A Cubesat Payload for Exoplanet Detection
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. The Satellite Project
2.1. Mission Analysis
- (1)
- Exoplanet detection (goal Earth-like planets around Sun-like stars)
- (2)
- Photometric transit method
- (3)
- Identification of false positive signals
- (4)
- 3U cubesat platform
- R.1
- The amplitude of the signal to be detected is 84 ppm. During the transit the ratio between the combined flux from star and planet (F(t)) and the unobstructed star flux (Fs) is approximated by the transit depth expression δ. The transit depth δ is proportional to the square ratio between the planet radius (Rplanet) and the star radius (Rstar) [1], Equation (1) (neglecting at this time the influence of the star limb darkening on the transit depth). The assumed star is the Sun and the assumed planet is the Earth, Table 2.The assumed planet transit duration is 6.5 h [19]. To get a 7 σ certainty of the measured transit [20], the maximum level of tolerable noise is 12 ppm. To be conservative, this requirement is applied to the observation time equal to the duty cycle time, without taking into account the multiple transit observation. A thermal analysis will be included in the error budget, thus reducing the requirement margin. The precision of the measurement requires high-stability pointing along the entire observation. As first choice (in analogy with ExoplanetSat example) the value of 5 arcsec is needed for pointing stability.
- R.2
- The required payload components are the objective and the detector (photometric payload)
- R.3
- To discriminate the false positive signal, the photometric signal is slightly dispersed. The observation band is the visible. The required spectral resolution is low (3 bands from 400 nm to 850 nm), since the measurement purpose is to monitor the centroid location of the dispersed signal.
- R.4
- The standard cubesat structural limits in terms of dimensions and weight must be fulfilled. The 3U-cubesat dimensions are 10 cm × 10 cm × 30 cm (34 cm in 3U+ configuration) with a mass up to 4 kg [21], Figure 1. These small satellites require an orbital deployer (e.g., P-POD from CalPoly) to ensure that the cubesat is safely stored and correctly launched from the launcher. The advantage of choosing a cubesat platform is its straightforward design, realization, and test with a cheap budget. The drawbacks are limited size and mass, and then limited resources for power, computing, and attitude control. The technical challenge is then to fulfill the mission objective through the limited capabilities of the cubesat space platform. Moreover, the requirement of 3U size comes from the consideration that further mass increment (and thus unit increment, till about 8U) would not provide free space for an objective aperture wider than 100 mm (assuming to use a circular aperture shape). The minimum estimated size for the payload is 1 unit and at least 2 other units are required for the satellite’s subsystems. Three units is then considered the most suitable number, as seen in Figure 2.
2.2. Satellite Orbit and Target
- as a piggyback payload from standard launchers,
- through the cubesat launch service from the ISS (Kibo module),
- through a private service from a dedicated satellite (e.g., GAUSS Unisat),
- as a primary payload from a launcher for small satellites (future option).
2.3. Cubesat Design
- a glass pyramid, with a round base and four facets, as seen in Figure 4,
- a commercial objective,
- a scientific detector, cmos (1),
- a second detector used to close the attitude control loop, cmos (2),
- a two-axis piezo-stage behind the detectors to compensate for the spacecraft jitter in a closed control loop.
3. Star Visual Magnitude Limit
- The observation time on each orbit (i.e., the product between the exposure time of a single frame and the number of co-added frames) must be less than or equal to the duty cycle time. The total transit observations should include one full transit time before and after the transit, to better estimate the transit baseline.
- The exposure time of each frame must be less than the time required to saturate the detector. This constrain is expressed as the number of photons corresponding to the saturation voltage, taking into account the detector conversion factor and the quantum efficiency.
4. Discussion and Conclusions
Acknowledgments
Author Contributions
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
FOV | Field of view |
MIT | Massachusetts Institute of Technology |
NASA | National Aeronautics and Space Administration |
ESA | European Space Agency |
CNES | Centre national d’études spatiales |
TESS | Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite |
CHEOPS | CHaracterizing ExOPlanets Satellite |
PLATO | PLAnetary Transits and Oscillations of stars |
CoRoT | Convection, Rotation and planetary Transits |
HEO | High Earth Orbit |
LEO | Low Earth Orbit |
CCD | Charge Coupled Device |
PI | Physik Instrumente |
ppm | parts per million |
S/N | Signal to Noise ratio |
vmag | visual magnitude |
References
- Seager, S. Introduction to exoplanets. In Exoplanets, 1st ed.; University of Arizona Press: Tucson, AZ, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Aigrain, S.; Barge, P. The CoRoT Exoplanet Programme: Exploring the Gas-Giant/Terrestrial Planet Transition. In Proceedings of the 14th Cambridge Workshop on Cool Stars, Stellar Systems, and the Sun, Leicester, UK, 7–11 August 2007; Volume 384, p. 270.
- Auvergne, M.; Bodin, P. The CoRoT Satellite in Flight: Description and Performance. Astron. Astrophys. 2009, 506, 411–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Borucki, W.; Koch, D. KEPLER: Search for Earth-Size Planets in the Habitable Zone. In Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union Symposium, Ioannina, Greece, 15–19 September 2008; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2008; Volume 4, pp. 289–299. [Google Scholar]
- Ricker, R.; Joshua, N.W. Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite. J. Astron. Telesc. Instrum. Syst. 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cessa, V.; Beck, T. Cheops: A space telescope for ultra-high precision photometry of exoplanet transits. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Space Optics, Tenerife, Canary Island, Spain, 7–10 October 2014.
- Rauer, H.; Catala, C.; Aerts, C.; Appourchaux, T.; Benz, W.; Brandeker, A.; Christensen-Dalsgaard, J.; Deleuil, M.; Gizon, L.; Goupil, M.J.; et al. The PLATO 2.0 Mission. Exp. Astron. 2014, 38, 249–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smith, M.; Seager, S. The ExoplanetSat mission to detect transiting exoplanets with a cubesat space telescope. In Proceedings of the 25th Annual AIAA/USU Conference on Small Satellites, Logan, UT, USA, 8–11 August 2011.
- Grün, E.; Gustafson, B.A.; Dermott, S.; Fechtig, H. Interplanetary Dust, Astronomy and Astrophysics Library; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Park, J.; Park, S. Mission Analysis and CubeSat Design for CANYVAL-X Mission. In Proceedings of the Space Operations 2016 Conference, Deajeon, Korea, 16–20 May 2016.
- Cahoy, K.; Marinan, A. CubeSat deformable mirror demonstration. In Proceedings of the Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2012: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1–6 July 2012.
- Nowak, M.; Lacour, S. Reaching Sub-Millimag Photometric Precision on Beta Pictoris with a Nanosat: The PicSat Mission. In Proceedings of the Space Telescopes and Instrumentation, Edinburgh, UK, 26–29 June 2016.
- Santerne, A.; Fressin, F. The Contribution of Secondary Eclipses as Astrophysical False Positives to Exoplanet Transit Surveys. Astron. Astrophys. 2013, 557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coughlin, J.; Thompson, S. Contamination in the Kepler Field. Identification of 685 KOIs as False Positives via Ephemeris Matching Based on Q1–Q12 Data. Astron. J. 2014, 147, 119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Santerne, A.; Moutou, C.; Tsantaki, M.; Bouchy, F.; Hébrard, G.; Adibekyan, V.; Almenara, J.M.; Amard, L.; Barros, S.C.; Boisse, I.; et al. SOPHIE velocimetry of Kepler transit candidates. Astron. Astrophys. 2016, 587, A64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Almenara, J.M.; Deeg, H.J. Rate and Nature of False Positives in the CoRoT Exoplanet Search. Astron. Astrophys. 2009, 506, 337–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bryson, S.; Jenkins, J.M. Identification of Background False Positives from Kepler Data. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 2013, 125, 889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wertz, J.; Larson, W. Space Mission Analysis and Design, 3rd ed.; Microcosm Press: El Segundo, CA, USA, 1999; pp. 1–94. [Google Scholar]
- Kepler Mission NASA Website. Available online: https://kepler.nasa.gov/science/about/characteristicsOfTransits/transitDetectionAndSimulation/ (accessed on 4 January 2017).
- Jenkins, J.M.; Caldwell, D.A. Some Tests to Establish Confidence in Planets Discovered by Transit Photometry. Astrophys. J. 2002, 564, 495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- CubeSat Design Specification. Available online: http://www.cubesat.org/resources/ (accessed on 4 January 2017).
- Bendek, E.; Belikov, R.; Thomas, S. Centaur, a scientific and technology pathfinder for direct imaging exoplanets missions. In Proceedings of the 4th Interplanetary Cubesat Workshop 2015, London, UK, 4–25 May 2015.
- Antichi, J.; Munari, M. Modeling Pyramidal Sensors in Ray-Tracing Software by a Suitable User-Defined Surface. J. Astron. Telesc. Instrum. Syst. 2016, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hecht, E. Optics, 4th ed.; Addison-Wesley: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Pong, C. High-Precision Pointing and Attitude Estimation and Control Algorithms for Hardware-Constrained Spacecraft. Ph.D. Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Zeiss Website. Available online: http://www.zeiss.it/camera-lenses/it_it/camera_lenses/slr-lenses/planart1485.html (accessed on 4 January 2017).
- Zeiss Camera Lens News. Available online: http://lenspire.zeiss.com/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2009/10/cln33_en_web.pdf (accessed on 4 January 2017).
- Howell, S.B. Handbook of CCD Astronomy, 2nd ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2006. [Google Scholar]
Subsystem | R.1 | R.2 | R.3 | R.4 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Cubesat Payload Subsystem | The signal amplitude is 84 ppm, the tolerable noise level is 12 ppm in a duty cycle time observation. The detector resolution should be greater than or equal to 12 bit. | The payload is a photometric payload (at least objective + detector) in the visible band. | The transit measurement signal must be redundant and spectrally dispersed. | The optical aperture diameter should be less than 10 cm. |
Cubesat Attitude determination and Control | High-stability pointing should be provided to detect the signal decrement (5″). | Total stored chemical energy will not exceed 100 Watt-hours. | ||
Cubesat Command and data handling | The onboard processing should be as limited as possible, to avoid any data alteration. | Select the scientific data to be stored according to the available data rate. | Total stored chemical energy will not exceed 100 Watt-hours. | |
Cubesat Structure and Mechanism | No more than one unit free space is available for the payload subsystem. | Platform dimensions are 10 cm × 10 cm × 34 cm. Platform maximum mass is 4 kg. | ||
Mission Operations | The minimum mission lifetime is four years, to measure the transit of an exoplanet with an orbital period of one year at least three times. | The scientific operations consists in looking at one target star continuously to measure the star flux along the entire orbital period of the exoplanet. |
Parameter | Value |
---|---|
Rstar, Sun volumetric mean radius (km) | 695,700 |
Rplanet, Earth volumetric mean radius (km) | 6371 |
δ, transit depth | 84 × 10−6 |
HAS2 | ZEISS Objective | ||
---|---|---|---|
Parameter | Value | Parameter | Value |
Overall dimensions | 30 mm × 30 mm | f | 85 mm |
Image sensor format | 1024 × 1024 pixels | F/# | 1.4 |
Pixel size | 18 μm | Diameter | 60.7 mm |
ADC resolution | 12 bit | Image diameter | 43 mm |
Saturation voltage output | 1.49 V | FOV | 12.42 deg |
Full well capacity | 105 e | Pixel scale | 44.15 arcsec/pix |
Quantum Efficiency | 45% (500–650 nm) | ||
Spectral response | 33.3% (400–900 nm ) | ||
Conversion factor | 14.8 µV/e | ||
Dark current | 12.5 e/pix/s | ||
RON | 2 e/pix |
Component | Name | Length X (mm) | Length Y (mm) | Length Z (mm) | Weight (g) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Pyramid | custom, BK7 glass | 62 | 62 | 13.8 | 85.38 |
Objective | Planar T 1.4/85 ZF | 77 | 77 | 62 | 570 |
Detector | HAS2 | 30 | 30 | 4.5 | 8 |
Detector | e2V | 10 | 10 | 2 | 5 |
Imager board | custom PCB | 3 | |||
Stage | PI P-733.2 CL | 100 | 100 | 25 | 580 |
Stage controller | custom (on PCB) | 3 | |||
Check/Tot | each ≤ 100 | each ≤ 100 | 107.3 | 1254.38 |
Constraints | Requirements | Assumptions | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Duty cycle time [min] | 31 | S/N | ≥105 | window [pix] | 40 × 40 |
Photons to saturate [phot/pix] | 2.237 × 105 | Photons/pix | 108 | system efficiency | 70% |
star defocus [pix] | 10 × 10 |
Computation Steps | |||
---|---|---|---|
Step | Step Title | Step Description | Values |
1 | Compute the signal level | (see the text above) | |
2 | Compute the noise level | (see the text above) | |
3 | Compute the S/N ratio | (see the text above) | |
4 | Min number of frames | Photon per pixel/Photon to saturate | 108/(2.237 × 105) = 447 frames |
5 | Max exposure time per frame | Eclipse time/Min number of frames | 4 s |
6 | Exposure time limit (tlim) to avoid saturation | Compute the detector voltage corresponding to the incoming photon flux for one frame. Find the exposure time to get the higher voltage value without saturation. The star flux is spread on 10 × 10 pix. | vmag = 0, tlim = 0.17 s; vmag = 1, tlim = 0.43 s; vmag = 2, tlim = 1.09 s; vmag = 3, tlim = 2.74 s; vmag = 4, tlim = 6.89 s; vmag = 5, tlim > 10 s; |
7 | Number of co-added frames | Compute the number of co-added frames required to get a S/N of 105 (star signal of 1010). | vmag = 0, frames = 451; vmag = 1, frames = 451; vmag = 2, frames = 451; vmag = 3, frames = 453; vmag = 4, frames = 461; vmag = 5, frames = 823 (10 s); |
8 | Verify the compliance with the duty cycle time constraint. | t = frames × tlim | vmag = 0, t = 77.75 s; vmag = 1, t = 194.94 s; vmag = 2, t = 492.43 s; vmag = 3, t = 1243 s; vmag = 4, t = 3175 s; vmag = 5, t = 8236 s. |
© 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Iuzzolino, M.; Accardo, D.; Rufino, G.; Oliva, E.; Tozzi, A.; Schipani, P. A Cubesat Payload for Exoplanet Detection. Sensors 2017, 17, 493. https://doi.org/10.3390/s17030493
Iuzzolino M, Accardo D, Rufino G, Oliva E, Tozzi A, Schipani P. A Cubesat Payload for Exoplanet Detection. Sensors. 2017; 17(3):493. https://doi.org/10.3390/s17030493
Chicago/Turabian StyleIuzzolino, Marcella, Domenico Accardo, Giancarlo Rufino, Ernesto Oliva, Andrea Tozzi, and Pietro Schipani. 2017. "A Cubesat Payload for Exoplanet Detection" Sensors 17, no. 3: 493. https://doi.org/10.3390/s17030493
APA StyleIuzzolino, M., Accardo, D., Rufino, G., Oliva, E., Tozzi, A., & Schipani, P. (2017). A Cubesat Payload for Exoplanet Detection. Sensors, 17(3), 493. https://doi.org/10.3390/s17030493