- 27
- 20 357
Build a CubeSat
Switzerland
เข้าร่วมเมื่อ 25 ธ.ค. 2023
#artlist100kfund Application: Building an Open Source Satellite
The #artlist100kfund is a yearly contest in which @artlist_io funds an out-there project with 100'000 USD. So naturally, I am applying, because my quest to build an #opensource #satellite is about as out there as it gets =D
Go here to apply: artlist.io/lp/100kfund/
Music Credits:
Get Down - Instrumental Version by CaptainQubz
Licensed with @artlist_io
B-Roll Credits:
@SpaceX
@NASA
@deepblueaerospace7575
Go here to apply: artlist.io/lp/100kfund/
Music Credits:
Get Down - Instrumental Version by CaptainQubz
Licensed with @artlist_io
B-Roll Credits:
@SpaceX
@NASA
@deepblueaerospace7575
มุมมอง: 156
วีดีโอ
CubeSat EPS v1: PCB Design Review and Challenges
มุมมอง 2Kวันที่ผ่านมา
After some trials and tribulations, it's my pleasure to share with you the first (and flawed, but hopefully functional) revision of my #cubesat EPS #pcb =) Thanks again to @dario_fresu for providing feedback! Definitely check out his channel if you want to learn more about PCB design. *Timestamps* 00:00 Intro 00:30 Board Overview 01:53 Battery Connection Pins and Jumpers 02:59 Back Side 03:25 L...
Structure Update: Panels, Connectors, Magnetorquer Ideas
มุมมอง 298หลายเดือนก่อน
In today's video we talk about how my #cubesat's #structure is coming along in #cad Solar and other panels, brackets, the EPS PCB, experimental connector stuff, and potential future magnetorquer ideas. *Timestamps* 00:00 Intro 00:31 EPS PCB Envelope 01:02 Solar Panels and Connectors 01:55 Experimental Receptacle Usage 02:44 Center of Mass Adjustability 03:32 Other EPS PCB stuff 04:40 Experiment...
CubeSat EPS v1: KiCad 8 Schematic, Part 2/2
มุมมอง 451หลายเดือนก่อน
In this video, we finish our #kicad #schematic walk-through of my #cubesat Electrical Power System v1. If you haven’t seen the first part, here it is: th-cam.com/video/YYE7vHrqCd8/w-d-xo.html This time around we mainly talk about connecting the #eps to the side panels (where the solar cells are) and to the rest of the system. Also, I will tell you about how I plan to make the battery chargers a...
CubeSat EPS v1: KiCad 8 Schematic, Part 1/2
มุมมอง 4712 หลายเดือนก่อน
This is the first version of the Electrical Power System (#EPS) #schematic for my DIY #cubesat done in #kicad 8. In this video I walk you through most of the components I chose and how I try to achieve some resilience through redundancy and a bunch of telemetry. If you have any suggestions, please let me know. I’m new at electronics design, so I am more than happy to learn from you all :) *Time...
CubeSat EPS: Breadboard Prototype
มุมมอง 5512 หลายเดือนก่อน
In this episode we find out if the main components I picked for my #cubesat EPS actually work together by hooking up some eval boards to a @raspberrypi Pico W on a breadboard. *Timestamps* 00:00 Intro 00:25 Solar Cells 01:35 Battery Charger 02:15 Buck Regulator 02:46 3V3 Regulator and RBF Jumper 03:36 Dashboard and PMBus Struggles 06:16 Charging Test 07:06 Discharging Test 08:36 Next Steps and ...
CubeSat EPS: Block Diagram and Part Selection
มุมมอง 9453 หลายเดือนก่อน
My first step towards designing an Electrical Power System for my #CubeSat (or #EPS for short, aka. BMS or Battery Management System) is to make a simple #blockdiagram and then select some parts that are easy to work with. The great @RGSAT is my inspiration for this, but I take a slightly different approach. All of this is in preparation for breadboarding and schematic capture, which I will cov...
Connecting the PCB Stack in my CubeSat with M.2
มุมมอง 6654 หลายเดือนก่อน
In this side note we explore how M.2 connectors could be used to connect the PCB stack in a #CubeSat. This idea is heavily inspired by #MicroMod by #SparkFun - that's why I call it MacroMod for now, but please do suggest a better name, I beg you. *Timestamps* 00:00 Intro 00:09 #PC/104 01:19 SparkFun MicroMod 02:35 MacroMod 04:30 Daughter Boards *Links* @sparkfun #MicroMod www.sparkfun.com/micro...
CubeSat Structure: EPS Bay
มุมมอง 3644 หลายเดือนก่อน
In this episode we are taking a look at the #EPS compartment of my #CubeSat, basically where the batteries and the battery management system will go. _Timestamps_ 00:00 Intro 00:35 EPS Bay Tour 06:00 Cost 07:00 Battery Contact PCBs Thanks to @Snaptron for the contact dome samples and @PCBWay for once again doing a good job! (not sponsored) _Repo Links_ EPS Bay CAD files in the Structure Repo: c...
Battery Selection for a CubeSat EPS
มุมมอง 6625 หลายเดือนก่อน
What do you need to take into account when choosing batteries for the harsh conditions of launching to and operating in space? Find out as I share my journey into the rabbit hole of #18650 #lithiumbatteries and learn how the @NASAJPL saves the day once again. *Timestamps* 00:00 Intro and Requirements 00:57 What's UL-listed? 01:31 Choosing a form factor 03:57 Choosing a chemistry 06:48 Where to ...
CubeSat Structure: Rails
มุมมอง 4956 หลายเดือนก่อน
In this episode I tell you all about my #cubesat #rail #design. We get into their various features, open questions and why they are not quite flight-ready yet. *Timestamps* 00:00 Intro 00:08 Fabrication by #pcbway and Cost 01:08 Assembly 04:15 PCB Clamp Demo 05:48 Vibration Mitigation 08:24 CAD Overview in #fusion360 08:26 CDS Compliance of Bolt Hole Pattern 11:57 Panel Mounting Slots 12:36 Sym...
Direct to Cell Technology in 2024: A Quick Summary
มุมมอง 2.5K6 หลายเดือนก่อน
Direct to Cell Technology in 2024: A Quick Summary
CubeSat Structure: From Idea to Mockup
มุมมอง 3446 หลายเดือนก่อน
CubeSat Structure: From Idea to Mockup
Launching a CubeSat to Space: Rideshare Missions Explained
มุมมอง 2907 หลายเดือนก่อน
Launching a CubeSat to Space: Rideshare Missions Explained
CubeSat Standard Read-Through: Electrical Specifications (Part 2 of 2)
มุมมอง 2888 หลายเดือนก่อน
CubeSat Standard Read-Through: Electrical Specifications (Part 2 of 2)
CubeSat Standard Read-Through: Mechanical Specifications (Part 1 of 2)
มุมมอง 4628 หลายเดือนก่อน
CubeSat Standard Read-Through: Mechanical Specifications (Part 1 of 2)
Developing a DIY CubeSat: Where to Start
มุมมอง 2.3K8 หลายเดือนก่อน
Developing a DIY CubeSat: Where to Start
schöns projekt
Merci :)
nutzisch du github?
Sub #908 Baby!!
Haha thanks man =D
LFG!
Thanks for sharing. What version of kicad are you using coz I see it supports dark theme
Thanks for watching! I am using 8.0.6 and the theme options are located in Preferences -> Preferences... -> PCB Editor -> Colors
This is the sort of channel we need more of on YT. Sharing information about more advanced projects and applications. Looking forward to the future videos.
Building REV 2 for my EPS set to launch next year. Thanks for the valuable insight into your design
Awesome! Just watched your NASA ASCEND video, beautiful footage. Are you going to document your next launch too?
plz we need a detailed series on how to make an EPS for cubesat.
I'm on it :) there are two videos about the schematics and one about the PCB layout on my channel right now
@@buildacubesat Thankyou, it will be a great help for Electrical engineering students.
I think some people may use the Cubesat format for ballon flight - to start being familiar with the architecture. That may explain the presence of sensors related to the atmosphere
Good point! I have done that myself multiple times. It may be beneficial to advertise the purpose of such sensors more clearly though imo.
9:02 i think you're misinterpreting "unspecified signal impedance requirements", you say it's not applicable to your signals that don't have controlled impedance requirements, when that's exactly what that condition is referring to. this is saying "for signals that don't state a specific controlled impedance requirement, aim for 50 ohms", or in other words, most of the signals on the board. I'm far from an EMI expert (just a hobbyist), and I def find controlled impedance intimidating too, but there are online calculators you can use, they ask you for a bunch of info about the stackup (which should be available from your fab, in fact a lot of fabs have their own calculator that inputs this data for you), whether the signal is single-ended or differential, and your desired impedance, and it'll tell you the trace width and spacing (technically, you pick a value for either width or spacing and it gives you the other one, then you fiddle with the values till you get something that fits well into your design). No idea if the advice to use 50 ohms by default is valid, but given how harsh the environment is up there, it seems reasonable to me to have *some* default controlled impedance for non-specified signals. also: controlled impedance is weird, because you usually have some amount of unavoidable discontinuities in the trace impedance. unless the chip package, connector, and any other components in the signal path have been designed specifically to perfectly match your board stackup, the geometry of the pads probably won't perfectly match the width/spacing needed for your stackup. if you wanna get really fancy, you can smooth the transitions between the non-ideal pad sizes and the correct trace sizes, but there's gonna be a couple mm here and there where the impedance is a bit off. (not to mention the connectors themselves, take a look at ethernet for example, the spec's maximum cable length is predicated on a maximum number of jacks it can pass through because each jack is a discontinuity). As far as I can tell, this seems to just be accepted and budgeted for in signal integrity requirements, but i don't know the specifics of how that works / how to calculate whether you're within tolerance (especially since in space your tolerances are probably more strict than the official spec!) I would expect all the signals on the board (definitely i2c, probably CAN as well) to work just fine, and the issues will be in emission of and susceptibility to EMI, and possibly error rate if you're driving the CAN bus rly fast. so, stuff you def need to fix before flight but will likely work well enough for initial tests. i2c especially should be functional, as long as the actual circuit is correct and you're not driving the clock in the MHz. and if i understand your CAN pass-through correctly, you have maybe a few mm of track total that the signal passes through, so the size of the discontinuity is pretty small (in a lot of designs i've seen, there's usually a couple mm of wrong impedance breaking signals out of a footprint). no idea how that discontinuity scales across multiple boards stacked together though, that might add up to a problem.
Hey! Thank you so much for taking the time to comment in this level of detail, this is super helpful! I did understand the "unspecified signal impedance requirements" in the same way you mentioned - it's just that I don't always succeed in expressing myself coherently in these unscripted parts... I appreciate you mentioning this though. So for r2 I will definitely look into impedance control and use the approach you suggested (get in tha ballpark using online calculator and then tweak track sizes and spacings to fit in the design). That's an interesting vantage point, I have never thought of connectors being much of a problem for SI, rather cable/trace length between them and EMI. So I suppose in my design, the limiting factor may actually be the number of M.2 connectors a signal may go through in the stack up. Interesting! I dont' plan to run anything in the MHz range. For I2C, the usual 400 kHz mode will be plenty I think. You also brought up something I read a few times now, but never quite understood: Why do you think LEO would be a harsh environment regarding EMI? Would ionizing radiation (solar / cosmic background radiation) have an influence? Because thinking about just how empty it is up there, it would seem to be a much more benign environemnt regarding EMI than say an average office building. About smoothing transition between pad sizes and traces: Would you tend to step-up trace widths (like Phil Salmony tends to do) or use teardrops? Thanks again for the input. I will start a Discord next season, would be awesome to see you there :)
@@buildacubesat so to be clear this is all just anecdotal advice from my relatively limited experience as a hobbyist. my main assumption around stricter requirements in space is just, a vague sense of "radiation" being a problem, and the much higher cost of failure, since a lot of otherwise recoverable or easily fixable error states are potentially mission-ending when you can't physically access the device. i think what you're saying about it being much quieter up there is probably true, and ionizing radiation is a totally different thing from EMI, so i'm likely overstating the problem, i guess i was mainly just going off the general association between aerospace and stricter standards. I have not done any research into transitioning btwn trace sizes, my main intent was just to point out that lots of applications seem to get by with just accepting those small discontinuities. but i definitely think it's worth exploring how to optimize that, i just don't know much about that myself.
my intuition would say test your i2c bus at 400kHz, but also some much lower frequency (whatever the lowest your application can afford is) and use that in the final version, just to give you a nice big margin of safety. also: some of i2c devices implement CRC checksum functionality, you can check for that and make use of it where available to give you extra assurance
@@spambot7110 Sure, I understand that and your comments are still very much appreciated :) I want to look more into EMI/SI for space next year and ideally have a CubeSat dev as a guest on the channel who may be able to share some insights. For now, until the high altitude balloon test flight in June, I am going with a 'good enough if it works' approach to keep the momentum going, and then after that, I will start going over each subsystem with a fine-toothed comb and move into a space-worthy design direction. Well-reasoned comments like yours will be great to refer back to in the future, so thanks again for taking the time.
@@buildacubesat oh i just thought of something, when you see the length matching squiggles in a trace, when it's a differential pair of traces and the squiggle is on just one of them (for skew correction), that's another impedance deviation. so, i still don't know how to quantify it, but clearly there's a way to budget for it
Nice videos. U motivated me to try and learn more about CubeStas! Laptop specs?
Hey and thanks for the comment! I'm happy to hear that :) This is a framework 13", with the 12th gen i5. I can really recommend framework laptops, definitely check them out
out of everything, your CAN will most certainly work. I have people using seen untwisted wires for can bus and they work just fine for small node lengths. if you manufacture this with JLCPCB they wont charge you for via in pad service. I dont know about others, but as this is going on a satellite you might have to go to other vendors that uses more exotic materials and process to manufacture pcbs. but for one off prototype JLCpcb should be sufficient. Listen to the recent podcast from The Amp Hour, its on cubesat.
That would of course be great, I'm eager to find out! =) I sent this to PCBWay for manufacturing (they also make all the CNC parts) and you're right, for flight hardware a different substrate may be needed (they also offer Rogers). But that's still a few years away :) Thanks for the comment and also the telling me about that TAH episode, will definitely check it ou!
Hey man, I've just found your channel, and as an electrical engineering student that wants to get into the space industry a lot more, I want to thank you for these really good and information heavy videos! I've been binge watching your videos and have come to learn a lot of interesting information on things that I had no idea about, and have seen a lot of crucial problems when making cube sats. Thanks again for the videos and please keep making them :)
Hey! Thanks so much for the kind words, that means a lot =) It's great to know that this stuff is useful for someone getting into the space industry. Best of luck with your studies, and I'll definitely keep the videos coming! Feel free to drop any questions or topics you'd like to see covered in future videos
You made micromodule out of micromodule, :D. Will the buck module with parts on both sides fit into the hole on main board? Looks very nice overall.
Yeah basically, babushka-style xD Thanks! Yes, I placed all components in a 20 x 20 mm area, so if I didn't mess up too badly, this should work.
aw hell yeah, another cubesat channel. Rg sat kind of went MIA so there is potential in this channel. Im planning on starting an organzation where we build a cubesat at my university and I like watching stuff like this, so keep it up!
Hi! Great to hear that you are starting a CubeSat project - no better time than the present if you ask me :) Are you going to open-source it too? I got in touch with Richard from RGSat a while back and he mentioned being super busy with work, but not having abandoned the project. So I'm keeping my fingers crossed for him to continue at some point.
@@buildacubesat Well I'm glad he didn't quit. But yeah, I do plan on making everything open source, even the ground station. I think open sourcing things like this especially the flight computer is good for the community considering commercial products are so expensive.
@@mdarnell321 100% percent agree! Make sure to send a link to your project my way, would love to follow
Man! I really appreciate your content. Keep it up!
I know you said that there could be a couple of videos more before the break, but just in case for whatever reason this turns out to be the last video of season 1: Enjoy your break!!! We'll see you in February!
Thanks man! I really appreciate you sticking with the channel through the first season 🛰
I forgot to mention that most of the SMD parts on the back are part of the LDO section. Hope you like the video!
I am a bit confused, referring to commercial setups vs DIY. You made a comment regarding commercial platforms have been designed by Aerospace Engineers, is this a requirement for cubesat manufacturers? I ask, as if it is required, then why invest time, money and energy into a project that would not take flight if devised by a hobbyists level enthusiast. I think the concept of DIY is neat, though seems simpler to pursue commercial. Maybe i am not understanding the processes involved.
Hi Ryan, thanks for your comment! You're absolutely right - if your goal is to get to orbit asap and you have the funding, then buying a CubeSat bus with flight heritage from a well-established vendor is 100% the way to go. My project, however, is about exploring whether there can be a more accessible, open-source path for CubeSat development. So far, I haven’t hit any roadblocks, but I still have years to go before any qualification testing. So yes, commercial is definitely easier, but DIY is more interesting imho :) Did that answer your question?
Yes, I appreciate the feedback.... I was playing with this idea, as every since I was a kid, I wanted to make something of my own and have launched into orbit, standing the reason in pursuing DIY over commercial. I was not aware these had to be built by Aerospace Engineers. I was following the Stanford Model as published by NASA for the frame which i intended on building myself. As far as the payload, electronics speaking, I am looking into considering a commercia modular set-up, allowing for a customized platform.
@@ryanpuckett134 This has been a long-held dream of mine too :) Well, CubeSats certainly don't _have_ to be built by aerospace engineers, otherwise most student projects (like the Stanford one) would never have gotten off the ground. It's just that if you buy a commercial bus, it's more than likely that the people who made it are actual aerospace engineers. As far as I can tell, the only formal "qualifications" you absolutely need is a license to operate radios on your CubeSat and a company or institution to carry any insurance you may need. Apart from that, if your CubeSat passes qualification testing, you should be good. I plan to talk to Exolaunch in the near future about the details of this process and will make a video about it.
@@buildacubesat Thank you again for your feed back! I am enjoying the videos, you are definitely light-years ahead, of my progress. I like your modular rail system, I am thinking of using vertical standoffs for my application. is there a maximum width for rails, I have noticed many minimum surface requirements, but was curious if there were a maximum exterior width limit. Are you using deployment switches? If so, what switch are you thinking to use?
@@ryanpuckett134 I don't think there is a maximum rail width stated in the CDS, but usually they are as slim as possible for practical reasons, like maximizing the available volume and minimizing weight and manufacturing cost. Also, in my opinion it's advisable to not put more structural parts into orbit than necessary (to minimize orbital debris and aluminum oxide particulates in the upper atmosphere). Yes, I am planning to use a flexure to push down on dome switched on a PCB as deployment switches. There will be a few videos on that in season 2 :)
Sorry, i hat to write in german... Toller Kanal. Besonders für alle die bei RG SAT angefangen haben. Leider hast du da einen Nischenkanal in einer großen Nische. Aber für die Menschen die sich für cubesats interessieren wird es eine Goldgrube sein. Ich gebe zu ich gehöre zu denen die die private Raumfahrt und die ganzen cubesats fruher eher skeptisch betrachtet haben. Mittlerweile sehe ich aber was das für Möglichkeiten eröffnet. (Was leider in den deutschen Medien nicht wahrgenommen wird) Es war nie billiger und einfacher einen eigenen Satelliten in den Weltraum zu bringen als heute. Es sei denn man wartet bis morgen. Mit den Cubesats sehe ich das ähnlich wie früher mit dem Amateurfunk. Dort wurde auch in den Hobbykellern getüftelt und erfunden, und dabei ist auch einiges rausgekommen. Ich kann mir vorstellen das man über cubesats auch "einfacher" eigene Ideen in den Weltraum bringen kann, und hier und da sicher tolle sachen rauskommen werden. Und dank Leuten wie dir, die das ganze auch open source machen wird sicher in Zukunft noch vieles mehr möglich werden.
Great video series. I like the calm, relaxed way you tell the story. I'm excited to see what happens next.
Great work!!
H̶e̶y̶ ̶F̶o̶l̶k̶s̶!̶ ̶I̶ ̶h̶a̶v̶e̶n̶'̶t̶ ̶g̶o̶t̶t̶e̶n̶ ̶a̶r̶o̶u̶n̶d̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶u̶p̶d̶a̶t̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶r̶e̶p̶o̶ ̶w̶i̶t̶h̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶n̶e̶w̶ ̶f̶i̶l̶e̶s̶ ̶y̶e̶t̶,̶ ̶b̶u̶t̶ ̶I̶ ̶w̶i̶l̶l̶ ̶d̶o̶ ̶s̶o̶ ̶i̶n̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶n̶e̶x̶t̶ ̶f̶e̶w̶ ̶d̶a̶y̶s̶.̶ Hope you like the video! 🛰 Edit: Repo is up to date now :)
Hi. I found your interesting Channel after I checked if there is something new on the RG Sat Channel. Do you know Something about his Project? I think it was never cheaper than thoday to launch the own Satellite. Unless you wait untill tomorrow.
Hello and welcome! I definitely agree and I'm looking forward to what the next decade has in store in that regard :) I did reach out to Richard a year or so ago and he mentioned being busy with work but that the project had not been abandoned. Here's to hoping!
I like the architecture you have here. I have a question, have you considered the radiation effects or tolerance with this design?
Thank you! :) I don't worry too much about radiation at this point, mainly because there are a bunch of other things that need to work before radiation can even become a problem. And also in LEO, radiation still seems to be relatively benign. My list of priorities up until the high altitude balloon test flight next year are: 1. Get it to work at all, 2. Thermals, 3. SI/EMI
Looking forward to the board layout!
It's been a challenge, but I'm trucking along :) Thanks for watching!
Hi Manuel, Just found your channel and the videos are great. What checks are actually performed by these launch companies to make sure the sat is powered off and can not emit any rf until deployment? Best Graham
Hi Graham Thank you so much, I am really happy to hear that! :) Great question! I think this mainly works through providing the necessary documentation to that end. Are you familiar with the NASA CubeSat 101 document? Check out chapters 6.2 (Transmitter Survey) and 6.7 (Electrical Report). Basically you provide detailed diagrams of your system and a list of all transmitters so the launch provider can verify that your inhibit logic is sound. I think this is how it work for most missions, although I think it's plausible that a LP may conduct independent RF/EMI/EMC tests for more exotic payloads. Would that be a topic you would like to see a video about at some point? Maybe I can get someone form Exolaunch to talk to me about these things.
@buildacubesat Hi Manuel, Thanks for the reply. This would make for a great video. I have read those docs, but I have not seen anything concrete about what actual tests are done to prove it. Attestation documentation from the maker of the device is false security, it's pretty surprising that launch providers accept this. But this is part I am trying to find out about. Best Regards, Graham
Very interesting!
Electronics 😍 Keep that Awesome stuff coming Sir
Will do! 🫡
great to see another episode. i really appreciate all the insights and the open approach to your project. your cubesat series has slowly become one of my favorite things to follow to youtube
Thank you so much, this means a lot to me! :)
Interesting series so far. Looking forward to your progress. How did you get your estimate for the launch of a 2U cubesat? Cheapest offering I've found was around 40k for a 2U by Alba Orbital
Thank you :) Do you mean the 5K figure? That's my guesstimation of what launch costs for a 2U may by the mid 2030s (when I plan to be ready to launch this). So no hard evidence there, just hoping for economies of scale.
LOVE our CubeSat friends 🛰
Can't wait to send a CM4 (or 5?) to orbit some day! <3
Great video, keep it up!
You could use a mosfet for the reverse current protection. Might be worth it since the voltage drop over Rds(on) is way smaller than the schottkey voltage.
Thanks for the comment, that's interesting! How would you implement this? With an ORing controller (like the LTC4358)?
@@buildacubesatinteresting ic but the voltage range of 9-24V seems like an issue. Do you have a simulation for energy harvesting part of your sat?
@@aculleon2901 Not yet, I feel like there are too many unknowns as of now to start working on simulations. Let me get back to you once I have a first draft of the schematic. Getting to that point should clear up a number of questions.
@@buildacubesat Sure 👍. I would be glad to help you. Do you have a github repo or something similar?
@@aculleon2901 Cool :) I have a Codeberg repo, but the schematic on there is very much a WIP. Unfortunately YT won't let me post URLs here, but there is a link in the description and if you go to main project, you will find the is a hardware repo.
The next thing I would like to try with the LTM4675 (after getting the PMBus telemetry to work reliably) is reading its internal temp sensors and characterize the temp rise when at different currents and at ambient pressure vs. in a vacuum. Also I just noticed a discrepancy between the telemetry and the actual current displayed on the adjustable load at 08:05 just now. That's one more thing to look into. Hope you like the episode :)
Which adjustable load is that?
It's called Atorch DL24, I think I got it on Aliexpress
Great videos. Subscribed
It is much more reasonable to have a vertial (like sitting parallel to rails, just behind solar panels) carrier board with set of M.2 (or shatever you want) connectors with goldfinger receiptance. Those carriers could also be stackable. In your design you would stuck with soldering M.2 connectors, as they usually have plastic or even metal tabs to hold connector on PCB.
If you still want to have a stack-up of boards, look at the proper mezzanine connectors, like Conan line from Amphenol.
Thanks for the input! This sounds interesting, do you have any visualizations of that layout? I had looked at a number of different board-to-board connectors but kept coming back to M.2 because using simple 2 layer PCBs of various lengths as connectors seems very flexible and cost-efficient. It is completely unproven though, so I may very well fall back on a different solution. I don't remember if I had evaluated the Conan line, will look into it. Thanks again!
Very interesting stuff.
Thanks :) Can't wait to start breadboarding.
Are you planning on having the boards, even prototype ones, professionally assembled? The LGA form factor is impossible to hand solder, and I don't know well they work with hobbyist-level oven/hot air/hot plate soldering. In my experimentation I always try to stay away from packages that can't be easily soldered, even if in practice I usually use an oven - all too often, I've had to touch up the solder by hand.
I am going to break the PMIC and DC regulator sections out to stamp-sized PCBs that that fit on a MHP30 hot plate, hoping that this would make assembly DIY-able. I have never worked with LGA before, just BGA, but i figured the usual stencil, paste and hot plate method should work here... But yes, if all else fails, these may end up needing PCBA service then. Thanks for the heads up, that's really helpful!
@@buildacubesat - if you've done BGAs successfully this way, then the LGA should be just fine. I've stayed away from both, because I wasn't sure it'd work in a DIY environment. Good to know that it does.
Great work! Very inspiring!
Glad you liked it!
How can your channel only have 242 subscribers? I can't believe it hasn't launched itself (pun intended) through the stratosphere already... I lovei it!
Haha thanks, that's so nice of you! It's a long way to the stratosphere, and we are just getting started :)
That was brilliant!! Thanks. I really enjoyed it
Thank you!
Nice view of Bern.
Thanks :) It sure was a lovely day for a HAB flight
Hammer Videos! So detailliert öber das Thema geds sälte👌
Merci! =) Freut mi sehr, dases interessant fingsch!
Board-to-board I'd use Canbus, or another differential protocol. Much more resistant to interference.
Thank you! I was suspecting this may be the way to go.
will you share the stl files in the future? im not that good at cad x3
Absolutely! You can find them here: codeberg.org/buildacubesat-project/bac-structure
@@buildacubesat god you are THE man thanks :3
Happy to help! x) make sure you're subscribed, there is a lot more to come in the future
@@buildacubesat when i saw your channel i instantly subbed x3
Great series! Keep at it brother!
Thanks! Will do!
Got my follow, looking forward to your journey and I love your commitment 🎉
Thanks for sharing the feedback! Very nice project!