[HN Gopher] Designing a Star Tracker for Astronaut Don Pettit to...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Designing a Star Tracker for Astronaut Don Pettit to Use on the ISS
        
       Author : wallflower
       Score  : 47 points
       Date   : 2025-01-14 18:31 UTC (4 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (petapixel.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (petapixel.com)
        
       | mkmk wrote:
       | > Don is a bit of a machinist himself, so we decided to have some
       | fun with the device name.
       | 
       | I don't get it, anyone able to explain?
        
         | petee wrote:
         | I think its just them being overly technical on the naming the
         | mechanism, ie _" Rotational Coil Spring Powered"_, rather than
         | just being a plain ol Windup Star Tracker
        
         | snypher wrote:
         | My only thought is 'RCSPAST' is the joke, but I still don't get
         | it.
         | 
         | Edit: I think maybe Don's reputation as an in-space inventor
         | (first patent for something invented in space) means the clock
         | spring device got a long and contrived name for it's quite
         | basic function.
        
       | ColinWright wrote:
       | This tripped me up:                 "I was not a big fan of
       | designing a        mechanical clock unless there was
       | another option."
       | 
       | So either this should be _"... unless there was no other option
       | ",_ or I'm completely misunderstanding.
        
       | lysace wrote:
       | Neat.
       | 
       | Debbie Downer: Looks like it fairly easily could have been made
       | with like 50% less mass.
       | 
       | Perhaps that wouldn't have mattered though.
        
         | echoangle wrote:
         | True, I wonder how that would not be a factor, surely they
         | always have stuff they could send up to the ISS as a backup. So
         | if they would have made this 500g lighter, they could have sent
         | 500g more food, for example.
         | 
         | I also can't imagine that the resupply flights are volume
         | limited instead of mass.
        
           | imglorp wrote:
           | NASA's 2-year cert for electronics requirement is puzzling. I
           | understand rules about mission critical electronics: you want
           | to (a) depend on it and (b) avoid fire, magic smoke, and
           | blowing breakers on the Station. But for a non-critical
           | application, you don't care about (a) and the risk of (b)
           | from a 5V/2A microcontroller with a worm drive motor seems
           | reasonably remote.
        
             | echoangle wrote:
             | Did you mean to post this under my comment? I don't see the
             | connection.
        
               | imglorp wrote:
               | Yes - it might have been 500g lighter if it wasn't fully
               | mechanical.
        
               | echoangle wrote:
               | True, but even for a fully mechanical one, the one shown
               | seems very heavy. It looks like weight wasn't a real
               | concern, which is strange. The plates are very thick and
               | a lot of material could have been removed to reduce
               | weight.
        
             | someguydave wrote:
             | Nobody involved wants to take the risk, no matter how
             | trivial
        
         | polishdude20 wrote:
         | They've got the camera mounted to it using a long moment arm in
         | one of the photos. The tracker needs to be really rigid to hold
         | it I'd think.
        
           | lysace wrote:
           | "Long" = like 70 cm.
        
         | dylan604 wrote:
         | fairly easily how? bold statement with no explanation of your
         | ideas on where the wasted mass is.
         | 
         | the front/back plates? looks like your standard 3/8" aluminum
         | plates. could they have used 1/4"? other materials like
         | plastic/carbon would probably not have passed NASA
         | requirements. plastic/carbon could chip into small pieces which
         | is a very bad thing on the ISS. so you're left with a metal,
         | and aluminum is pretty safe choice. it's clear there are
         | several holes in these plates that are not tapped and are there
         | solely as a means to reduce the weight.
         | 
         | moving the pieces closer for a tighter fit resulting in a
         | overall smaller unit size? this thing is meant for ease of use.
         | extra space affords that, and making it more compact
         | complicates its use.
        
           | echoangle wrote:
           | You could have made a lot of holes on those plate to reduce
           | weight while still having it very rigid. Those plates are
           | extremely oversized right now.
        
       | dylan604 wrote:
       | Looking at the way the system is rigged to the wall of the
       | station is quite humorous to me in how it is taking full
       | advantage of being weightless. From the arm the camera is
       | attached to the tracker, and then the tracker being mounted to
       | the one arm just seems like it would collapse on itself if it
       | were on terra firma.
       | 
       | I've seen some crazy/shitty rigging done, but this one gets a
       | pass because it's in spaaaaaaaace
        
         | zokier wrote:
         | I do kinda struggle to understand the geometry here though.
         | Especially in the picture with the black-out fabric, how is the
         | camera rotating to track stars?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-01-18 23:01 UTC)