This Challenge invites you to re-think the CubeSat using additive manufacturing!
The CubeSat is scalable by grouping multiple 1U CubeSat frames in 3U, 6U, or even 12U configurations to provide enhanced functionality in a more complex system. Regardless of configuration, each CubeSat has an interface compatible with a single launch deployment system.
By standardizing the geometry, componentry, and interfaces, the CubeSat model has radically dropped the cost of building and launching a small satellite. But, despite the efficiencies of standardization, the CubeSat remains constrained by traditional manufacturing methodology and the structure contains 30-50 parts including fasteners.
Now that we have the ability to consider additive manufacturing as a valid production manufacturing tool, Stratasys would like to support the development of the CubeSat by utilizing the benefits of additive manufacturing (also known as 3D Printing) to further promote innovation within the CubeSat community.
Many in the community have gravitated to additive manufacturing for building assembly fixtures, composite layup tools, prototypes and non-flight engineering design units, but advances in materials and processes are accelerating and flight components are now possible.
YOU MUST INCLUDE:
1. STL file
3. Description of your design
YOU ARE ENCOURAGED TO INCLUDE:
1. CAD file in any format
2. Additional description or infographic/document describing:
- Explanation of design solution and its advantages
- Additive build process and material selection, and why
- Key requirements considered
- Advantages of your design – what does Additive Manufacturing enable for CubeSat design, and what does your design solution enable for a CubeSat operator?
- State whether any patent application was filed.
1. Does the design meet the technical requirements given in the Challenge?
2. Technical Feasibility – Is the design buildable, and is the selected material (if not commercially available) feasible?
3. Producibility – The idea is to simplify, so the winning design should be readily producible for scalable manufacturing, and with a reduced part count.
4. Value (Cost x Relative Utility) – The winning design may not be the least expensive to produce, but the more expensive the design, the more relative benefit it must provide.
5. Optimal for Additive Manufacturing – Does the design take full advantage of the benefits of the selected additive manufacturing technique?
1. Design either a 1U (10cm x 10cm x 10cm) scalable structure similar to the standard CubeSat model, or an optimized point design at a 3U or 6U increment, using DFAM (design for additive manufacturing) principles.
2. The design should follow the intent of the CubeSat standard as described in the CubeSat Design Specification on www.cubesat.org, but need not meet the technical requirements.
3. The submission should be designed for compatibility with existing CubeSat deployment systems (Reference Spaceflight Industries secondary payload users guide) but need not be fully compliant with the technical requirements.
- Note that the Random Vibe requirement in 4.1.1 is a key driver for the structure.
- Consider focusing on a key design challenge for existing CubeSats to emphasize the value of your design solution:
- Wire routing in a volume-constrained environment.
- Conduction of heat from internal components to the skin.
1. Select one of the following Additive Manufacturing techniques:
A) FUSED DEPOSITION MODELING
- Advantages include the ability to utilize composites for greater material customization, current commercial system build volumes up to 36”x24”x36”, little or no material waste, the ability to heat stake fasteners or other components into thermoplastics, and the ability to pause a build for secondary operations.
- Comparative limitations include porosity, build time, and commercial material selection.
B) SELECTIVE LASER SINTERING
- Advantages include the ability to design structures that conventional subtractive manufacturing technologies are unable to replicate due to the self-supporting nature of SLS technology within the build chamber. Current commercial system build volumes up to 27x15x22 inches.
- Comparative limitations include the use of a full chamber of material powder for each build, and material selection.
C) DIRECT METAL LASER SINTERING
- Advantages include the ability to build geometries that are higher in complexity in production grade aerospace metals. Little to no material waste in comparison to conventional CNC machining in certain cases. Current commercial system build volumes up to 9x9x9 inches (4x4x4 inch preferred).
- Comparative limitations include cost and build volume.
2. Select a build material:
- Material does not need to be currently commercially available.
- No unobtainium, but reasonable stretches beyond commercial materials are expected and warranted for this application.
- Focus on environmental requirements – Outgassing, Thermal performance, Thermal Conductivity, Electrical Conductivity/Dissipation.
3. Material Options to consider as a starting point include:
- Thermoplastics such as Nylon, PEI and PEKK, and composites of those materials filled with glass, carbon fiber, or metal powder. Also consider post-processed Thermoplastics (painted, electroplated, or mylar wrapped)
- Metals including Al, Ti, amd 316SSL.
For more information on commercially available materials to start from, see www.stratasysdirect.com
ENTERING THE COMPETITION
The Challenge is open to everyone except employees and families of GrabCAD and the Sponsor. Multiple entries are welcome. Team entries are welcome.
By entering the Challenge you:
1. Accept the official GrabCAD Challenges Terms & Conditions.
2. Agree to be bound by the decisions of the judges (Jury).
3. Warrant that you are eligible to participate.
4. Warrant that the submission is your original work.
5. Warrant, to the best of your knowledge, your work is not, and has not been in production or otherwise previously published or exhibited.
6. Warrant neither the work nor its use infringes the intellectual property rights (whether a patent, utility model, functional design right, aesthetic design right, trademark, copyright or any other intellectual property right) of any other person.
7. Warrant participation shall not constitute employment, assignment or offer of employment or assignment.
8. Are not entitled to any compensation or reimbursement for any costs.
9. Agree the Sponsor and GrabCAD have the right to promote all entries.
If you think an entry may infringe on existing copyrighted materials, please email firstname.lastname@example.org
SUBMITTING AN ENTRY
Only entries uploaded to GrabCAD through the "Submit entry" button on this Challenge page will be considered an entry. Only public entries are eligible.
We encourage teams to use GrabCAD Workbench for developing their entries.
Entries are automatically given the tag "cubesat" when uploading to GrabCAD. Please do not edit or delete this tag. Only entries with valid tag will participate in the Challenge.
AWARDING THE WINNERS
The sum of the Awards is the total gross amount of the reward. The awarded participant is solely liable for the payment of all taxes, duties and other similar measures if imposed on the reward pursuant to the legislation of the country of his/her residence, domicile, citizenship, workplace, or any other criterion of similar nature. Only 1 award per person.
All judging decisions are final.
All winners will be contacted by the GrabCAD staff to get their contact information and any other information needed to get the prize to them. Payment of cash awards is made through PayPal. All team awards will be transferred to the member who entered the Challenge.
We will release the finalists before the announcement of the winners to give the Community an opportunity to share their favorites in the comments, discuss concerns, and allow time for any testing or analysis by the Jury. The Jury will take the feedback into consideration when picking the winners.
Winning designs will be chosen based on the Rules and Requirements.
- Entry deadline is June 22, 2015 (11:59pm UTC).
- The finalists will be announced by July 10, 2015.
- The winners will be announced by July 31, 2015.
Void where prohibited.
Awards for TOP 10 places.
- $2,500 cash
- Your design printed by Stratasys Direct Manufacturing (*)
- Makerbot® Replicator® and material pack.
- Featured story in Stratasys online communication and use of your design as an example part in Stratasys trade show and conference appearances.
- $1,000 cash
- Your design printed by Stratasys Direct Manufacturing (*)
- Makerbot® Replicator® and material pack
- $500 cash
- Makerbot® Replicator® and material pack.
- $100 cash
- Makerbot T-Shirt
- 3D Printed Sample Part
(*) Stratasys Direct Manufacturing models will be produced with commercial materials.
Recognizing the need to develop custom solutions for high requirements markets, Stratasys, the world leader in Additive Manufacturing, formed Vertical Solutions teams for key industries. Drawing top technical and management talent from those key industries, Stratasys built teams that speak the language and understand the core challenges of their respective markets. The Aerospace Vertical Solutions Team is sponsoring the Additive CubeSat Challenge, with collaboration from our GrabCAD, Makerbot, and Stratasys Direct Manufacturing colleagues.
Stratasys Ltd. (Nasdaq:SSYS), headquartered in Minneapolis, Minnesota and Rehovot, Israel, is a leading global provider of 3D printing and additive manufacturing solutions. The company's patented FDM®, PolyJet™, and WDM™ 3D Printing technologies produce prototypes and manufactured goods directly from 3D CAD files or other 3D content. Systems include 3D printers for idea development, prototyping and direct digital manufacturing. Stratasys subsidiaries include MakerBot, Solidscape, GrabCAD, and Stratasys Direct Manufacturing. Stratasys has more than 3,000 employees, holds over 600 granted or pending additive manufacturing patents globally, and has received more than 25 awards for its technology and leadership.
For more information, visit the company's website at www.stratasys.com