridge, MA 

• The Development, Build and Enviro nmental Testing of a Bi-Axis Solar Array Drive Mechanism  Noemy Scheidegger, Mark Ferris & Nigel Phillips, Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd, Surrey, United  Kingdom 

• Advances in Current Rating Techni ques for Flexible Printed Circuits  Ron Hayes, Honeybee Robotics Spacecra ft Mechanisms Corp., Longmont, CO 

• Design of 3D-Printed Tit anium Compliant Mechanisms  Ezekial Merriam & Larry Howell, Brigham Y oung University, Provo, UT; Jonathan Jones, NASA  Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL 

• Magnetic Gearing versus Conven tional Gearing in Ac tuators for Aerospace Applications  Gregor Puchhammer, Karl Rejlek GmbH, Vienna, Austria 

• Flight Testing of a Low Cost De -orbiting Device fo r Small Satellites  Dana Turse, Phil Keller, Robert Taylor, Mark  Reavis & Mike Tupper, Composite Technology  Development, Inc., Lafayette, CO; Ch ris Koehler, Colorado Space Gr ant Consortium, University  of Colorado, Boulder, CO
x • Deployment Methods for an Origam i-Inspired Rigid-Foldable Array  Shannon Zirbel, Spencer Magleby & Larry Howell, Brigham Young Univers ity, Provo, UT; Brian  Trease, Jet Propulsion Labor atory, Pasadena, CA 

4:30  SESSION IV – MARS   Louise Jandura, Session Chair Jet Propulsion Laborator y, Pasadena, CA 

• ROPEC – ROtary PErcussive Coring Drill for Mars Sample Return  Philip Chu, Justin Spring & Kris Zacny, Honeybee Robotics Spacec raft Mechanisms Corp.,  Pasadena, CA 

• Aperture Valve for the Mars Organic Molecule Analyzer (MOMA)  Charles Engler, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD; John Canham, ATK Space  Systems, Beltsville, MD 

• Development of the RA NCOR Rotary-Percussive Coring System for Mars Sample Return  Gabe Paulsen, Stephen Indyk & Kris Zacny, H oneybee Robotics Spacecraft Mechanisms Corp.,  Pasadena, CA 

6:30 -10:00  RECEPTION  - Ballroom Foyer, Hyatt Regency  Invited component suppliers display current pr oducts and provide tutorials. Local high school  FIRST Robotics Team demonstrations, 4-H r obotics and aerospace disp lay and a light buffet  meal.    THURSDAY, 15 MAY 2014    7:00  Thursday Presenters' Breakfast – Pisces Room, 15 th floor, Hyatt Regency   8:00  SESSION V – HOLD IT OR LET IT GO   Wayne Jermstad, Session Chair NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX 

• Torque Tension Testing of Fasteners used for NASA Flight Hardware Applications  Ed Hemminger, Alan Posey & Michael Dube, NASA Goddard Space Fli ght Center, Greenbelt,  MD 

• Ultrasonic Method for Depl oyment Mechanism Bolt El ement Preload Verification  Eric Johnson, Yong Kim & Robert Pan, The Aerospace Corporati on, El Segundo, CA; Fred Morris  & Joel Mitchell, Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co., Littleton, CO 

• LARES Mission:  Separati on and Retention Subsystem  Alessandro Bursi, Pierluigi Camilli, Gianni Babini  & Elio Mangraviti, CGS S.p.A., Milan, Italy;  Claudio Piredda, consultant 

• Testing Orion’s Fair ing Separation System  Henry Martinez, Chris Cloutier,  Heber Lemmon, Daniel Rakes,  Joe Oldham & Keith Schlagel,  Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company, Littleton, CO 

10:00  BREAK
xi 10:15  SESSION VI – TESTING   Rob Mueller, Session Chair NASA Kennedy Space Center, FL 

• Design and Lessons Learned on the Development of a Pupil Select  Mechanism to be used in the  Testing and Calibration of the In tegrated Science Instrument M odule (ISIM) on the James Webb  Space Telescope (JWST)  Alissa Mitchell, Thomas Capon, Claef Hakun,  Paul Haney & Corina Koca, NASA Goddard Space  Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD; Jeffrey Guzek,  Stinger Ghaffarian Te chnologies, Greenbelt, MD 

• GMI Instrument Spin Balance Met hod, Optimization, Calibration and Test  Laoucet Ayari, Michael Kubitschek, Gunnar Asht on, Steve Johnston, Dave Debevec & David  Newell, Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp., Boulder, CO; Joseph Pe llicciotti, NASA Goddard  Space Flight Cent er, Greenbelt, MD 

• The European Robotic Arm: A High-Performance Mechanism Fi nally on its Way to Space  Henk Cruijssen, Marcel Ellenbr oek, M. Henderson, H. Petersen, P. Verzijden & M. Visser, Dutch  Space B. V., Leiden,  The Netherlands 

• GPM Solar Array Gravity Negated Deployment Testing  Jonathan Penn & Chris Johnson, Stinger Gha ffarian Technologies, Greenbelt, MD; Jesse Lewis,  Trevin Dear & Alphonso Stewart, NASA Goddar d Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD   12:15  LUNCH   Lunch for AMS Attendees in the Atri um and Harborview, Hyatt Regency 

1:00  SESSION VII – MOTORS and GEARS  Gérard Migliorero, Session Chair  ESA/ESTeC, Noordwijk, The Netherlands 

• A Recommended New Approach on Motorization Ratio Calculations of Stepper Motors  Ruben Nalbandian, Moog, Chatsworth, CA; Thierry  Blais, Astrium SAS, Toulouse, France;  Richard Horth, MDA Cor poration, Montreal, Canada 

• Magnetic Gearboxes for Ae rospace Applications  Jose Luis Perez-Diaz, Efren Diez-Jimenez, Ma rco Antonio Alvarez-Va lenzuela, Christian  Cristache & Ignacio Valiente- Blanco, Universidad Ca rlos III de Madrid, Leganés, Spain; Juan  Sanchez-García-Casarrubios, MAG SOAR S.L., Val demoro, Spain 

• Primer – Stepper Motor Nomenclature, De finition, Performanc e and Recommended Test  Methods  Scott Starin & Cutter Shea, Avior Control Technologies, Inc, Longmont, CO   2:30  BREAK    2:45  SESSION VIII – DEPLOYMENTS   Chris Lashley, Session Chair ATK Aerospace Systems, Beltsville, MD 

• Development Testing and Subsequent Failure I nvestigation of a Spri ng Strut Mechanism   Jared Dervan, NASA Marshall Space Flight C enter, Huntsville, AL; Brandan Robertson, NASA  Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX; Lucas Staab, NASA Glenn Research Center, Cleveland,  OH; Michael Culberson, Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co., Littleton, CO; Joseph Pellicciotti,  NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD
xii   • Development of a Tendon-Act uated Lightweight In-Space MANipulator (TALISMAN)  William Doggett, John Dorsey & Thomas Jones, NASA Langley Research Center, Langley, VA;  Bruce King, Northrop Gr umman, Hampton, VA 

• The Use, Evolution and Lessons Learnt of Deployable Static Solar Array Mechanisms  Mark Ferris & Andrew Haslehurst, Surrey Sa tellite Technology Ltd, Surrey, United Kingdom 

• Deployment Mechanism for Thermal Pointing System  Kraig Koski, Laboratory for Atmos pheric and Space Physics, Univers ity of Colorado, Boulder, CO 

4:45  INVITED PRESENTATION  Mechanisms on the JWST mission John Mather, Principal Investigator, Nobel Priz e Awardee, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center,  Greenbelt, MD   7:00-11:00 BANQUET – National Aquarium  Social Hour and Dinner, with 4-D movie presenta tions at 7:30 or 8:30 pm. Aquarium exhibits open  from 7:00 to 11:00 pm. 

FRIDAY, 16 MAY 2014   7:00  Friday Present ers’ Breakfast – Pisces Room, 15 th floor, Hyatt Regency 

8:00  SESSION IX – PUMPS & VALVES   Steven Bauman, Session Chair NASA Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, OH 

• ISS Ammonia Pump Failure, Recovery , and Lesson Learned - A Hydrodynamic Bearing  Perspective  Robert Bruckner, NASA Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, OH; Richard Manco II, Sierra Lobo  Inc., Cleveland, OH 

• Wide Range Vacuum Pumps for the SAM In strument on the MSL Curiosity Rover  Paul Sorensen & Robert Kline-Schoder, Creare Incorporated, Hanover, NH; Rodger Farley,  NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 

• SLM Produced Hermetically Sealed Isolation Valve  James Richard, NASA Marshall Spac e Flight Center, Huntsville, AL 

9:30 BREAK
xiii 9:45  SESSION X – SMALL SESSION ON SMALL SATELLITES  William Niemeyer, Session Chair NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 

• DRAGON - 8U Nanosatellite Orbital Deployer  Marcin Dobrowolski, Jerzy Grygorczuk, Bartosz Kę dziora, Marta Tokarz & Maciej Borys, Space  Research Centre of the Polish Ac ademy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland 

• Mechanism Design and Testing of a Self-Depl oying Structure Using Fl exible Composite Tape  Springs Joseph Footdale, LoadPath, Al buquerque, NM; Thomas W. Mur phey, High Strain Dynamics,  Phoenix, NY 

• Innovative Escapement-Based Mechanism for Micro-Antenna Boom Deployment   Marta Tokarz, Jerzy Grygorczuk & St anisław Jarzynka, The Space Re search Center of the Polish  Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland; Henryk Gut, GUTRONIC Henryk Gut, Warsaw, Poland 

• Design and Functional Vali dation of a Mechanism fo r Dual-Spinning CubeSats  Eric Peters, et al, Space Syst ems Laboratory, Massachusetts Ins titute of Technol ogy, Cambridge,  MA; William Blackwell, et al, Lincoln Laborator y, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,  Lexington, MA 

11:45  SPECIAL PRESENTATION   The Challenge of Mechanism D evelopment- Some Experiences and Guidelines to Avoid Trouble  Manfred Schmid, Airbus Defence & Space, Friedric hshafen, Germany  Manfred to provide insights into the mechani sm development process and highlighting issues  encountered and how to avoid or resolve them.   TECHNICAL SESSIONS CONCLUSION  Edward Boesiger, General Chairman, Lockheed Martin S pace Systems, Sunnyvale, CA  • Herzl Award Presentation 

1:00  LUNCH   Lunch for AMS Attendees in the Atri um and Harborview, Hyatt Regency 

1:45 – 4:30 TOUR      1:45  Buses depart hotel for NASA Goddard Space Flight Center      2:15-4:30 Facility tour    5:00  Buses return to hotel
xiv SYMPOSIUM ORGANIZING COMMITTEE 

Host Chairs  Claef F. Hakun, NASA GSFC  Minh Phan, NASA GSFC   Joseph P. Schepis, NASA GSFC 

General Chairman - Edward A. Boesiger, Lockheed Martin  Deputy Chairman - Stuart H. Loewenthal, Lockheed Martin 

Steven W. Bauman, NASA GRC  William Caldwell, NASA ARC  Jared Dervan, NASA MSFC  Barry J. Dunn, NASA LaRC  Carlton L. Foster, NASA MSFC (retired)  Christopher P. Hansen, NASA JSC  Louise Jandura, JPL   Wayne Jermstad, NASA JSC  Alan C. Littlefield, NASA KSC   Ronald E. Mancini, NASA ARC (retired)  Fred G. Martwick, NASA ARC  Donald H. McQueen, Jr., NASA MSFC  Gérard Migliorero, ESA/ESTeC  Robert P. Mueller, NASA KSC  Donald R. Sevilla, JPL   Mark F. Turner, NASA ARC  Robin Tutterow, NASA LaRC  James E. Wells, NASA LaRC
An Innovative Aperture Cover Mechanism used on SDO/EVE and MMS/SDP Stephen Steg*, William Vermeer*, Scott Tucker* and Heather Passe*  Abstract This paper describes an aperture cover mechanism that was successfully flown in four locations on  SDO/EVE, and is awaiting launch in sixteen locations on MMS. This design uses a paraffin actuator and a  latch that secures the cover closed and removes the actuator from the load path. This latch allows the  assembly to operate both as a light weight contamination cover (SDO/EVE), and also as a high-strength  sensor restraint mechanism (MMS/SDP). The paper provides design/analysis/test information about the  mechanism. Introduction The Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) EUV Variability Experiment (EVE) was launched in February  2010, and contains four optical channels, each protected with this cover mechanism. EVE has a cooled  (-120/g113C) detector, grazing incidence optics, 35-micron entrance slits, and operates in the extreme ultraviolet. Together, these features make this instrument extremely sensitive to particulate and volatile  contamination. The function of this mechanism is to keep the instrument free from contamination during  ground assembly and test through launch and initial spacecraft outgassing. The Magnetospheric Multiscale Mission (MMS) is a four spacecraft constellation. The Fields Investigation  incorporates several instruments, including the Spin Plane Double Probe (SDP). The SDP instrument utilizes this same aperture cover mechanism; however, it is modified to restrain a preloaded sensor  element. Both the SDO/EVE and MMS/SDP implementations of this mechanism are nearly identical.SDO/EVE was designed / fabricated / tested several years before MMS/SDP, but many of the design features are carried forward into the MMS/SDP implementation. Mechanism Requirements    /g120Dust / contamination seal (SDO/EVE) /g120Sensor restraint  (MMS/SDP) /g120One time on-orbit release – open only /g120Manual close /g120<50 lifetime releases, pre-launch /g120Design Life 500 cycles, limited by actuator /g120Cover opens 120 degrees or more /g1201 G operation /g120Force Margin 4x on passive deployment springs /g120Redundant mechanical and electrical device /g120No metal to metal contact  /g120 A-thermalize design - Thermal gradient across hinge line /g120Position sensors to power off actuator /g120Window for instrument stimulus (SDO/EVE) /g120>2 Hz deployed frequency /g120Temp range –30 to +40 /g113C, prior to actuation. /g120Survive the radiation environment of geosynchronous orbit (SDO/EVE) *Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics, University of Colorado, Boulder CO /g51/g85/g82/g70/g72/g72/g71/g76/g81/g74/g86/g3/g82/g73/g3/g87/g75/g72/g3/g23/g21/g81/g71/g3/g36/g72/g85/g82/g86/g83/g68/g70/g72/g3/g48/g72/g70/g75/g68/g81/g76/g86/g80/g86/g3/g54/g92/g80/g83/g82/g86/g76/g88/g80/g15/g3/g49/g36/g54/g36/g3/g42/g82/g71/g71/g68/g85 /g71/g3/g54/g83/g68/g70/g72/g3/g41/g79/g76/g74/g75/g87/g3/g38/g72/g81/g87/g72/g85/g15/g3/g48/g68/g92/g3/g20/g23/g16/g20/g25/g15/g3/g21/g19/g20/g23/g3 1
Mechanism Mechanical Design A redundant torsion spring hinge line with redundant Vespel bushing surfaces is utilized. A unique latch  restrains the mechanism for launch. A High Output Paraffin (HOP) actuator is configured in such a way that it expands, releases the latch, and provides a positive “kick-off” force on the cover to ensure that  deployment motion is initiated. This kickoff force overcomes possible stiction at the cover interface. Ground testing is eased by removing the actuator and measuring the force required to release the latch.When the cover opens, the end of travel catch securely stops the motion. Hinge CoverFilter Wheel  Mechanism Baffle Aperture Cover  Mechanism B Figure 1.  SDO/EVE Aperture assembly with four aperture cover mechanisms  Two limit switches sense cover motion and power off the HOP. The MMS/SDP implementation removed  the limit switch from the redundant heater side, providing an innovative way to protect against the risk of limit switch failure, while still utilizing the limit switch to protect the integrity of the HOP before launch. Figure 1 shows the location of the Aperture Cover Mechanism with respect to the EVE instrument. For  this implementation, the primary function of the mechanism is to maintain cleanliness against particulate and volatile contamination. Figure 2 shows the implementation for MMS/SDP. In addition to providing cleanliness, this mechanism  functions to restrain the sensor element during launch. A large preload is applied to the sensor element,  which is directly reacted by the cover and subsequently the catch. The over center latch is ideal because of its large load carrying capability as well as its low release force. Late in the MMS/SDP program, the  sensor preload was significantly increased to mitigate an issue with vibration at the interface between the sensor-sphere and the restraint cover. This existing design handled the increased loading. 2
Figure 3 shows the mechanism deployment sequence and details of the restraint latch. During launch, the  latch hook secures the cover. This load is directly carried by the latch into the latch pivot. The loading  from the cover (and the pre-loaded sensor element for MMS/SDP) is never applied to the actuator. This  arrangement allows the actuator to be physically removed during ground testing to measure how much force is actually required to release the cover and establish a definitive actuator force margin. The latch  rollers, latch pivot, and leaf spring bushings are all low friction Vespel SP3. The roller directly adjacent to the actuator is brass which dissipates any electrical charging due to the high radiation GEO environment.The latch hook is contoured which allows the kickoff roller to apply a direct force to the cover in the event  that the cover is stuck. The over-center contour at the “latch roller / latch hook” interface prevents  inadvertent release during launch. The latch hook has a ramp which allows the cover to be manually reset, simply by pushing the cover closed and visually observing the latch position. When the cover is latched for launch, one of two limit switches is depressed. After launch, the cover is opened by powering the HOP. Initially it expands slightly as can be seen in Figure 3: “Released”. At this  point, the redundant torsion springs are free to open the cover. However, the HOP is still powered, so its shaft will continue to axially deploy. In the event that the door is stuck, the HOP will expand until a roller is  pushed firmly against the cover with 156 N (35 lb) of force. At the fully deployed position, the “coverclosed switch” is released, and the “cover open” switch is engaged. Either of these events will nominally power off the HOP. 3
Table 1. Unique design features a nd benefits of this mechanism Feature Benefit Release latch, then “kick-off” Ensures motion will start, particularly at the beginning of travel. 156N force available from HOP ensures large force margin of safety. Actuator out of launch load pathNo side load on pin puller. Design is insensitive to increased pre-load  on cover Manually open/close Useful feature for ground testing End of travel catch Securely holds cover in open position Redundant springs, bushing surfaces, HOP heatersHigher reliability Removable actuator Allowed verification of force margin In the event of a switch failure, the microprocessor can ignore the switches in the SDO/EVE  implementation. The MMS/SDP implementation does not use switches on the redundant side, thus  eliminating the risk of a limit switch anomaly preventing HOP actuation. 4
The MMS/SDP mechanism opens 180 degrees. The resultant spring torque at full open is sufficient to  hold the cover against its open stop without an end-of-travel catch. For SDO/EVE, the cover opens   240 degrees and the spring torque at the fully opened position is small. Initial prototypes of the  mechanism revealed 10-20 degrees of backlash of the cover when at its open position. To remedy this,stiffer torsion springs were used and a catch was added to hold the cover securely in the open position.Although this freedom of motion would not negatively affect the instrument, it would prevent the “cover open” switch from actuating reliably.  Initially, the catch was designed as a thin beryllium copper sheet metal component, as shown in Figure 4. After several actuations, it was discovered that the bounce-back of the door was loading the end of the  sheet metal catch in compression, causing it to buckle and yield. The catch was redesigned out of a machined aluminum component, pivoting on a vespel bushing, and preloaded with a small torsion spring (Figure 4 and 5)  Details of the final end-of-travel catch are shown in Figure 5. Only after the cover has opened  180 degrees, and is completely outside the instrument’s glint free FOV, does the catch begin to engage  with the cover. The location at the hinge line was selected to provide ready access to un-latch the catch,  such that the cover could be manually closed without any disassembly or tools. Catch Anomaly:   During mechanism run-in testing, the catch always secured all four covers in the open  position, reliably. However, upon close inspection it was found that two of the four mechanisms had  catches that did not in fact capture the cover as it was initially deployed, but rather allowed these covers to bounce back about 45 degrees, then return to the catch, at which point they were securely captured.Many manual deployments were completed as this phenomenon was investigated. It appeared that slight variations in the end-of-travel springs and limit switch springs caused the catch to not engage on the first cover impact, but always engage on the second cover impact. This is considered acceptable because:  1) the catch always secures the cover in its open position, 2) the limit switches are redundant, and 3) a failure of the catch wound not prevent the cover from properly opening. 5
Close attention was paid to the details of the hinge line, as shown in Figure 6. All moving surfaces were  Vespel SP3, which contains MoS 2dry lubricant. The bushings were arranged such that redundant sliding  surfaces exist at every interface. Axial bushings are used at one end of the hinge, but the other end isallowed to float axially. SDO/EVE faces the sun, so it was expected that the cover may get hot and that  the hinge needs to allow for a large thermal gradient between the cover and the mechanism. Clearances are tightly controlled between bushings and mating surfaces to ensure that under the worst thermal  conditions, a clearance would exist and prevent the hinge from binding. Hinge friction was measured for all flight units under the full survival temperature range (details to follow). Thermal design features are shown in Figure 7. External metal surfaces are coated with silver composite  coating CCaG, which prevent the cover from getting hot in direct solar illumination. This coating is sensitive to damage by handling, so great care was taken during mechanism assembly and test. The MLIattachment is considered a critical interface. Simple clamp plates are used (also CCaG coated) to  compress the MLI securely around the apertures. 6
MLI clamping was done to prevent any trapped particulate within the MLI from being vented at the  aperture cover, and to prevent the MLI from obscuring the aperture. Thermally, the performance of the MLI is significantly reduced at this interface, but mechanically, this is very secure. The cover is machined Al6061T6, as shown in Figure 8. The actual seal was intended to be leaky and  allow slow venting of the pre-launch purge N 2. Additional larger vents are located on the instrument  housing and they allow rapid instrument venting during launch. Viton O-rings are known to develop stiction, and would not allow the mechanism to slowly vent, so they are not used on this mechanism. The  seal is fabricated from kapton tubes, fitted into dovetail O-ring grooves, and secured in place with an  internal wire. Although this works fine, it turned out to be more complicated than necessary, and if done  over again, they would be replaced with a simple machined Vespel seal. A window is included in the cover to allow for pre-launch instrument aliveness verification.   7