John:
Per your suggestion, I have examined your
data for the U band Receiver. I shall first examine the power supplies for the
receiver. The data that I have elicited from your information is as
follows, powers in Watts:
Device
Dissipation Delivered
U16
0.340
0.850
U17
0.411
U18
0.384
1.200
U19
0.108 0.090
U20
0.040
0.224
------------ ------------
Totals
1.283W 2.364W
For a grand total power dissipation of the
power system of 3.647W. Of the delivered power you have identified two devices
that suck up (U2 = 0.490W and U3 = 0.388W) a total of 0.878W. It is not
clear where the remaining 1.486W is dissipated. Your help in identifying where
this thermal energy is dumped in the module would be helpful, just to make sure
that no stone remains unturned in this matter of handling these dissipations.
Hot resistors could be an issue of concern......
You talk (somewhat glibly) of sinking
regulator devices to PCB copper pads and such. For at least five devices, U2,
U3, U16, U17, & U18 I consider that such mounting is not acceptable as such
concentrated dissipations, exacerbated by the vacuum environment, must be
treated more specifically in achieving heat sinking to the module housing. The
module Base Plate, drawing E05 21, being of somewhat robust 1.6mm thick aluminum
should help significantly in dissipating these module powers. More direct
thermal coupling methods are going to be needed in this module to get that heat
to the Base Plate. PCB thermal conductivities, even enhanced by added copper,
are not good at all and cannot really be depended upon in these
situations.
With this module "pushing" the envelop of
module power rating, baring a full heatsink module, it is clear that the
coatings of the module will not be bare aluminum. This raises the ante in the
picture of keeping command-level modules from getting too cold in the eclipse
situation. The original concept for maintaining full control of the spacecraft
through a 3 hour eclipse, where the spaceframe can be as low as -130°C or lower,
low power, command-sensitive modules would not become dangerously cold, provided
that their dissipations are indeed low and the thermal coatings highly
reflective. If on the other hand we depend upon higher dissipation modules, such
as this URx, then the module temperatures may be a concern in the eclipse
situation. This is all subject to detailed analytic examination upon the
construction of a full spacecraft analytic model, which we do not have at the
moment, we first need a detailed mechanical design before having that
analytic model.
In any event, this URx presents a
significant thermal challenge. Solving this challenge first needs an
understanding of the physical bodies of these devices of the forenoted concern.
Can you provide me with the physical information on these devices, either
directly or by URL? Can you also respond to my earlier question on where the
rest of the power dissipation resides? By one means or another we need to
engineer a more direct thermal connection between these devices and the E05 21
Base Plate, which may require some inventiveness of our
collective crania.
'73,
Dick Jansson, KD1K
(ex: WD4FAB)
---------------------------