The following three extracts and links provide an answer:“REASONS FOR SPACECRAFT VIBRATION TESTINGThe primary reason for performing a spacecraft level vibration test is to follow the “Test Like You Fly” (TLYF) philosophy in which the vibration test provides the final chance to verify that the as-built payload will perform as expected after exposure to the low-frequency launch environment. The spacecraft level vibration test along with the spacecraft level acoustic test and shock test covers the full range of expected dynamic environments that the payload will experience during launch.The spacecraft level vibration test is the only test that simulates the low/mid-frequency mechanically transmitted launch vibration environment. Acoustics tends to drive structural response above 100 Hz for most spacecraft modes. The acoustic 1/2 wavelength must be less than the smallest S/C dimension for significant excitation of non-baffled panels. At 100 Hz, this characteristic dimension is roughly 5 feet so that below 100 Hz only large surface area items such as solar arrays and antenna dishes will respond to direct acoustic input. For most launch vehicles the acoustic spectrum rolls off quickly below 100 Hz such that the input is roughly 10 dB below the peak SPL. Most primary spacecraft structure and very heavy components that attach to the spacecraft will not be excited by acoustics and will respond primarily to mechanically transmitted energy. One critical reason for running both a vibration test and an acoustic test at the spacecraft level is that each type of input excites the spacecraft structure differently and will screen for different types of failure modes. This is illustrated by the fact that both a coupled loads analysis and separate vibro-acoustic analysis are required to develop the full set of launch loads and environments experienced by the spacecraft and the hardware mounted to it.With all spacecraft and especially with the spacecraft produced by GSFC and JPL that typically include very sensitive one-of-a-kind science instruments, there is always the concern about the impact that workmanship will have on the ability of the hardware to perform as expected. The spacecraft level vibration test is the only test that will put significant loads into both primary and secondary structure, which responds dynamically to the low-frequency launch environment. This means it is the only test that will verify the installation and workmanship of structural interfaces between the spacecraft and attached hardware. Typically all components and most subsystems are tested separately and can be considered qualified for launch based on that lower- level of assembly testing. But the spacecraft vibration test is the only test that will screen for workmanship issues related to installation of the hardware on the spacecraft.Finally, the spacecraft that are being built by JPL and GSFC are typically one-of-a-kind spacecraft with instruments and sensors that are fabricated and tested by many different organizations from aerospace contractors, international partners and University organizations. These spacecraft are not multiple copies of production hardware in which workmanship and design issues may have already been addressed in prior builds. For these types of payloads, we rely very heavily on system level testing (vibration, acoustic, and shock) to uncover design and workmanship issues which may have been missed based on testing at lower levels of assembly due to test limitations, inadequate test specification, or inadequate simulation of boundary conditions.”
AND:For the past several years, much has been written about systems data collection onboard modern airplanes: GE jet engines collect information at 5,000 data points per second; a Boeing 787 generates an average of 500GB of system data a flight; an Airbus A380 is fitted with as many as 25,000 sensors.19 Dec 2014AND:
I think if you have read to this point you will have already worked out the answer to why successful adoption of AKIDA in SPACE is a driver of terrestrial success. "Used in Space" is the foil to "nobody got sacked buying IBM".
My opinion only DYOR
Fact Finder
- Forums
- ASX - By Stock
- BRN
- New Partnership
New Partnership, page-36
-
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 7 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
Featured News
Add BRN (ASX) to my watchlist
|
|||||
Last
20.0¢ |
Change
0.000(0.00%) |
Mkt cap ! $371.1M |
Open | High | Low | Value | Volume |
0.0¢ | 0.0¢ | 0.0¢ | $0 | 0 |
Buyers (Bids)
No. | Vol. | Price($) |
---|---|---|
1 | 8444 | 22.5¢ |
Sellers (Offers)
Price($) | Vol. | No. |
---|---|---|
17.5¢ | 125000 | 1 |
View Market Depth
No. | Vol. | Price($) |
---|---|---|
1 | 2400 | 0.210 |
1 | 497 | 0.205 |
14 | 110548 | 0.200 |
20 | 769699 | 0.195 |
56 | 1896757 | 0.190 |
Price($) | Vol. | No. |
---|---|---|
0.180 | 152783 | 3 |
0.190 | 22000 | 1 |
0.195 | 174862 | 7 |
0.200 | 225357 | 10 |
0.205 | 400000 | 7 |
Last trade - 16.16pm 24/07/2024 (20 minute delay) ? |
Featured News
BRN (ASX) Chart |
Day chart unavailable
The Watchlist
LGP
LITTLE GREEN PHARMA LTD
Paul Long, CEO
Paul Long
CEO
Previous Video
Next Video
SPONSORED BY The Market Online