PRE2018 4 Group9: Difference between revisions

From Control Systems Technology Group
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 13: Line 13:


==Objectives==
==Objectives==
{{plainlist|
* Analyzing the available methods to remove space debris<br />
* Analyzing the available methods to remove space debris
* Find methods on how to prevent new space debris (governance)<br />
* Find methods on how to prevent new space debris (governance)
* Further develop a promising method<br />
* Further develop a promising method
}}




Line 25: Line 23:


Requirements:
Requirements:
{{plainlist|
* re-usable <br />
* re-usable <br />
* quick to implement<br />
* quick to implement<br />
Line 33: Line 30:
* durable<br />
* durable<br />
* affordable<br />
* affordable<br />
}}
 


==Approach, milestone and deliverables==
==Approach, milestone and deliverables==

Revision as of 12:58, 4 May 2019

Group members

Rob de Mooij 1017797
Ilja van Oort 1001232
Sara Tjon 1247050
Thomas Pilaet 0999458
Joris Zandeberge 1231962

Problem statement

The amount of collisions between satellites and space debris increases exponentially, due to the growing amount of space debris.
Chance that a satellite collides with a piece of debris bigger than 1 cm in a year:
2007: 17-20%, 2010: 50%
Consequences: no internet, no gps, costs a lot of money, space travel may become more difficult/impossible

Objectives

  • Analyzing the available methods to remove space debris
  • Find methods on how to prevent new space debris (governance)
  • Further develop a promising method


Users and their requirements

Users:
Satellite owners (governments, space associations)

Requirements:

  • re-usable
  • quick to implement
  • hard to abuse
  • versatile (for both smaller and larger debris)
  • autonomous
  • durable
  • affordable


Approach, milestone and deliverables

Approach:
Reading papers to get a good picture of the current problem and the state-of-the-art technology
Analyzing and comparing possible methods for space debris removal by looking at their pros and cons
Further development of a (combination of) promising technique(s) with a model or prototype.

Milestones: week 2
determined subject
defined plan
week 3
find state of the art methods
finished literature search
week 4
determine promising method(s)
week 5
basic model
week 6
final model
week 7
results model
implement model in USE
finalized wiki
week 8
presentation

Deliverables
Wiki page
Presentation
Model/prototype

Who is doing what?

Literature study All
Literature analysis All
Modelling Rob/Ilja/Sara
Prototyping Rob/Ilja/Sara
Updating wiki All
Implementation USE Joris/Thomas
Visualizing data/results Joris/Thomas
Presentation Joris/Thomas