An Algorithm for Conjoint Thermal, Mounting and Size Requirements Considering while Instruments Layout Development Inside the Spacecraft Compartments

Aeronautical and Space-Rocket Engineering


Аuthors

Belyakov A. A.1*, Shulepov A. I.2**, Papazov V. M.1

1. S. P. Korolev Rocket and Space Corporation «Energia», 4A Lenin Street, Korolev, Moscow area, 141070, Russia
2. Samara National Research University named after Academician S.P. Korolev, Moskovskoe shosse, 34, Samara, Russia

*e-mail: post@rsce.ru
**e-mail: shulepov-al@mail.ru

Abstract

The onboard equipment layout optimization according by the minimum structure mass, minimum mutual heating temperature and maximum layout density criteria often supposes participation several specialized specialists. Practice demonstrates that implementation of these measures is being performed by the developers heuristically and does not allow searching for optimal solutions justified by joint consideration of the above said requirements. This study relevance lies in the fact that system solution of the problem requires an algorithm, which would regularize and automate the basic procedures being fulfilled by various specialists and allow predicting the structure weight relative to the fulfillment of the requirements specified to the onboard equipment layout.
This study hypothesis consists in the fact that arrangements on the joint accomplishing thermal, mounting and size requirements to the onboard equipment layout may be algorithmized, which would lead to the labor intensity reduction of the optimization problem solution. The purpose of the study consists in determining an algorithm that may ensure a systematic process for finding a solution to the problem of the onboard equipment layout optimizing according to the criteria of minimum structural mass, minimum temperature of the onboard equipment mutual heating and maximum layout density. The study solves the tasks of developing mathematical models, algorithm procedures and proposals for their inclusion in the spacecraft developing process.
To meet the dimension requirements for arbitrary spatial orientation of the instruments the dense placement functions should be used. However, the most rational spatial orientation of the devices is such that their edges are parallel to the base planes of the spacecraft compartment stabilization, because then the volume of voids between the devices and the body of the spacecraft compartment is being minimized. To achieve the highest density of the onboard equipment layout, the instruments should be oriented so that their edges are mutually parallel as well. With this approach, the installation of devices in the placement zones can be accomplished in the form of racks.
In case of the thermal conditions inside the spacecraft strict control necessity and dimensional limitations, the instruments should be arranged so that the thermal impact would be minimal at high density of the onboard equipment layout. The required goal function of the thermal gap is of large dimension and has no analytical form of the solution regarding the instruments mutual effect temperature. The initial form of the thermal gap function is being generally determined by a system of differential equations. This system consists of a non-stationary heat conduction equation, the Navier-Stokes equation for a viscous incompressible fluid, the continuity equation, the equation of state, the energy equation in the cooler between the walls of the devices, and the equations of non-intersection of the electronic dimensional models of the devices.
It is possible to optimize the design of instruments fastenings by weight, and maintain a minimum temperature of their mutual heating by controlling the angular position and heat exchange of devices. To ensure this, it is necessary to improve the methods of basing and fastening devices when developing their mounting or installations. If the production capacity of the enterprise allows for the structural elements manufacturing by the additive methods, then optimization by changing the density of the material and the cross-sectional area of the fastening structure is possible as well. As in the case of the instruments heat exchange assessment, the authors recommend performing the strength test for the fasteners design when fulfilling the mounting requirements for the layout of the onboard equipment when releasing the spacecraft strength computations with special software, since such a test requires a large number of computations.

Keywords:

instrument layout, onboard equipment arrangement, thermal mode of the instruments, instruments layout density, spacecraft compartment

References

  1.  Kozlov DI, Anshakov GP, Agarkov VF. Designing of Automated Spacecraft. Moscow: Mashinostroenie; 1996. 448 p. (In Russ.).
  2.  Gavrilov VN. Automated layout of aircraft instrument compartments. Moscow: Mashinostroenie; 1988. 137 p. (In Russ.).
  3.  Belyakov AA, Shulepov AI, Shesteryakov SI., et al. Ergomonic, mounting, size requirments implementation while automatically arranging devices in compartments of rocket and space vehicles. Trudy MAI. 2023(133). (In Russ.). URL: https://trudymai.ru/eng/published.php?ID=177671
  4.  Stoyan YuG, Kulish EN. Automation of aircraft equipment layout design. Moscow: Mashinostroenie; 1984. 192 p. (In Russ.).
  5.  Petrov IA. Method of automated on-board equipment blocks layout and cable laying on the steps of aircraft design. PhD thesis. Moscow: MAI; 2019. 147 p. (In Russ.).
  6.  Cong W, Zhao Y, Du B., et al. A Spacecraft Equipment Layout Optimization Method for Diverse and Competitive Design. Computer Modeling in Engineering and Sciences. 2023;136(1):621-654. DOI: 10.32604/cmes.2023.025143
  7.  Bodryshev SV. Methods of spatial layout based on functional dependences of operational parameters. PhD thesis. Moscow: MAI; 2006. 172 p. (In Russ.).
  8.  Ye Win Tun. Assessment of the ergonomics of the aircraft equipment compartment layout. PhD thesis. Moscow: MAI; 2020. 166 p. (In Russ.).
  9.  Shilov LB. Methodology of choosing the areas of placing and dimensional orientation outer on-board equipment of earth remote sensing spacecraft. PhD thesis. Samara: Samarskii universitet; 2016. 187 p. (In Russ.).
  10.  Shulepov AI, Abrashkin AV. Placement of on-board equipment taking into account the thermal regime in the compartments of small spacecraft. Materialy XIX Vserossiiskogo seminara “Upravlenie dvizheniem i navigatsiya letatel'nykh apparatov” (June 15-17, 2016; Samara). Samara: Samara University; 2016. p. 210-212. (In Russ.).
  11.  Anshakov TP, Biryuk VV, Vasil'ev VV, et al. Numerical simulation of the thermal state on the Photon spacecraft. Materialy V Vserossiiskoi nauchno-tekhnicheskoi konferentsii “Protsessy goreniya, teploobmena i ekologiya teplovykh dvigatelei” (October 5-7, 2004; Samara). Samara: SSAU; 2004. Issue 5. p. 9-16. (In Russ.).
  12.  Alekseev VA, Kudriavtseva NS, Malozemov VV, et al. Mathematical modeling of heat processes of miniature unboard equipment. Aerospace MAI Journal. 2010;17(1):55-61. (In Russ.). URL: https://vestnikmai.ru/eng/publications.php?ID=13355
  13.  Bugrova AD, Kotlyarov EYu, Finchenko VS. Procedure for preliminary thermal analysis of the lunar lander instrument panel. Part 1. Rapid analysis of the instrument panel thermal environment. Vestnik NPO im. SA Lavochkina. 2021(2):25-35. (In Russ.).
  14.  Bugrova AD, Kotlyarov EYu, Finchenko VS. Procedure for preliminary thermal analysis of the lunar lander instrument panel. Part 2. Temperature evaluation of mounting seats and TCS modification options. Vestnik NPO im. SA Lavochkina. 2021(3):23-29. (In Russ.).
  15.  Chen X, Chen X, Xia Y, et al. An ILP-Assisted Two-Stage Layout Optimization Method for Satellite Payload Placement. Space: Science & Technology. 2022. DOI: 10.34133/2022/9765260
  16.  Kaurov IV. Methodology of engineering the small spacecraft thermal control system and its verification on the base of testing operations. PhD thesis. Samara: Samarskii universitet; 2016. 187 p. (In Russ.).
  17.  Kolga VV, Lykum AI, Marchuk ME, et al. Optimization the position of the spacecraft instrument panel mounting points based on modal analysis. Siberian Aerospace Journal. 2021;22(2):328–338. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.31772/2712-8970-2021-22-2-328-338
  18.  Borovikov AA, Leonov AG, Tushev ON. Technique Employing Topology Optimisation to Determine Panel-to-Panel Support Bracket Positions in a Spacecraft Body. Vestnik MGTU im. N.E. Baumana. Seriya Mashinostroenie. 2019(4):4-19. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.18698/0236-3941-2019-4-4-19
  19.  Boldyrev AV, Pavel’chuk MV, Sinel’nikova RN. Enhancement of the fuselage structure topological optimization technique in the large cutout zone. Aerospace MAI Journal. 2019;26(3):62-71. (In Russ.).
  20.  Phyo A, Semenov VN, Fedulov B N. Optimization of transformable aircraft structures. Aerospace MAI Journal. 2024;31(1):32–40. (In Russ.).
  21.  Sofinskiy AN. Developing and assuring the durability of the spacecraft secondary structure. Kosmicheskaya tehnika i tehnologii. 2023;40(1):29-39. (In Russ.).
  22.  Kamalov VS. Spacecraft Production. Moscow: Mashinostroenie; 1982. 280 p. (In Russ.).

mai.ru — informational site of MAI

Copyright © 1994-2025 by MAI