Copyright 1998, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

Multidiscipline Design as Applied to Space

Charles F. Lillie, Michael J. Wehner and Tom Fitzgerald
TRW Space & Electronics Group
One Space Park, Redondo Beach, CA 90278
Abstract
The objective of this paper is to look at the
spacecraft design process and see how that
process balances desired spacecraft features
within an imposed set of operational and cost
constraints. The constraints often show up as
competing multidiscipline interactions, which in
their resolution lead to practical spacecraft
designs. This paper gives examples of how the
design process was implemented in a feasibility
design study for NASA's proposed Next
Generation Space Telescope (NGST), and
describes how the project organization was used
to effectively deal with multidiscipline design.
Orbit selection, spacecraft propulsion, station
keeping, and overall mechanical and thermal
subsystem designs are discussed as examples of
multidisciplinary design optimization. The final
section is an across-the-board discussion of
multidiscipline design optimization, what its
benefits are, what are the negative points and
what can be done to improve the process.

was presented to the NGST Integration Team at

GSFC on August 20, 1996.
The study was to involve industry, universities
and/or non-profit organizations in the early
planning for the NGST in a search for the best
ideas for accomplishing the mission. The
NGST project office felt that it would be
necessary to go beyond simple parameter trades
to non-linear thinking in order to break the
current cost-aperture paradigm to achieve the
$500M goal for NGST development, with a
total life-cycle cost of $900M in 1996 dollars..
This paper describes some of the major features
of our approach to developing the NGST
spacecraft, launching it, and operating it for 10
years. The paper includes the mission
requirements which we derived from the
Dressier Committee's "HST and Beyond"
report, and examples of the trades and analyses
which we performed to develop a mission
concept and baseline configuration for the
NGST, a development plan for enabling
technologies, a cost estimate and a
recommended management approach.

Introduction
This paper deals with work performed by the
TRW-led study team under National Aeronautics
and Space Administration Cooperative
Agreement No. NCC5-137, awarded May 24,
1996 by the Goddard Space Flight Center, for
research entitled: Next Generation Space
Telescope Feasibility Assessments. The report

Figure 1 shows the organization of our study

team and each team's responsibilities. Our
organization paralleled that of the ongoing
government study to facilitate the integration of
our results with those from the other teams.

*Senior Member AIAA

Copyright 1998 by TRW, Inc.
Published by the American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc. with
permission.

During the study the Integrated Product Teams

(IPT's) responsible for the Optical Telescope
Assembly and for the Science Module worked
closely together to define an integrated payload
1

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Copyright 1998, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

with an optimum partitioning of functions

between the two assemblies. The Spacecraft
systems team was responsible for the classical
subsystems as well as thermal shields, vibration
control, and the fine pointing system. The
Operations team was responsible for the end-to-

B. Marcus, TRW LOB Manager

S. Savarino, TRW Marketing

end data flow, including the ground system

architecture and partitioning flight and ground
system functions. The System Engineering team
had responsibility for design integration as well
as requirements definition, mission analysis, and
interface definition

NGST Study
C. Lillie, TRW
Science
Advisors/Working
Group

Cost Modeling
E. Wood, WW

Payload
Optical
Telescope
Assembly
Optics
Light Baffles
Structure
Mechanisms
Cryogenics
Materials
Figure Control

Science
Module
Detectors
Cryostat
Cryocoolers
Cameras
Spectrometers
Wavefront Sensors
Deformable Mirrors
Steering Mirrors

N. Wallace, TRW

T. Fitzgerald, TRW

Spacecraft
Systems

Electrical Power
Communications
C&DH
I ACS
I Propulsion
Structure and
I
Mechanisms
I Thermal Control
Vibration Control
I
I

K. Biber, TRW

Operations
Systems

Systems
Engineering

Ground System
Design
Staffing
Data Reduction
and Analysis
Planning and
Scheduling
Contingency
Operations
Normal Operations

Systems Requirement
Definition
Mission Analysis
Interface Definition &
Control
Optical, Electrical,
Mechanical, & Thermal
Design Integration
Contamination Control
Launch Vehicle Interface

D. Werts, TRW

M. Wehner, TRW

Figure 1. Study Organization

The responsibilities of the study team member
optics, structures, electromechanical devices,
organizations are summarized in Figure 2.
thermal control, cryogenics, contamination
TRW personnel led the NGST study IPTs and
control, instrument design, and operations, who
took the lead in the system engineering, design
were members of our IPTs and supported our
integration, science module, spacecraft bus and
study activities. Additional support to the IPTs
operations activities. HDOS led the optical
was provided by scientists and engineers from
design activities and supported the NGST study
the Langley Research Center with expertise in
in requirements development, materials
analysis and control of flexible structures, active
selection, performance modeling, active optical
structures, active materials, isolation systems,
systems, and mirror assembly concepts. Swales
and spacecraft analysis and modeling. The study
personnel supported our NGST study in thermal
was also supported by scientists from several
design, contamination control, structure/
universities who worked with their industrial
mechanism design, science module design, and
counterparts to define the system requirements,
develop conceptual designs for the instruments,
operations.
assess system performance and review the
outputs of our study.
Swales worked closely with personnel from
Goddard Space Flight Center with experience in
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Copyright 1998, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

Most interaction between team members was

accomplished by weekly telecons and individual
phone, fax, and e-mail communications. We
also established an Internet homepage for the
study team to facilitate the flow of information,

Team

TRW

including direct file transfers. This approach

worked reasonably well, once the tools were in
place and face-to-face introductions of team
members had been accomplished.

HDDS

GSFC/SWALES

I LaRC/Science Team

System
Engineering

Lead, system requirements, Requirements Development,

trades, analysis, design
optical performance modeling
integration

Thermal design,
Contamination control

Science team models

system performance for
typical targets

OTA,
Including
structures/
mechanisms

Lead, deployable structure,

mechanisms

Optical design, material

selection, modeling, assembly
concepts

Support for structure and

mechanisms design

LaRC supports active

structures design,
technology roadmap
development

Science
Module

Lead, system design,

payload accommodation,

Wavefront sensor, fine

guidance sensor, active optics

Instrument design

Science team supports

instrument design

Spacecraft
Bus

Lead, classical bus design,

vibration control, fine
pointing

Identify Enabling
technologies, alternative
designs, attitude control

LaRC supports vibration

control, spacecraft
analysis and modeling

Operations

Lead, ground system,

design, mission operations,
planning

Operations plans and

scenarios, communications
link trades and analyses

Science team supports

mission scenario prep.,
MO&DA planning

Science/

Coordinate science advisor,

working group activities

Science Support

Science team reviews

study results,

MO&DA

Figure 2. Team Responsibility Matrix

Opening a website at TRW to external team
members required the development of new
network security procedures, which were
successfully implemented midway through the
study. Once established, this website was very
useful for the disseminating data to the team and
archiving the results of the study, as well as
providing pointers to other relevant information
on the Internet.

NGST System Design Process

We used our proven system engineering process

on this project in defining mission requirements,
deriving system requirements and developing
system concepts. Several of these processes are
iterative. The design features are balanced
against the cost, risk and complexity of the
concepts to produce a baseline concept. As the
concept evolves the system requirements are

finalized. The final product is a baseline NGST

design and the associated technology
development necessary to implement the design.

Design Reference Mission

We developed a Design Reference Mission
based on the Dressier Report and our Science
Team's expertise in astronomy. The NGST
system was optimized to provide high quality
information for investigating the early universe
formation (using a large aperture and IR
imaging). NGST would also continue the
Hubble telescope role of determining the
Hubble constant via Cepheid variables and other
techniques. NGST would have very significant
capabilities in 'ordinary' astronomy involving
stellar evolution, galactic structure, planetary
astronomy, etc.

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Copyright 1998, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

Top-down requirements definition and bottoms-up technology application procesess produce an

optimized design for NGST
______________________________
Concept Assessments
Performance
- Science return
- Requirements
- Integrated modeling
LCC
Cost drivers
Risk
Schedule
Cost Performance
System Trade Studies

Payload

Observatory
Spacecraft
Orbit
Launch vehicle
Ground station

Mission concepts

Performance

Outputs
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)

NGST design(s)
SI and mission operations requirements
Architecture models
Performance assessment
Technology roadmap
LCC estimate and descope options
Development plan
Alternative approaches

i) Technology development

Figure 3. System Design Process

Early Universe Investigation (Z -4 to 10)
- -50% of NGST observing time
- 100 to 200 survey fields at high galactic
latitudes
- Integration times ~10e3 to 10e5 sec
Foreground Galaxies (Z -0.5 to 3)

- -20% of NGST observing time

- Observation of Cepheids, supernovae, etc.
(Bubble Constant)
- Integration times ~10e3 to 10e4 sec
Local Galaxy (including Local Group)
- -10% of NGST observing time
- Stellar evolution, brown dwarfs, etc.
- Integration times ~10e3 to 10e4 sec
Solar System Objects
- -10% of NGST observing time
- Planets, comets, asteroids, Kuiper Belt objects
- Integration times -10 to 100 sec
Targets of Opportunity
____- -12 to 24 hour response time_________

Figure 4. DRM

Mission Requirements

Based on the DRM and our Science Teams

guidance, we developed a set of Mission
Requirements for NGST. These requirements
are essentially concept independent, demanding
only that NGST be a large aperture, imaging and
spectroscopic IR optimized space telescope.
Note that there are four graduations of
importance in the requirements: 1) required, 2)
highly desired, 3) desired and 4) goal. These are
guidance to the concept designers as to the
importance of these requirements. We placed
some emphasis on targets of opportunity. Our
design incorporates features dedicated to this.
We believe that such flexibility is essential to
provide data on comets and transient targets,
such as supernovae.

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Copyright 1998, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

The Dressier report and the DRM are directly

responsible for the 'quality' requirement on this
page. Early universe objects are highly redshifted, which reduces the need for visible light
observations. Therefore, we designed the NGST
for diffraction limited performance at 1 jam.
Note also the required bands correspond to the
Dressier reports recommendations, but it was
considered advantageous for NGST to exceed
this band range if possible and cost effective.
Slit spectrometers are required. It was also
desired that an imaging spectrometer be added,
if feasible. We did not want NGST to be
limited in stare time by design features.
Therefore, a very long (~28 hours) requirement
for stare time was included.
Lifetime
10-year Mean Mission Duration (MMD) (required)
13-year design life (required)
Targets
High redshift objects (required)
Local area galaxies, clusters (required)
Milky Way objects (required)
Solar system objects
- Planets (desired), outer solar system objects (highly
desired)
- Near-earth comets/asteroids (goal)
- Targets of opportunity within Field of Regard
Observations
Multi-color imaging (required
Spectroscopy (required)
Polarimetry (highly desired)
High speed photometry (desired)
Astrometry (desired)
Response times
Scheduled observations: 1 month (required
Targets of opportunity: 24 hours (required; 12 hours
(goal)
Aperture
z 6 m (required)
28m (highly desired)

Quality
Optics have diffraction limit (1/14 wave RMS) at 1um
(required)
Nyquist sampled at lower end of each octave range

except for bands < 1 urn

Imaging Spectral Bands
1 to 5 pm (required)

0.5 to 10 pm (highly desired)

0.5 to 20 urn (desired)
0.35 to 40 pm (goal)
2-D Spectrometer Bands (Slit Spectrometer)
I/A I =1000 selected imaging band (but no greater than
0.5 to 20 urn) (required)
I /A I = 10000 in 0.5 to 20 pm band (highly desired)

The agility requirement of 30 in 15 minutes is

expected to not be stressing from a design
viewpoint, and to provide a reasonably small
loss in total observing time. Given that the
majority of observations are long exposures (~2
hours based on the DRM), this implies that the
telescope is repositioned -10 times per day,
resulting in down-time of 2.5 hours out of 24,
which is roughly 10% down-time.
Field of view of the imager has been a parameter much discussed. Larger is of course better,
but has significant cost implications in requiring
large numbers of pixels and stresses the optics
design. The value chosen is the same as the current Hubble Wide Field camera (if the square
was filled).
3-D Spectrometer Bands (Simultaneous 2-D Spatial
Spectroscopy)
I/A I = 50 in all bands (required)
I /A I = 1000 in 0.5 to 20 [im band (desired)
Stare Time
No system limitations up to 1E5 sec (required)
Sufficiently short such that bright targets not over exposed
(required)

Agility
Slew and settle a nominal distance (30) within 900 sec
(required)
Sufficient to follow planets and outer solar system objects
(required)
Sufficient to follow fast moving comets (e.g., Comet
Hyakutake) (highly desired)
- 0.5 arcsec/sec (highly desired)

- 2.0 arcsec/sec (goal)

Pointing Stability
Total short-term jitter and long-team drift during exposure
results in 20% larger diffraction image (note that is
dependent of diffraction limit selected) (required)
Imaging Field of View
2 2.5 x 2.5 arc minutes (required)
2 4 x 4 arc minutes (highly desired)
Spectroscopic Field of View
2D slit 2 30 arcsec (required)
3D array covering 2 0.5 x 2 0.5 arc minutes
(desired)
Coverage
4 IT steradian coverage of the celestial sphere (required)
Coverage of any solar system object greater than 1.5 au
from the sun, when projected onto the ecliptic plane
(required)
Field of Regard
1 steradian (required)
2 IT steradian hemisphere centered 180 from the sun
(hemisphere zenith pointing anti-sunward) (highly
___desired)________________________

Figure 5. Mission Requirements

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Copyright 1998, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

Coverage is defined as the region which can be

viewed by NGST over an extended time (like
one year). Field of Regard (FOR) is the region
which can be viewed by NGST over a short time
(like one day). Field of View is the region that
can be viewed by NGST instantaneously. With
the coverage requirement defined, NGST will be
able to view all parts of the celestial sphere and
the outer parts of the solar system. The highly
desired FOR enables target of opportunity
detection over half the celestial sphere at any
one time. The required FOR corresponds to a
20 annulus perpendicular to the sun vector.
This is commensurate with an NGST design
without an elevation gimbal.

Baseline Concept

When stepping from the realm of mission

requirements to system requirements, it is
necessary to have a baseline system concept.
This chart and the one following show the
NGST baseline as of the conclusion of the three
month study. In this paper we show the key
trades and requirements flowdown which led to
this baseline.
NGST is in a Lissajous orbit at the Lagrangian L2 poin
placed there by an Atlas n AS (specified by the
government) which follows an Earth-Moon flyby
trajectory. Communication to earth is via X-Band.

Lissajous Orbit

X-Band Transponder/TT&C
2 to 4 kbps

Visible IR

11 m Antenna

Telescope

X-Band High Gain

10Mbits/sec

I1255.014.SAW3

6000 Ib Space Vehicle

Figure 6. Mission Concept

A small ( l l m ) X-band antenna on the ground

will provide low cost support to the NGST
Space Vehicle (SV). A dedicated ground station
would schedule and operate the SV.
Figure 7 presents the configuration which we
developed for the NGST space vehicle. Note
the sun and thermal shields are cut away for
clarification. The spacecraft bus is located at

the center of the shields, separated from the

instrument module and telescope by a boom.
The space vehicle is kept oriented such that the
shields shade the telescope from the sun and
earth. An optional shield sized to shade the
telescope from the moon was considered, but
rejected (shield size approximately doubled,
from -200 m2 to -400 m2). The thermal load

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Copyright 1998, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

tracking of the targets.

from the moon is negligible; the impact of

sunlight reflected off the moon needs further
investigation. The shields are supported by
struts, attached to the spacecraft. Note the
symmetry of the shield. This is to counteract
solar pressure. Note also the placement of
electrochromic patches, which are used as trim
tabs to balance the pressure with the space
vehicles center of gravity.

As an illustrative tool and as a guide to our trade

space, we present the key trades we performed
throughout this study. Note that some of the
options are in italics and lined out. These are
potential solutions that were rejected. The
highlighted options have been baselined.

Key trades

The telescope primary mirror is deployable

using TRW's HARD (High Accuracy Reflector
Development) technology. The telescope is
coarsely pointed with an elevation gimbal.
After thermally stabilizing, fine pointing is
achieved by 'nodding' the space vehicle and
rotating in azimuth about the sun line. A fine
pointing mirror provides final pointing and
10 Tilting of SV for
Fine Elevation Pointing

Spectral Band Options: It was decided that a

UV capability for NGST would be costly and

not in keeping with the Dressier guidelines.

Fabricating UV optics is expensive, and
coupling that with deployable optics was
considered too extreme. Similarly, to achieve

Rotate SV for
Azimuth Control

Elevation Gimbal

Primary & Secondary Tip/Tilt

Deployable Secondary

Steering Cables for Elevation Gimbal

Passively Cooled FPAs

Passively Cooled

Deployable Boom Separating

Hot and Cold Regions

Telescope
f1.25-8m Primary

Deformable Primary
and Wavefront Mirror

4 Thermal Shields

Silvered Teflon
Sun Shield

H2 Resistojets for Stationkeeping

Biprop for Transfer Orbit

Electrochromic

Patches for
Momentum
Shield Cp Balanced with Cg

Smart Strut Booms

Twist For Propeller
Momentum Dumping

Dumping

Deployable Struts Rigidly

Support Shields
Imbedded Amorphous
Silicon Solar Array

Figure 7. Key Design Features

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

9602155.013.SA043

Copyright 1998, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

40 urn capability, we found that the optics would

have to be cooled below reasonable levels (next
figure). Later we will show that due to cost
reasons, the 20 um band was also rejected.

360AzimuthPointing

0 to 80 Elevation Gimbal

Transfer Orbit Options

A number of options are available to deliver the space
vehicle to L2. The selected baseline, lunar flyby with
phasing loops, offers a large launch window with good
throw weight. Direct transfer is advantageous as it ha:
a large launch window, but has the least throw weight
of any of the options. Direct lunar flyby has the same
throw weight as the selected option, but has a very sho
launch window. Integral propulsion is attractive as it

9602155.015.SA043

Figure 8. Payload Pointing

NGST Trade Tree (1/3)

Spectral Band Options
0.1 O.C unij

integral nropulcion < Lunar Hyby

Stotlonkeeplng
Prooulsion Options

Transfer Orbit
Propulsion Options

Figure 9. Key Trades

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Copyright 1998, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

Assumptions
f/15 telescope
Zodiacal spectral radiance
-10e-11 W/cm2umSr
Bandpass: 0.1 um
Irradiance: 3.5e-15 W/cm2
Mirror emissitivity: 0.1

has the best throw weight of the options, but

requires a large amount of propellant. Due to
launch vehicle size constraints, we do not have
the room to accommodate this additional
propellant.
70

Figure 10 illustrates why NGST was not

designed to operate at 40 urn. Operating at this
point would require very cold mirror
temperatures, which are beyond a reasonable
design capability.
We allocated to thermal control the objective of
passively cooling optics to ~30 K. This
preserves the option of including a 20 um band.
The cost of achieving this temperature is very
modest, only requiring the inclusion of an
additional thermal shield layer. The
requirement for cold optics drives the SV
configuration.

o
o

60
50
40
30
20

10

12
14
16
Cutoff Wavelength, |im

18

20

Figure 10. Temperature vs. IR Wavelength

Orbit Options

Orbit Selection Summary

L2 exact orbit requires high stationkeeping 2V

L4/5 have very long communication ranges (1 AU)
Drift-away orbit limits life; long communication range

1 AU heliocentric orbit needs further investigation

3 AU heliocentric orbit has lower throw weight; not needed for
our bands

Near-Earth (and moon) orbits have a stressing

thermal environment. Therefore, only orbits
some distance from the earth were considered.
The Lissajous L2 orbit was baselined.
Attractive features of this orbit are: short range

to the earth, low station keeping requirements,

and no insertion DV to enter the orbit. LI orbits
have no advantages and the disadvantage of
higher solar flux and having the earth shining in
the telescopes field of regard. The drift away,

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Copyright 1998, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

L4/L5 and 3 AU heliocentric orbits are at long

ranges from the earth and have minimal
advantages in the primary band of interest (1-5
jam ). Halo and L2 'exact' orbits have high
station keeping and transfer DV requirements.
The 1 AU Heliocentric orbit located 0.1-0.3 AU
from the earth is still under investigation. This
orbit may be able to be station kept at a
reasonable earth distance.

over the mission life.

Station keeping at L2
Considerations
L2 is an unstable point, so
station keeping is required

Serious contamination concern

due to cold optics temperatures

One of the advantages of the selected Lissajous

orbit is that no burns are required to enter, and it
requires low DV to maintain. Also, this orbit is
very large (300,000 km by 600,000 km axes),
and only needs maintenance occasionally. The
DV required to meet this the station keeping
requirements is 2-4 m/sec/year, or 20-40 m/sec

Station keeping Requirements

Delta V: ~2 m/sec/year
Station keeping maneuver timelim
3 months

Contamination Concerns

Contamination is a major concern in cryogenic optical systems

Acceptable contamination levels have not yet been determined for NGST
Water, oxygen, argon, nitrogen, etc. can freeze out on cold surfaces
Contamination control approaches
- Select low outgassing materials for construction
- Exercise contamination control pre-launch
- Protect optical surfaces during launch and during early time on-orbit
- Perform vacuum bakeout and use molecular absorbers to reduce
outgassing rates
- Minimize vapor and gas flux to cryogenic surfaces
- Periodic heating of surfaces to remove contamination

An atidifioriaiSbtirce of eohtarriinaliort islroWiatificfii vehicle> feirirtg

during ascent

particular concern are the effects from

propulsion systems. Some propulsion systems
are very dirty. Others are relatively clean, but
produce by-products such as water which can
condense onto the cold optics. On the following
charts we present the propulsion trades and
explain how contamination concerns were a
driver.

Contamination Concerns

Contamination concerns have driven our

selection of the propulsion systems for NGST.
As detailed design progresses, contamination
concerns will significantly affect material
selection and will require designing in vent
paths and baffles. Our -30 K optics will be cold
traps for volatile materials to condense on. Of

Transfer Propulsion Trades

10

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Copyright 1998, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

rejected, mainly due to low thrust levels that

were not compatible with the mission. Solids
were rejected as too dirty and impractical due to
restart requirements. Liquid propulsion was
selected, specifically a dual mode system.
Weight of the system is -170 lb., using available
thrusters. Contamination products are mostly
water. This led us to delay deployment of the
telescope and sun/thermal shields until after the
transfer burns were completed. This would
allow time for the propulsion system products to
disappear.

A number of options were considered as a

transfer orbit propulsion system. Such a system,
assuming a lunar flyby with phasing loops
trajectory, requires -100 m/sec DV (including
margin). Multiple burns are required, extending
over weeks after launch. Due to contamination
concerns, we considered first using a cold gas
with no contamination concern, such as
hydrogen. However, we found that due to the
low ISP and large DV required, it was not
possible to package this system in the allowable
volume. Electric propulsion was considered and

Transfer Propulsion Trades

Propulsion system requirements for lunar assist with phasing loops transfer orbit
- -100 m/sec total =V
- Phasing maneuver *V at launch + days
- Mid-course maneuver 2V at lunar flyby + weeks
-

NO 2V REQUIRED FOR L2 INSERTION

Low contamination system required

System

Advantages

Cold Gas

No contamination with right gas Heavy, very large storage tanks needed
Low ISP, thrust
Inexpensive

Disadvantages

High thrust

Serious contamination potential

No restart; multiple engines required

Very high ISP

Very low thrust

Simple

Solid

Electric Propulsion

High power requirements

Station keeping Propulsion Options

simplicity. However, the low ISP means that

hundreds of kilograms of H2 would be needed
over the mission life. There is not enough
weight margin or volume to accommodate such
a system.

Contamination was the driving concern in

selecting the station keeping propulsion system
which led us to reject the liquid system used for
transfer orbit. This is unfortunate, as only a few
extra kilograms of fuel would suffice to provide
station keeping over the mission life. The
products (water, etc.) would likely be major
contaminants on the cold mirror and other
surfaces. Therefore, only non-contaminating
fuels were considered further.

Electric propulsion (resistojets, arcjets, Hall

effect thrusters) is attractive, but often entails
significant cost and requires high power.
However, resistojets are a simple electrical
system with great promise. This technology is
flight proven, and TRW has past experience
with these systems. Resistojets are very small
(couple of inches long) and light weight (only

Cold gas systems are attractive due to their

11

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Copyright 1998, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

-10-20 kg of H2 needed). They use ~ 250 W of

power each, and have a high ISP. As will be
seen in the Space Support Module (spacecraft)
discussion, resistojets make a lightweight
attractive system. Operationally, due to low
thrust, they would have to burn for hours. This
would probably mean shutting down
observations, but as burns are only needed every
several months, this is not an issue.
Note the location of the resistojets on the
concept description chart. Thrusters should
operate though the Cg of the space vehicle. The
resistojets are located on the boom at the

approximate Cg of the system.

Our early baseline contained a cryostat (for
instrument cooling) of solid Hydrogen.
Interestingly, the amount of H2 needed in the
cryostat for a ten year mission is about the same
as needed for station keeping. We expended
some effort to try to utilize the cryostat boiloff
as fuel for the resistojets. Unfortunately, the H2
in the cryostat is at very low pressure (1 psi),
and we could find no practical way to pressurize
this gas to the 10s of psi required. Lack of
synergy with the resistojets contributed to the
demise of the cryostat.

Stationkeeping Propulsion Options

Options

Advantages

Disadvantages

Mono or Biprop

Synergistic with transfer orbit

Serious contamination concerns

Cold Gas

Very simple system

No2contamination concerns
- H condenses at 5 K

Requires 100s of kg of gas

Very large tankage required

Arcjet

Can use H2or hydrazine

Very high ISP

Complex system
Requires high power (>1 kW)

Hall Effect

Can use H2 N2Zenon

Complex system

propulsion system

- He condenses at 1 K
- N2 condenses at 30 K

(inert gasses)
Very high ISP

B
Solar Sailing

Utilizes our sunshade

No contamination

Launch Vehicle Capabilities

This list of current and anticipated expendable

launch vehicles potentially suitable to the NGST
mission indicates the relative performance
parameters and fairing volume constraints. The
foreign vehicles are listed for completeness and
comparison, and could be of interest should the
program become an international effort. The
capabilities of future systems are listed with
public performance specifications to protect
competition sensitive contractor actual
estimates. The trend of all planned future

Requires high power (-1 kW)

tilting increases shade size

Very low thrust. Sufficient?

vehicles is increased performance at reduced

costs. Fairing dimensions are inside payload
usable volume. Approximate (~) performances
are not based on specific mission estimates but
are extrapolated from GTO capability. All
estimates are for optimum inclination for each
launch vehicle and launch site. The Atlas EAR
and Delta HE vehicles currently under
commercial development with contractor funds
and are planned for first flight in 1998.
Although details are still considered propriety,
both contractors have plans to expand these
vehicles into a family with increased capability.

12
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautic

Copyright 1998, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

It is reasonable to expect the commercial market

to stimulate substantial performance

improvements in the medium and heavy class

before NGST is ready for procurement.

Launch Vehicle Capabilities

Launch
Vehicle

GTO (kg)

Xi?S3i33WSlm1:1?:*:iX'

Atias?*
Ariane 5
Delta III
Delta II
EELV Heavy

H HA (initial)
H IIA (growth)
Long March 3B

Proton Die
Proton M
Zenith 3 SL

C3=0(kg)

C3=-2.3(kg)

^pasHas*?'* w:**^*'**-?:-;?.? 'ZV&:*jQ'%f&*FF3&y

T

3900 '

6800
3810
1800
>12247
4700
9900
4800
6700
7100
5200

- isss

-2$9&

-4980
2722
-1200
-8970
-3450
-7250
-3500
4100
-5200
3400

-5220
-2850
-1310
-9400
-3620
-7600
-3670
4100
-5450
3560

Dia (m)

Length(m)
^s^^jiMS^'^-w

Cylinder
Length(m)
~v,.v* *~^~.".

jKStsSSiSS&S:

3.65
4.6
3.75
2.8
4.5
5.1

Unknown
3.65
4.1

Unknown
3.75

"i'6T"'

5.t J

15.2
8.9
-

9.2

4.3
12.2
4.9

Unknown
4.7
7.5
Unknown
4.9

Unknown
10
Unknown
6.5
7.6
Unknown
8.5

Notes:
1) Fairing dimensions are inside payload usable volume.
2) Approximate (~) performances are not established values but are estimated.
3) Performance is for optimum inclination for each launch vehicle site.
4) Atlas is currently doing design trades to develop a 5-meter diameter (outside) fairing for the
Atlas IIAR series and the above. For special unique missions they could change the existing fairing
ring and stringer design to get to a -3.8-meter inside payload usable diameter.
5) Attas IIAR series performance is assumimg a 3-foot stretch of the fairing as indicated.

development is the realization that we have a

very limited volume to package a very large
structure. The launch vehicle constraints and
the thermal considerations drove our
configuration.

NGST Trade Trees (2/3)

The following figure provides a roadmap
through additional trades used to define our
baseline. Here we concentrate on issues related
to space vehicle design. Key to concept

NGST Trade Tree (2/3)

HARD: High Accuracy Reflector Development

12

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautic

Copyright 1998, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

Deployable Mirror Concept

The small fairings available in the Atlas class
drove our selection of the deployable mirror.
Two general classes were considered, foldable
and stackable. The fold up-down is attractive as

it is simple. However, it wastes a great deal of

fairing volume, limiting the room left for the
spacecraft. Packaging studies indicated that we
had insufficient volume left for the spacecraft
and instruments. The alternate concept, based
on the TRW developed HARD deployment

Stacked Versus Fold Up-Down Mirror

Configuration Designs

Space vehicle packaging trade hinges on the mirror configuration

Fold Up-down is potential simpler mechanically, but has limited volume,
also has smaller growth potential

HARD concepts package more efficiently, increasing useable fairing volume

Has significant growth potential

Fold Up-Down Concept

HARD Concept

Mirror Deployment

13
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Copyright 1998, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

concept, is much more compact, and leaves the

lower part of the fairing free for spacecraft and
instrument packaging. TRW has demonstrated
the HARD concept for large deployable RF
antennas. Another very attractive feature of this
concept is that it is expandable (see next chart).
We have baselined the HARD concept.

secondary. This provides a rigid tripod

structure. Thermal considerations remain,
which is the primary reason for only moving the
elevation gimbal periodically. At a constant
gimbal angle, even with the SV tilting 10, the
thermal environment is stable.

HARD Mirror Concept Expandability

Support of Secondary Mirror
The HARD technology allows easy expansion to
much larger surfaces. With hexagonal petals,
two rings of petals can be deployed. The entire
stack of petals pivots about one corner of the
last petal deployed and then drops into place.
The remaining petals now pivot about the new
petal, continuing the process.

The support structure for the mirror secondary

has evolved significantly throughout our study.
The first concepts had three fixed struts holding
the secondary. Unfortunately, due to height
limitations in the fairing, this required a very
fast (f 0.9) primary mirror, which was
considered very difficult to build and too
sensitive to mechanical disturbances. Once the
decision was made to have a slower mirror (f
1.25), we went to a single deployable boom
holding the secondary. Analysis showed that
the allowable deflections in the secondary
location were very small (55 urn perpendicular
to the optical axis, 300 (im in axis).
Dynamically, when the telescope slewed, we
were very concerned that vibration and
hysteresis effects would exceed these values.
While the secondary has five axis position
control, it is desirable to not have to recollimate
after every slew. Additionally, even with a very
low CTE material, we found that temperature
differences had to be kept at ~ 1F both across
the boom diameter and along the boom length.
The temperature deltas along the length is
considered challenging.
We considered supporting the secondary better
by placing the boom in tension and adding guy
wires. Deployment of the wires was difficult,
and dynamically not much stability was added.
Two struts were considered briefly. They were
found to offer little additional stability.
Three struts is the current baseline. Two of the
struts fold out of the way during mirror
deployment and then fold back up to catch the

Generic Options for Space Vehicle Design

We examined three generic concepts for the
Space Vehicle design. The first two, parasol
and piggyback, have the spacecraft behind the
sun/thermal shields. Operating a spacecraft in a
-30 K environment is beyond the state of the
art. The payload-on-a-stick concept permits the
spacecraft to stay warm while the instrument
compartment and telescope are behind the
shade, staying cold. We examined options for
the boom separating the regions. Able has a
FASTmast that looks acceptable. The mast is
collapsible into a compact package one foot in
height, and is stored in within a 47" canister in
the spacecraft central cylinder. As it is
deployed, the longerons, diagonals and battens
snap into place. The boom can be constructed
of low CTE material such as T300 graphite,
resulting in only -70 milliwatts conduction from
the Spacecraft to the instrument module.
Dynamically, the boom is rigid and stable. Even
after a slew the boom returns to position very
accurately - errors between the star trackers
(located on the S/C) and the fine guidance
sensors (located on the P/L) are -arcseconds.

15
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Copyright 1998, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

HARD Mirror Concept Expandability

Generic Options for Space Vehicle Design

Parasol Shield

Piggyback Shield

Advantages
Integral spacecrafr-payload
Lightweight shield
Disadvantages:
Operation of spacecraft at cryo
temp
Heat sources near SI and OTA

Science
Instruments

Predicted Temperature Distribution

The following chart presents the NGST
temperatures with the telescope located at an
elevation of 0. Note that the mirror

Advantages:
Compact design
Simple structures
Disadvantages:
Limited FOR
Spacecraft heat
sources near OTA
and SI
I Spacecraft
1

temperatures are <30 K, the desired value. The

left side of the instrument compartment, where
the IR instrument passive radiator is located, is
at 25 K, adequate to cool the FPAs to ~ 30 K for
near infra-red (NIR) imaging.

16
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Copyright 1998, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

Predicted Temperature Distribution

pfi

Assumptions
- Instrument
Module
dissipation of
1.004W
- Parasitic heat
load of 0.1 W

324

322

322

321

321 324

direction) to minimize shield size.

Unfortunately, we found that the reaction
wheels would saturate in ~11 hours due to
unbalanced solar pressure. This led to the
present symmetric shield. Eventually residual
torque will spin up the wheels anyway, so

Sun/Thermal Shield Design Options

The baseline is a sun shield of two mils silvered
Teflon, followed by four shields of 1 mil mylar
with vacuum deposited aluminum on both sides,
with an angle of 5 between the shields. This
permits the cavity between the shields to radiate
to deep space.

methods of dumping the momentum were

developed.

Deployment of the shields was a major issue.

Early versions had inflatable shields. However,
we had serious concerns over the additional
weight of the bladders, gas for inflating, and
how to rigidize the structure. Outgassing and
deployment were other issues of concern. We
baselined a strut deployment which would then
pull out the sun and thermal shields.

We considered trim tabs on the edge of the sun

The size of the shields is sufficient to prevent

Another effect that must be compensated for is

either the sun- or earth-shine from striking the

telescope and to accommodate a 10 tilt in the

spin momentum buildup. Any mismatch in

shield symmetry will cause it to act like a

entire SV for pointing.

propeller. This could be stopped and the wheel

shields, but it is difficult to keep the telescope

from seeing the hot tabs. An option that looks
promising is to use panels covered with
electrochromic materials that change reflectivity
based on the voltage applied. This changes the
resultant momentum by a factor of ~ two.
Issues remain on material selection.

momentum dumped by twisting the struts to

change the pitch of the propeller.

Early versions of our shields had an asymmetric

design (since the telescope gimbals in only one

17
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Copyright 1998, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

Sun/Thermal Shield Design Options

Multi-layer insulation was first considered as shields

- Weight of spacers between layers added considerably to mass
Analysis showed that single sheets with an angular difference between
them was as efficient and saved considerable weight
Inflatable shields were considered and rejected
- Added weight for the inflated portions (double thickness) and
inflation gas
- Concern on how to ridigidize the inflated spokes and rims
Concern that UV hardening required thermal shields that could
withstand direct solar heating
Concern that hardening compounds might outgas
- Concern on rigidity of structure after tilting or twisting
TRW has demonstrated deployable booms/arrays
- Booms can be easily applied to this task
- Wire rigging can pull out the shields

moments of inertia of the system and found that

the required 30 slews can be accomplished in
well under the 15 minutes required (30 Az slew
in ~8 minutes, 10 El pitch in ~9 minutes).
Additionally, we examined the vibration modes
of the system and found that the lateral bending

Other Key Trades

We point the telescope coarsely by moving the

elevation gimbal, and then by tilting the S V and
rotating the entire SV about its axis. Reaction
wheels will accomplish this. We examined the

Other Key Trades (3/3)

Spectral Band Options
n 7 n *:

-*, I ~W.W

Fine Guidance Sensor

flecnanicai
* Hubble GSC (14.5 muy)

New 19th Magnitude 6SC

18

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Copyright 1998, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

field of regard. Given the limited Field of

regard that we need at 18th magnitude, and

modes of the spacecraft/mast/payload are about

1 Hz. The sunshield modes will likely be lower
in frequency. These are anticipated to damp out
quickly, and any residual motion can be
accommodated by fine pointing mirror in the
optical train of the telescope. Reaction wheels
are biased to spin at 10 Hz or higher.

Fine Guidance System Sensor

Requirements
Mission Requirements
- Diffraction limited optics at 1 um (1.2 l/d)
- Pointing stability ^20% of diffraction blur
Pointing System Requirement
- Diffraction blur: 1.2 x 1e-6/8 = 0.15 urad = 0.03
arcsec
- Allowable jitter/drift: 6 milli-arcsec
With adequate SNR, can use centroiding to locate a
star
- -1/4 to 1/10 of the FGS pixel size
- Assuming 1/5 => FGS pixel size is -30 milliarcsec
Given FOV requirement of 2 x 2 arcmin (see previous
chart): 4000 x 4000 pixels required
Adequate SNR exists
- Flux from 18th magnitude star: 58,000
photons/sec (8 meter telescope)
- Image blurred to cover -4 pixels: 14,500
photons/sec/pixel
- SNR (1 sec): -sqrt (14,500) = -120
- SNR (0.1 sec): -sqrt (1450) = -40
- (Note: Quantum efficiency of pixels assumed to
be-1)_______________________

Fine Guidance Sensor Options

The mission requirements state that pointing
must be stable enough to not increase the
diffraction blur by <20%. At 1 um, this
corresponds to an AIRY disk diameter of 0.03
arcsec, and with 20% jitter, requires a pointing
error of less than 6 milli-arcsec.

Since a practical blur centroiding algorithm will

provide location to -1/5 of a pixel, this leads to
a fine guidance sensor pixel size of 30 milliarcsec. Given a FOV of 2x2 arcmin (see next
chart), this results in an array size of 4000 x
4000 pixels, an easy value to achieve, with 18th
magnitude, adequate signal-to-noise ratio exists
to permit centroiding. Three Fine Guidance
Sensor options have been considered. One is
like Hubble, which used a large field of regard

Fine Guidance Sensor Options

Hubbks-Uke
Use outer edges of main telescope FOV
Operate in visible

Use mechanical pickoff mirrors to locate guide stars

Relay starlight to an interferometer
FOR of FGS magnitude dependent (see following chart)

5"x5" mechanical
pickoff mirror

arcmin2 FOR

Separate Guide Telescopes

Two 45 cm Cassegrain visible light telescopes
FGS Telescopes
4 x 372 x 372 arcsec FOV (-150 arcmin 2)
14.5 magnitude guide star catalogue required
Located at right angles to each other and to the main telescope axis

19

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Copyright 1998, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

given that we can readily buy enough pixels to

cover this field of view, we rejected the Hubble
concept. Separate guide telescopes were
considered and sized. We rejected this concept
based on limited volume in the fairing and the
potential for misalignments between telescopes.
Instead, the Large Array concept uses the
existing main telescope field of view.

Multidiscipline Design Optimization.

Our paper describes the process used in the
aerospace industry to develop design concepts
for space science missions, using our Next
Generation Space Telescope Feasibility
Assessment Study [1] as an example.
The process begins with articulation of the need
for a mission, a definition of its objectives and
an estimate of the funding which is available.
For NGST, the need and objectives were
provided by the report of the "HST and Beyond"
committee [2], while the funding level was
determined by the savings which NASA could
achieve by discontinuing HST maintenance
activities after the 2003 servicing mission.
A mission concept and spacecraft design are
then developed by a multi-disciplinary team
organized by function or spacecraft element into
Integrated Product Teams. These teams identify
design options which meet the mission
objectives, and select the most promising
alternatives through a series of trades and
analyses. Their selection criteria include system
performance as well as cost and risk. If no
design solution is found, the requirements are
modified and new technologies [3] are
introduced until an "optimum design" is
achieved.
Design optimization is an iterative process, with
more detailed designs and analyses generated
during each iteration. For the NGST CAN study
we used relatively simple thermal, dynamic and
optical models to assess system performance
and utilized existing spacecraft designs

wherever possible. Much more detailed models

and designs were generated during our current
mission architecture study, including an
integrated model to assess the end-to-end optical
performance of our baseline design in the
dynamic and thermal environment predicted for
NGST.

The use of highly integrated system performance

models for design optimization is a new trend
in spacecraft design, made practical by recent
advances in computer technology. Ideally,
integrated models can be used to determine the
sensitivity of our design to key parameters and
find an optimum configuration. To date,
however, high fidelity simulations are best
obtained by linking existing stand-alone
"industrial-strength" software tools with special
purpose "translators". And building a detailed
system performance model is a labor-intensive
process which can only begin when a detailed
design of the spacecraft is available.
Low fidelity integrated models using linked
spreadsheets running on PC's are now being
used by integrated design teams at many
aerospace companies and government
laboratories. It is important to have a well
developed set of mission requirements and well
defined mission concept before going to a
design center; however; since a typical design
effort a week of effort by 10-12 highly skilled
engineers and scientists.
The use of multidicipline design teams is a
powerful tool for exploring the design space to
find a optimum solution, since experts in all of
the relevant areas are readily available. They
must be used judiciously, however; to control
costs. Powerful analytic tools are available for
design optimization, but more work needs to be
done to link them together. Before a design
centers or integrated models can be used
effectively, much effort must be expended to
refine the mission requirements and "zero-in" on
a feasible mission concept and baseline design.

20
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Copyright 1998, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

Summary
The objective of this paper was to look at the
spacecraft design process and see how that
process balances desired spacecraft features
within an imposed set of operational and cost
constraints. The constraints often show up as
competing multidiscipline interactions, which in
their resolution lead to practical spacecraft
designs. This paper gives examples of how the
design process was implemented in a feasibility
design study for NASA's proposed Next
Generation Space Telescope (NGST), and
describes how the project organization was used
to effectively deal with multidiscipline design.
Orbit selection, spacecraft propulsion, station
keeping, and overall mechanical and thermal
subsystem designs were discussed as examples
of multidisciplinary design optimization. The
final section discusses multidiscipline design
optimization, what its benefits are, what are the
negative points and what can be done to
improve the process.

Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration under
Cooperative Agreement No. NCC5-137.

References
1.TRW-LedNext Generation Space Telescope
Feasibility Assessment Study Results, ed. C.F.
Lillie, TRW, 1996.
2. Exploration and the Search for Origins: A
Vision for Ultraviolet-Optical-Infrared Space
Astronomy, Report of the "HST and Beyond"
Committee, ed. A. Dressier, AURA, 1996.
3. The Next Generation Space Telescope, ed.

P.Y. Bely, C.J. Burrows, and G.D.

niingworth, STScI, 1989.
4. Visiting a time When Galaxies Were Young, ed. P.
Stockman, STScI, 1997.

20
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics