Avionic-X: A demonstrator for the Next Generation Launcher Avionics

More documents

Recommendations

Info

3 Distributed Dependable Architectures for Safety-Critical Applications4 With the help of the Swedish company ÅAC Microtec.• SPA (Space Plug-and-Play Avionics),• SAVOIR,• DDASCA.SPA was developed in United States by the Air ForceResearch Laboratory (AFRL) 4 . The draft SPA standard hasalready been released through the American Institute ofAeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA). The SPA effort is aresponse to the need for reduced design, fabrication,integration, and test schedules (and therefore relatedengineering costs) for small spacecraft, thanks to selfconfigurationand self-organization.SAVOIR stands for Space Avionics Open InterfaceArchitecture. The space industry and Agencies have recognizedthis already for quite some time: The level of standardization inthe spacecraft avionics systems should be raised in order toFigure 1. Context of the Avionic-X projectincrease efficiency and reduce development cost and schedule.It has been proposed to federate several ongoing initiativesActually there are several other ESA technology programs under the common “Space Avionics Open Interfacebesides FLPP which include avionics aspects, for instance: Architecture” initiative. Within this initiative, the approach• Basic Technology Research Programs (TRP) for TRLbased on reference architectures and building blocks plays afrom 1 to 3. In particular ESA’s Deep Sub-Micronkey role. The SAVOIR Advisory Group (SAG) membersinitiative is working with industry to design a newregroups space agencies, large and small system integrators andgeneration of space-worthy microchips;equipment/software suppliers.Lastly, DDASCA is a newly born consortium dedicated to• General Support Technology Programs (GSTP) forTRL from 2 to 8.Distributed Dependable Architectures for Safety-CriticalApplications. It regroups universities and research centers,Besides, the Launch Vehicle (LV) avionics sector is toosmall a market to allow for self-standardization and to fundsystem integrators and equipment/software suppliers, withstandardization organisms.specific technologies development. The “Not Invented Here”syndrome is not an option. Therefore we have to seek ideas andIt aims at engineering and standardizing referencetechnologies in other innovative sectors, and establish a spinin,rather than recreate everything from scratch.architectures with generic building blocks, that will bemodular, provable, reusable and safe, to build hardware andsoftware platforms for safety-critical applications (DAL A –Several trends from outside the Launch Vehicle (LV) sectorseem promising:SIL 4).Within the Avionic-X project frame, we will strive to take• The “More Electric Aircraft” trend in aeronautics. Ona launcher, this could translate into electromechanicalactuators (EMA) for Thrust Vector Control, andelectrical valves in cryotechnic engines, thus givingbirth of a “More Electric Launcher”.in a wide range of promising concepts, emerging standards andinnovations (with a TRL above 2), and perform trade-offanalysis w.r.t. their interest in a launcher system context, andfinally prototype and test the most interesting candidates on theplatform.• Standardization is a trend in the satellite industry withthe Space Plug-and-Play Architecture (SPA), theIII. AVIONIC-X WORK LOGICSAVOIR 2 initiative, and more generally for embeddedsystems with the DDASCA 3 consortium. This couldA. Work Logic presentationalso encompass the IMA concepts (Integrated Modular Avionic-X project is more than a platform or a list ofAvionics), and the ARINC 653 Time and Space technologies. Its work logic is built on three axes:partitioning (TSP) standard [3]. Several projects arecurrently trying to spin-in from the aeronautical• #1 - Demonstrator activities (target IRL-3),domain the TSP/IMA technology for space • #2 - Technological activities (target TRL-6),applications.• #3 - Launcher avionics engineering.Three of the ongoing initiatives leading towards morestandardization in avionics, with reference architectures and As shown on the figure hereafter, these three branches ofbuilding blocks, are presented hereafter:Avionic-X interact all along the project in order to reach ourtargets in terms of TRL and IRL.2 Space AVionics Open Interface Architecture
The needs for demonstrations arise equally from theoreticalstudies on various launcher avionics architectures (“SEL-X”activities) in a top-down approach, and from technologicalenablers studies in a bottom-up approach. The “technologicalbranch” also focuses on innovative methods with the same goalin mind: reducing the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) of thelauncher system.The project Avionic-X is currently in phase A (systemconcepts feasibility). It is due to pursue its phase B(specification and preliminary design) from the beginning of2012, with an incremental development cycle, similar to the“spiral model” common in software engineering. This willoffer several windows of opportunity to introduce newtechnologies and new partners in the project.Figure 2. Work Logic of the Avionic-X projectB. Launcher avionics engineering (“SEL-X”)This activity branch of the project aims at identifying thekey drivers and requirements for a launcher avionics system,and following a top-down approach, taking into account thetechnological candidates, in order to propose several possibleavionics architectures (named “SEL-X”), and assess theirperformances and cost.But first, to prepare the future, we have to look back atthe past. So let’s take a look at the Ariane 5 launcher family.Ariane 5 avionics (see figure 3) follows three main drivers: Itis a duplex system, it is organized in several sub-systems(Flight Control, Telemetry, Electrical Power and FlightSafety Sub-Systems), and it is also strongly constrained bythe rule of “geographical return” (which may have led to apractical but non-optimal architecture).Ariane 5 avionics has evolved since the beginning ofAriane 5 program, in order to solve obsolescence problemsor to accommodate the various versions of the launcher, butits duplex architecture stays essentially the same. The duplexchoice was not derived from system requirements but wasseen as a way to increase robustness and ensure reliability.Figure 3. Overview of Ariane 5 upper composite avionics architectureAriane 5 avionics system breakdown in sub-systems willnot necessarily be retained, and for the moment,geographical return constraints should be put aside, in orderto look for “more” optimal solutions.The trade-offs performed on the SEL-X architectures ledus to consider several potential improvements: First, astronger integration (in order to reduce the number ofequipments, and the recurring costs), with standard modules
Page 4 and 5: in a rack-based architecture (follo
Page 6 and 7: Taking this into account, we will d
Page 8 and 9: The MDE covers the whole range from
Page 10 and 11: Intra-model consistency will be ver
Page 12: AADLACGAFDXAFRLAVQ-XCNESDALDDASCAEG

Avionic-X: A demonstrator for the Next Generation Launcher Avionics

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?