675.622.81 - Spacecraft Hardware Design Considerations

Expanded Course Description

Through lectures and exercises, this course will focus on the engineering and design considerations for hardware systems that will reliably perform in the harsh environment of space.  This course will provide a survey for the design engineer, systems engineer or aerospace program manager relative to the design, terrestrial based manufacturing, storage, launch and on-orbit performance of successful hardware systems.  Design and manufacturing concerns covering electrical, electronic and electromechanical components including part selection, materials considerations, radiation ratings and test, packaging, and manufacturing are examined.  The course will also cover the unique environments from terrestrial based to exo-atmospheric driving design and handling considerations relative to spacecraft hardware.

Course Structure

The course materials are divided into modules which can be accessed by clicking Course Modules on the left menu. A module will have two or more sections and the overview, content, readings, discussions, and assignments. You are encouraged to preview all sections of the module before starting. Most modules run for a period of seven (7) days, exceptions are noted in the Course Outline. You should regularly check the Calendar and Announcements for assignment due dates.

Course Topics

Space Environment: Introduction to Space Environmental Effects on Spacecraft Hardware
Space Environment: Thermal, Mechanical and Chemical Effects 
Space Environment: Radiation Effects
Full Life Cycle Approach 
Material Properties and Selection for Space Flight Operations
Electrical, Electronic, and Electro-mechanical Parts for Space
Spacecraft: Parts Packaging thru Board Assembly
More on Failure Analysis
Intro Spacecraft  Structures and Assemblies
Risk Management: Fault Tolerance Designs and  Mission Types
Reliability: A Deeper Dive and Test Regimes
More on Spacecraft Mechanisms and Structures
Special Consideration from Subsystems to Emerging Trends

Course Goals

To identify and relate the characteristics of the harsh space environment in combination with mission requirements to hardware design rules. Through this deeper understanding of the hardware concerns and considerations apply the principles to assuring mission success in spacecraft builds.

Course Learning Outcomes (CLOs)

• Associate the harsh environment of space and unique missions to design and test requirements for spacecraft hardware systems.
• Apply the concepts in designing hardware and test to assure performance in the mission applications.
• Analyze the impact of non- orbital space environments such as manufacturing and assembly, test, storage and the conditions of launch on hardware systems in order to associate test and design rules.

Textbooks

Not required.
Readings are available through the course site. Please click on eReserves link from the course menu to access the readings.

Student Coursework Requirements

It is expected that each module will take approximately 7–10 hours per week to complete. Here is an approximate breakdown: reading the assigned sections of the texts (approximately 3–4 hours per week) as well as some outside reading, listening to the virtual live slide presentations (approximately 3 hours per week), and writing assignments (approximately 2–3 hours per week).

Preparation and Participation (15% of Final Grade Calculation)

Evaluation of preparation and participation is based on contribution to discussions. In class, discussions will be led by the instructor on topics that have been covered in the session or on the previous assigned reading. Participation in peer review of individual assignments and group assignments are including in participation.

You are responsible for carefully reading all assigned material and being prepared for discussion. Post your initial response to the discussion questions by the evening of day 3 for that module week. Posting a response to the discussion question is part one of your grade for module discussions (i.e., Timeliness).

Part two of your grade for module discussion is your interaction (i.e., responding to classmate postings with thoughtful responses) with at least two classmates (i.e., Critical Thinking). Just posting your response to a discussion question is not sufficient; we want you to interact with your classmates. Be detailed in your postings and in your responses to your classmates' postings. Feel free to agree or disagree with your classmates. Please ensure that your postings are civil and constructive.

I/We will monitor module discussions and will respond to some of the discussions as discussions are posted. In some instances, I/we will summarize the overall discussions and post the summary for the module.

Preparation and participation is evaluated by the following grading elements:

1. Timeliness (50%)
2. Critical Thinking (50%)

Preparation and participation is graded as follows:

• 100–90 = A—Timeliness [regularly participates; all required postings; early in discussion; throughout the discussion]; Critical Thinking [rich in content; full of thoughts, insight, and analysis].
• 89–80 = B—Timeliness [frequently participates; all required postings; some not in time for others to read and respond]; Critical Thinking [substantial information; thought, insight, and analysis has taken place].
• 79–70 = C—Timeliness [infrequently participates; all required postings; most at the last minute without allowing for response time]; Critical Thinking [generally competent; information is thin and commonplace].
• <70 = F—Timeliness [rarely participates; some, or all required postings missing]; Critical Thinking [rudimentary and superficial; no analysis or insight is displayed].

Quizzes (15% of Final Grade Calculation)

Modules 1,2,3,4, and 5 will have short quizzes.

All assignments are due according to the dates in the Calendar.

Late submissions will be reduced by one letter grade for each week late (no exceptions without prior coordination with the instructors).

Assignments (15% of Final Grade Calculation)

Several modules will have templates and graphs assigned for analysis.  They will include a mix of qualitative assignments (e.g. literature reviews, model summaries), quantitative problem sets, and case study updates.

All assignment is due according to the dates in the Calendar.

Late submissions will be reduced by one letter grade for each week late (no exceptions without prior coordination with the instructors).

If, after submitting a written assignment you are not satisfied with the grade received, you are encouraged to redo the assignment and resubmit it. If the resubmission results in a better grade, that grade will be substituted for the previous grade.

Individual Case Study Assignments (15% of Final Grade Calculation)

(15% of the total grade: 5% for Presentation and 10% for report.  Case Study assignments are evaluated by the following grading elements:

Clarity of Presenting the Anomaly Cases 

Well done -Delineation of similarities and differences between the Case Studies is easily identified 

Acceptable- Understanding of the Case studies/anomalies not immediately clear; some additional content needed 

Some Weaknesses- Anomalies are difficult to determine; additional content needed to support objective 

Problematic- Objective cannot be determined 

Observations and interpretations of causes and effects 

Well done- Analysis is clearly supported by accurate evidence  

Acceptable -Many details support analysis, but some are not fully elaborated or sufficiently specific  

Some Weaknesses - Some evidence is provided, but data not fully explained or relevant 

Problematic- Little or no data to support the main ideas of the analysis 

Overall Lessons Learned 

Well done -Content and structure created a complete picture with understanding of actionable items 

Acceptable - Missing some content but generally conveys a solution set 

Some Weaknesses -Presentation is missing a substantial portion of content required by audience 

Problematic -No organization apparent 

Course Project (40% of Final Grade Calculation)

One small group project is assigned – the team assignment will be handed out at the midpoint of the course (before Module 8) and presented in the final mods. In this project, students will be required to work in teams to perform problem set solutions for real world scenarios. (40% of total grade --15% for presentation, 10% interim deliverable(s), 15% for submitted package).

Course Project Grading

Clarity of Presenting the Anomaly Cases 

Well done -Delineation of similarities and differences between the Case Studies is easily identified 

Acceptable- Understanding of the Case studies/anomalies not immediately clear; some additional content needed 

Some Weaknesses- Anomalies are difficult to determine; additional content needed to support objective 

Problematic- Objective cannot be determined 

Observations and interpretations of causes and effects 

Well done- Analysis is clearly supported by accurate evidence  

Acceptable -Many details support analysis, but some are not fully elaborated or sufficiently specific  

Some Weaknesses - Some evidence is provided, but data not fully explained or relevant 

Problematic- Little or no data to support the main ideas of the analysis 

Overall Lessons Learned 

Well done -Content and structure created a complete picture with understanding of actionable items 

Acceptable - Missing some content but generally conveys a solution set 

Some Weaknesses -Presentation is missing a substantial portion of content required by audience 

Problematic -No organization apparent 

Grading Policy

Grades are posted in a timely manner along with feedback where appropriate.

Course Policies

Often it is easiest to learn design principles from the hard lessons of others. Failures and anomalies are an excellent source of understanding of design requirements.  There may be some sensitivity by organizations or corporations and for that reason the class only uses open source material.

Guidelines on AI:

• Students are encouraged to explore and experiment with generative AI tools for learning purposes, but any use in assessments must be clearly indicated and appropriately attributed.
• The use of generative AI tools is strictly prohibited in all assessments to ensure fair evaluation of individual student performance.
• Generative AI tools may be used in activities and assignments, but students must include a reflection on their use and how it impacted their understanding of the material. 

For example:

You may choose to use AI generated material as a resource in discussions and assignments. The following are examples of how to use AI generated material and correctly cite in following the above guidelines. Note access dates are required for digital citations and all directly sourced material must be correctly attributed in footnotes or endnotes.

675.732 Example for Concept Map cite.  The outline topics of the Concept map on “Standardization of On Orbit Refueling Interfaces including RAFTITM “ was derived from AI Generated material (use the Tool cite as appropriate) and supplemented in each category by the author.

675.622 Example for Discussion cite: resources used in the response to the anodic coating for Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys include:  (see 4th reference for example)

• Mid-States Aluminum Corp. (n.d.). Anodizing Reference Guide. Retrieved Apr 19, 2022, from https://midstal.com/sft334/aluminum_reference_guide.pdf
• MIL-A-8625F, MILITARY SPECIFICATION: ANODIC COATINGS FOR ALUMINUM AND ALUMINUM ALLOYS. (1993, Sep 10). Retrieved Apr 19, 2022, from http://everyspec.com/MIL-SPECS/MIL-SPECS-MIL-A/MIL-A-8625F_2377/
• NASA. (2013, Aug 6). LLIS Proper Use of MIL-A-8625 Type II Anodize on 2000 and 7000 Series Aluminum Alloys. Retrieved Apr 20, 2022, from https://llis.nasa.gov/lesson/8403
• Cartoon created in Image created using OpenAI's DALL-E, a generative AI model, via ChatGPT 4.0 based on NASA JPL. (n.d.). MSL Curiosity Multimedia Images. Retrieved Apr 21, 2022, from https://mars.nasa.gov/multimedia/images/?page=0&per_page=25&order=pub_date+desc&
• Black anodic coatings for space applications: study of the process parameters, characteristics and mechanical properties. Retrieved Apr 24, 2022, from https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/195560778.pdf

Caution on the use of AI generated material:  AI is capable of generating material of dubious value:  Example related to Paschen’s Curve (especially relevant to gas when pulling a vacuum and breakdown voltages ..see Module 4 675.622)  AI produced this interesting piece: “if we were to take a creative approach and metaphorically 'apply' Paschen's Curve to an apple, we might imagine scenarios where the principles of electrical breakdown are compared to the breakdown of the apple's cellular structure. For example, if you increase the pressure on the apple (by squeezing it), there will be a point at which the apple's skin will break down and the apple will 'conduct' its juices, similar to how a gas will conduct electricity at the breakdown voltage.”  Cute answer but it will not generate any points upon grading!

Academic Policies

Deadlines for Adding, Dropping and Withdrawing from Courses

Students may add a course up to one week after the start of the term for that particular course. Students may drop courses according to the drop deadlines outlined in the EP academic calendar (https://ep.jhu.edu/student-services/academic-calendar/). Between the 6th week of the class and prior to the final withdrawal deadline, a student may withdraw from a course with a W on their academic record. A record of the course will remain on the academic record with a W appearing in the grade column to indicate that the student registered and withdrew from the course.

Academic Misconduct Policy

All students are required to read, know, and comply with the Johns Hopkins University Krieger School of Arts and Sciences (KSAS) / Whiting School of Engineering (WSE) Procedures for Handling Allegations of Misconduct by Full-Time and Part-Time Graduate Students.

This policy prohibits academic misconduct, including but not limited to the following: cheating or facilitating cheating; plagiarism; reuse of assignments; unauthorized collaboration; alteration of graded assignments; and unfair competition. Course materials (old assignments, texts, or examinations, etc.) should not be shared unless authorized by the course instructor. Any questions related to this policy should be directed to EP’s academic integrity officer at ep-academic-integrity@jhu.edu.

Students with Disabilities - Accommodations and Accessibility

Johns Hopkins University values diversity and inclusion. We are committed to providing welcoming, equitable, and accessible educational experiences for all students. Students with disabilities (including those with psychological conditions, medical conditions and temporary disabilities) can request accommodations for this course by providing an Accommodation Letter issued by Student Disability Services (SDS). Please request accommodations for this course as early as possible to provide time for effective communication and arrangements.

For further information or to start the process of requesting accommodations, please contact Student Disability Services at Engineering for Professionals, ep-disability-svcs@jhu.edu.

Student Conduct Code

The fundamental purpose of the JHU regulation of student conduct is to promote and to protect the health, safety, welfare, property, and rights of all members of the University community as well as to promote the orderly operation of the University and to safeguard its property and facilities. As members of the University community, students accept certain responsibilities which support the educational mission and create an environment in which all students are afforded the same opportunity to succeed academically. 

For a full description of the code please visit the following website: https://studentaffairs.jhu.edu/policies-guidelines/student-code/

Classroom Climate

JHU is committed to creating a classroom environment that values the diversity of experiences and perspectives that all students bring. Everyone has the right to be treated with dignity and respect. Fostering an inclusive climate is important. Research and experience show that students who interact with peers who are different from themselves learn new things and experience tangible educational outcomes. At no time in this learning process should someone be singled out or treated unequally on the basis of any seen or unseen part of their identity. 
 
If you have concerns in this course about harassment, discrimination, or any unequal treatment, or if you seek accommodations or resources, please reach out to the course instructor directly. Reporting will never impact your course grade. You may also share concerns with your program chair, the Assistant Dean for Diversity and Inclusion, or the Office of Institutional Equity. In handling reports, people will protect your privacy as much as possible, but faculty and staff are required to officially report information for some cases (e.g. sexual harassment).

Course Auditing

When a student enrolls in an EP course with “audit” status, the student must reach an understanding with the instructor as to what is required to earn the “audit.” If the student does not meet those expectations, the instructor must notify the EP Registration Team [EP-Registration@exchange.johnshopkins.edu] in order for the student to be retroactively dropped or withdrawn from the course (depending on when the "audit" was requested and in accordance with EP registration deadlines). All lecture content will remain accessible to auditing students, but access to all other course material is left to the discretion of the instructor.