Tethers In Space Handbook

TSS-1 Third Edition

December 1997

SEDS-2

M.L. Cosmo and E.C. Lorenzini

Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory

Prepared for
NASA Marshall Space Flight Center
Tethers In Space Handbook
Edited by
M.L. Cosmo and E.C. Lorenzini
Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory

for
NASA Marshall Space Flight Center
Grant NAG8-1160 monitored by C.C. Rupp
M.L. Cosmo and E.C. Lorenzini, Principal Investigators

Third Edition
December 1997

The Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory

is a member of the
Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics

Front Cover: (left) Photo of TSS-1 taken from the Shuttle cargo bay, 1992;
(right) Photo of SEDS-2 in orbit taken from the ground, 1994.
This page intentionally left blank
 FOREWORD

A new edition of the Tethers in Space Handbook was needed after the last edition
published in 1989. Tether-related activities have been quite busy in the 90Õs. We have had
the flights of TSS1 and TSS1-R, SEDS-1 and -2, PMG, TIPS and OEDIPUS. In less than three
years there have been one international Conference on Tethers in Space, held in Washington
DC, and three workshops, held at ESA/Estec in the Netherlands, at ISAS in Japan and at the
University of Michigan, Ann Harbor. The community has grown and we finally have real
flight data to compare our models with. The life of spaceborne tethers has not been always
easy and we got our dose of setbacks, but we feel pretty optimistic for the future. We are just
stepping out of the pioneering stage to start to use tethers for space science and
technological applications. As we are writing this handbook TiPs, a NRL tether project is
flying above our heads.

There is no emphasis in affirming that as of today spaceborne tethers are a reality and
their potential is far from being fully appreciated. Consequently, a large amount of new
information had to be incorporated into this new edition.

The general structure of the handbook has been left mostly unchanged. The past editors
have set a style which we have not felt needed change. The section on the flights has been
enriched with information on the scientific results. The categories of the applications have
not been modified, and in some cases we have mentioned the existence of related flight data.
We felt that the section contributed by Joe Carroll, called Tether Data, should be
maintained as it was, being a ÒclassicÓ and still very accurate and not at all obsolete.
We have introduced a new chapter entitled Space Science and Tethers since flight
experience has shown that tethers can complement other space-based investigations.
The bibliography has been updated. Due to the great production in the last few years we
had to restrict our search to works published in refereed journal. The production, however, is
much more extensive. In addition, we have included the summary of the papers presented at
the last International Conference which was a forum for first-hand information on all the
flights.

We would like to thank the previous editors, W. Baracat and C. Butner, P.Penzo and P.
Amman, for having done such a good job in the past editions that has made ours much easier.

The completion of this handbook would not have been possible without the contributions
from the following people:

A. Allasio A. Jablonski J. Puig-Suari

F. Angrilli L. Johnson W. Purdy
S. Bergamaschi K. Kirby C. Rupp
M. Candidi J. Longuski D. Sabath
J. Carroll M. Martinez-Sanchez J. Sanmartin
K. Chance P. Merlina A. Santangelo
S. Coffey L. Minna S. Sasaki
D. Crouch J. McCoy N. Stone
R. Estes A. Misra B. Strim
L. Gentile V. Modi T. Stuart
F. Giani P. Musi G. Tacconi
M. Grossi M. Novara G. Tyc
D. Hardy K. Oyama F. Vigneron
R. Hoyt P. Penzo M. Zedd

ii
Also, we would like to thank the staff of the Science Media Group at SAO for their help.
NASA support for this work through Grant NAS8-1160 from NASA Marshall Space Flight
Center is gratefully acknowledged.

Mario L. Cosmo
Enrico C. Lorenzini

Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory

Cambridge, Massachusetts

December 1997

iii
 Tethers in Space Handbook - Third Edition
Table of Contents
Page

Foreword ....................................................................................................................... ii

SECTION 1.0 TETHER FLIGHTS

1.1 The Tethered Satellite System Program: TSS-1

and TSS-1R Missions................................................................................ 2
1.2 The Small Expendable Deployer System (SEDS):
SEDS-1 and SEDS-2 Missions ................................................................. 15
1.3 The Plasma Motor Generator (PMG) ...................................................... 21
1.4 The Tether Physics and Survivability Spacecraft (TiPS) .......................... 25
1.5 The OEDIPUS Tethered Sounding Rocket Missions................................. 28

SECTION 2.0 PROPOSED TETHER FLIGHTS

2.1 Electrodynamic Tethers For Reboost of the International

Space Station ......................................................................................... 37
2.2 An Upper Atmospheric Tether Mission (ATM) ..................................... 41
2.3 The Naval Research LaboratoryÕs Advanced Tether
Experiment........ .................................................................................... 46
2.4 The AIRSEDS-S Mission ...................................................................... 49
2.5 The RAPUNZEL Mission ..................................................................... 51
2.6 Tether Mechanism Materials and Manufacture Project........................... 52
2.7 The Space Tether Experiment (STEX) ................................................. 53

SECTION 3.0 TETHER APPLICATIONS

3.1 General ................................................................................................... 55

3.2 Tether Applications Listing .................................................................... 56
3.3 Tether Applications ................................................................................ 58

SECTION 4.0 TETHER FUNDAMENTALS

4.1 GRAVITY GRADIENT ......................................................................... 119

4.1.1 General ........................................................................... 119
4.1.2 Controlled Gravity ........................................................... 124
4.1.3 Constellations ................................................................. 128
4.2 ROTATION OF TETHER SYSTEMS ..................................................... 132
4.2.1 General ........................................................................... 132
4.2.2 Controlled Gravity .......................................................... 132
4.3 MOMENTUM EXCHANGE .................................................................. 134
4.3.1 General-Conservation of Angular Momentum .................. 134
4.3.2 Tether Payload Deployment ........................................... 135
4.3.3 Orbit Variations................................................................ 136

iv
 Page

4.4 ELECTRODYNAMICS ......................................................................... 137

4.4.1 General ........................................................................... 137
4.4.2 Electric Power Generators .............................................. 137
4.4.3 Thrusters ........................................................................ 146
4.4.4 ULF/ELF/VLF Antennas ................................................. 148
4.4.5 Constellations .................................................................. 150
4.5 REFERENCES ...................................................................................... 151

SECTION 5.0 TETHER DATA

5.1 General .................................................................................................. 153

5.2 Generic Issues ........................................................................................ 154
5.3 Orbit Equations and Data ....................................................................... 155
5.3.1 Orbits and Orbital Perturbations ...................................... 155
5.3.2 Orbital Perturbations ....................................................... 157
5.3.3 Aerodynamic Drag .......................................................... 159
5.3.4 Thermal Balance ............................................................. 161
5.3.5 Micrometeoroids and Debris ............................................ 163
5.4 Tether Dynamics and Control .............................................................. 165
5.4.1 Gravity Gradient Effects ................................................. 165
5.4.2 Dumbbell Libration in Circular Orbit ............................... 167
5.4.3 Tether Control Strategies ............................................... 169
5.4.4 Momentum Transfer Without Release ............................ 171
5.4.5 Orbit Transfer by Release or Capture .............................. 173
5.4.6 Energy and Angular Momentum Balance ........................ 175
5.5 Tether Material Consideration .............................................................. 177
5.5.1 Tether Strength and Mass ............................................... 177
5.5.2 Tether Impact Hazards ................................................... 179
5.6 Electrodynamic Tethers ...................................................................... 181
5.6.1 Interactions with Earth's Magnetic Field and Plasma ....... 181
5.6.2 Electrodynamic Orbit Changes ........................................ 183
5.6.3 Tether Shape and Libration Control ............................. 185

SECTION 6.0 SPACE SCIENCE AND TETHERS

6.1 Overview ............................................................................................... 188

6.2 Synergy ............................................................................................... 191

SECTION 7.0 REFERENCES

7.1 General ................................................................................................. 195

7.2 Table of Contents of the Fourth International Conference on
Tethers in Space .................................................................................... 196
7.3 Bibliography .......................................................................................... 210

SECTION 8.0 CONTACTS .................................................................................... 218

Acknowledgments .......................................................................................................... 234

v
vi
SECTION 1.0 TETHER FLIGHTS

1
 1.1 The Tethered Satellite System Program: TSS-1 and TSS-1R Missions

Figure 1.1 TSS-1 Satellite and Tether Attached to 12 Meter Extendible Boom

The Tethered Satellite System (TSS) was proposed to NASA and the Italian Space
Agency (ASI) in the early 1970's by Mario Grossi, of the Smithsonian Astrophysical
Observatory, and Giuseppe Colombo, of Padua University. A science committee, the
Facilities Requirements Definition Team (FRDT), met in 1979 to consider the possible
scientific applications for long tethers in space and whether the development of a tethered
system was justified. The FRDT report, published in 1980, strongly endorsed a Shuttle-based
tether system. A NASA-ASI memorandum of understanding was signed in 1984, in which
NASA agreed to develop a deployer system and tether and ASI agreed to develop a special
satellite for deployment. A science advisory team provided guidance on science
accommodation requirements prior to the formal joint NASA-ASI Announcement of
Opportunity for science investigations being issued in April, 1984.
The purpose of the TSS was to provide the capability of deploying a satellite on a long,
gravity-gradient stabilized tether from the Space Shuttle where it would provide a research
facility for investigations in space physics and plasma-electrodynamics. Nine investigations
were selected for definition for the first mission (TSS-1) in July, 1985. In addition, ASI
agreed to provide CORE equipment (common to most investigations) that consisted of two
electron guns, current and voltage monitors and a pressure gauge mounted on the Orbiter, and
a linear accelerometer and an ammeter on the satellite. NASA agreed to add a hand-held low
light level TV camera, for night-time observation of the deployed satellite. The U.S. Air
Force Phillips Laboratory agreed to provide a set of electrostatic charged particle analyzers,
mounted in the Shuttle's payload bay, to determine Orbiter potential.

2
 Figure 1.2 TSS-1 Configuration on Orbiter

During TSS-1, which was launched July 31, 1992 on STS-46, the Italian satellite was
deployed 268 m directly above the Orbiter where it remained for most of the mission. This
provided over 20 hours of stable deployment in the near vicinity of the Orbiter--the region
of deployed operations that was of greatest concern prior to the mission. The TSS-1 results
conclusively show that the basic concept of long gravity-gradient stabilized tethers is sound
and settled several short deployment dynamics issues, reduced safety concerns, and clearly
demonstrated the feasibility of deploying the satellite to long distances--which allowed the
TSS-1R mission to be focused on science objectives.

Figure 1.3 TSS1 and TSS1R Timelines

The TSS-1R mission was launched February 22, 1996 on STS-75. During this mission,
the satellite was to have been deployed 20.7 km above the Space Shuttle on a conducting
tether where it was to remain for more than 20 hours of science experiments, followed by a
second stop for an additional seven to nine hours of experiments at a deployed distance of
2.5 km.
The goals of the TSS-1R mission were to demonstrate some of the unique applications of
the TSS as a tool for research by conducting exploratory experiments in space plasma

3
physics. It was anticipated that the motion of a long conducting tether through the Earth's
magnetic field would create a large motional emf that would bias the satellite to high voltages
and drive a current through the tether system. The circuit for the tether current would be
closed by a large external loop in the conducting ionospheric plasma where an array of
physical phenomena and processes would be generated for controlled studies.
Although the TSS-1R mission was not completed as planned, the Italian satellite was
deployed to a distance of 19.7 km--making TSS-1R the largest man-made electrodynamic
structure ever placed in orbit. This deployment was sufficient to generate high voltages
across the tether and extract large currents from the ionosphere. These voltages and
currents, in turn, excited several space plasma phenomena and processes of interest. Active
tether science operations had begun at satellite fly-away and continued throughout the
deployment phase, which lasted more than 5 hours. As a result, a high-quality data set was
gathered and significant science activities had already been accomplished prior to the time
the tether broke. These activities included the measurement of the motional emf, satellite
potential, Orbiter potential, current in the tether, charged particle distributions, and electric
and magnetic fields. Significant findings include:

(1) Currents, collected by the satellite at different voltages during deployment, that
exceeded the levels predicted by the best available numerical models by factors of up
to three (see figure 1.4).
(2) Energetic electrons, that are not of natural ionospheric origin and whose energy
ranged as high as 10 keV, were observed coincident with current flow in the tether.
These data suggested possible energization of electrons by wave-particle
interactions(see figure 1.5).
(3) A large increase of the tether current, a precipitous drop of the satellite bias voltage,
very intense and energetic ion fluxes moving outward from the satellite's high-voltage
plasma sheath, and a strong enhancement of the ac electric field in the 200 Hz to 2
kHz range-all observed to be concurrent with a satellite ACS yaw thruster firing.
These observations imply a plasma density enhancement by ionization of the neutral
gas emitted by the satellite thrusters.

Figure 1.4 Measured TSS-1R and Figure 1.5 Energetic electron Population
theoretically predicted I-V characteristics measured at the satelliteÕs surface.

It is already apparent, therefore that the data gathered during TSS-1R have the potential
to significantly refine the present understanding of the physics of (1) the collection of
current and production of electrical power or electrodynamic thrust by high-voltage tethered
systems in space, (2) the interaction of spacecraft, and even certain types of celestial bodies,

4
with their local space plasmas, and (3) neutral gas releases in space plasmas and their effect
on both of the above processes.

Figure 1.6 TSS Functional Schematic

The sensor package on the boom was electrically isolated from the satellite, and its
potential was controlled by the ROPE floating power supply. For satellite potentials up t o
500 V, the sensor package was maintained near the local plasma potential to allow
unambiguous measurements to be obtained. The potential of the sensor package could also be
swept to allow the package itself to serve as a diagnostic probe.

TSS-1R Science Investigators

TSS Deployer Core Equipment and electrodynamic interaction of the tethered

Satellite Core Equipment system with the ionosphere. The TSS
(DCORE/SCORE) Core Equipment controls the current
flowing through the tether between the
Carlo Bonifazi, Principal Investigator satellite and the orbiter and makes a
Agenzia Spaziale Italiana number of basic electrical and physical
measurements of the Tethered Satellite
The Tethered Satellite System Core System.
Equipment will demonstrate the capability Deployer Core Equipment consists of
of a tethered system to produce electrical several instruments and sensors on the
energy and will allow studies of the starboard side of the MPESS in the

5
payload bay. A master switch connects electrostatic deflection system, which
the tether conductor to science equipment determines the charged particle direction
in the orbiter payload bay; a power of motion over a range of 100 degrees,
distribution and electronic control unit routes particles to a retarding potential
provides basic power, command, and data analyzer, which determines the energy of
interfaces for all Deployer Core the ion stream, measuring particle energies
Equipment except the master switch; and a from 0 to 100 electron volts (eV). The
voltmeter measures the tether potential directional discrimination of the
with respect to the orbiter structure. The Differential Ion Flux Probe will allow
Core Electron Accelerator has two scientists to differentiate between the
electron-beam emitters that can eject up ionospheric ions flowing around the
to 750 milliamperes of current from the satellite and the ions that are created in
system. Two other instruments the satellite's plasma sheath and
complement the electron accelerator's accelerated outward by the sheath's electric
operations: a vacuum gauge to measure field.
ambient gas pressure and to prevent The Soft Particle Energy
operation if pressure conditions could Spectrometer instrument is a collection of
cause arcing and a device to connect either five electrostatic analyzers that measure
generator head to the tether electrically. electron and ion energies from 1 t o
Satellite Core Equipment consists of a 10,000 eV. Three analyzer modules
linear three-axis accelerometer and an provide measurements at different
ammeter. The accelerometer (along with locations on the surface of the satellite's
the satellite's gyroscope) will measure hemispherical Payload Module. These
satellite dynamics, while the ammeter will sensors determine the potential of the
provide a slow sampling monitor of the satellite and the distribution of charged
current collected on the skin of the TSS- particles flowing to its surface. Two other
1R satellite. Soft Particle Energy Spectrometer sensors,
mounted with the Differential Ion Flux
Probe on the end of the boom, measure
Research on Orbital Plasma ions and electrons flowing both inward and
Electrodynamics (ROPE) outward from the satellite. These
measurements can be used to calculate the
Nobie Stone, Principal Investigator local potential of the plasma sheath.
NASA Marshall Space Flight Center The sensor package on the boom is
electrically isolated from the satellite, and
This investigation is designed to study its potential is controlled by the floating
the behavior of the ambient ionospheric power supply. For satellite potentials up
charged particle populations and of ionized to 500 V, the sensor package will be
neutral particles around the TSS-1R maintained near the local plasma potential
satellite under a variety of conditions. to allow unambiguous measurements to be
Since the collection of free electrons from obtained. The potential of the sensor
the surrounding plasma produces current in package also can be swept, allowing the
the tether, knowledge of the behavior of package itself to serve as a diagnostic
charged particles is essential to probe.
understanding the physics of tether current
production.
From its location on the satellite's
fixed boom, the Differential Ion Flux
Probe measures the energy, temperature,
density, and direction of ambient ions that
flow around the satellite, as well as neutral
particles that have been ionized in the
satellite's plasma sheath and accelerated
outward radially. In this instrument, an

6
Research on Electrodynamic Tether On the opposite boom, a plasma
Effects (RETE) package determines electron density,
plasma potential, and low-frequency
Marino Dobrowolny, Principal fluctuations in electric fields around the
Investigator satellite. A Langmuir probe with two
Agenzia Spaziale Italiana metallic sensors samples the plasma
current; from this measurement, plasma
The behavior of electrostatic waves density, electron temperature, and plasma
and plasma in the region around a tethered potential may be determined. This
satellite affects the ability of that satellite potential is then compared to that of the
to collect ions or electrons and, satellite. Two other probes measure low-
consequently, the ability of the tether t o frequency electric fields.
conduct an electric current. This
investigation provides a profile of the
electrical potential in the plasma sheath Magnetic Field Experiment for TSS
and identifies waves excited by this Missions (TEMAG)
potential in the region around the satellite.
probes, placed directly into the plasma in Franco Mariani, Principal Investigator
the vicinity of the satellite, map Second University of Rome
alternating current (ac) and direct current
(dc) electric and ac magnetic fields The primary goal of the TEMAG
produced as the current in the tether is investigation is to map the magnetic fields
changed by instabilities in the plasma around the satellite. If the magnetic
sheath or as the Fast-Pulse Electron disturbances produced by satellite
Accelerator or Core Electron Accelerator interference, attitude changes, and the
or Core Electron Accelerator is fired in tether current can be removed from
the payload bay. measurements of the ambient magnetic
The instruments are mounted in two fields, the Tethered Satellite System will
canisters at the end of a pair of 2.4 m prove an appropriate tool for magnetic
extendible booms. As the satellite spins, field studies.
the booms are extended, and sensors Two triaxial fluxgate magnetometers,
measure electric and magnetic fields, very accurate devices designed to measure
particle density, and temperature at magnetic field fluctuations, are located on
various angles and distances in the the fixed boom. One sensor at the tip of
equatorial plane of the satellite. To the boom and another at mid-boom
produce a profile of the plasma sheath, characterize ionospheric conditions at two
measurements of dc potential and electron distances from the satellite, determining
characteristics are made both while the the magnetic signature that is produced as
boom is fully extended and as it is being the satellite moves rapidly through the
extended or retracted. The same ionosphere. Combining measurements
measurements, taken at only one distance from the two magnetometers allows real-
from the spinning satellite, produce a map time estimates to be made of the magnetic
of the angular structure of the earth. fields produced by the presence of satellite
One boom carries a wave sensor batteries, power systems, gyros, motors,
canister, which contains a three-axis ac relays, and permanent magnets. The
electric field meter and a two-axis search environment at the tip of the boom should
coil ac magnetometer to identify electric be less affected by the spacecraft
fields and electrostatic waves and t o subsystems than that at mid-boom. After
characterize the intensity of surrounding the mission, the variable effects of
magnetic fields. Highly sensitive radio switching satellite subsystems on and off,
receivers and electric field preamplifiers of thruster firings, and of other operations
within the canister complement the that introduce magnetic disturbances will
operations of the probes. be modeled by investigators in an attempt

7
to remove these spurious signals from the current and voltage, while controlling
data. tether circuit load resistance. The Fast-
The two magnetometers will make Pulse Electron Accelerator emits an
magnetic field vector readings 16 times electron beam of 100 or 200 milliamperes
per second to obtain the geographic and at an energy of 1000 electron volts. The
temporal resolution needed to locate beam can be pulsed with on/off times
short-lived or thin magnetic structures. ranging from 400 nanoseconds to 107
The readings will be made two times per seconds. The beam balances the tether
second to allow discrimination between current and is used to control the level of
satellite-induced magnetic noise, the charging of the Space Shuttle orbiter. In
magnetic signals produced by the tether addition, the beam is used as an active
current, and the ambient environment. stimulus of the plasma near the orbiter in
The magnetometers will alternate these support of several scientific objectives.
rates: while the one on the tip of the The Spherical Retarding Potential
boom operates 16 times per second, the Analyzer, mounted on a stem at one
midpoint magnetometer will operate twice corner of the support structure, records
per second and vice versa. Data gathering plasma ion density and energy distribution
begins as soon as possible after the satellite in the payload bay. Similarly, a Langmuir
is switched on in the payload bay and Probe measures electron plasma
continues as long as possible during temperature and density and is mounted on
satellite retrieval. the tower also. At the center of the
support structure, the Charge and Current
Probe measures the return current to the
Shuttle Electrodynamic Tether orbiter, recording large and rapid changes
System (SETS) in orbiter potential, such as those that are
produced when electrons are conducted
Brian Gilchrist, Principal Investigator, from the tether to the orbiter frame or
University of Michigan when an electron beam is emitted. A
three-axis fluxgate magnetometer
This investigation is designed to study measures the magnetic field, allowing the
the current-voltage characteristics of the magnetic field lines in the payload bay t o
orbiter-tether-satellite system and the be mapped, which is crucial since electron
fundamental controlling parameters in the beams and the flow of plasma spiral in
Earth's ionosphere. This is accomplished response to these fields. Using this
through control of the tether system information, scientists can aim the
electrical load impedance and the emission electron beam at various targets, including
of electrons at the orbiter end of the orbiter surfaces, to study the fluorescing
system. The experiment also explores the that occurs.
use of space tethers as science tools.
Orbiter charging processes are measured
using electron emissions plus the tethered Shuttle Potential and Return Electron
satellite as a remote electrical reference. Experiment (SPREE)
Plasma waves generated by electron beams
are measured by receives at the satellite. David Hardy, Principal Investigator
Ionospheric spatial structure is Department of the Air Force, Phillips
investigated by simultaneous in-situ Laboratory
measurements at both the orbiter and
satellite. Also, electrodynamic tether low- SPREE will measure the charged
frequency radio wave reception, emission, particle populations around the orbiter for
and transient response are investigated. ambient space conditions and during active
The hardware is located on the MPESS TSS-1R operations. SPREE supports the
near the center of the payload bay and TSS-1R electrodynamic mission by
adjacent to the deployer pallet. A Tether determining the level of orbiter charging
Current-Voltage Monitor measures tether with respect to the ambient space plasma,

8
by characterizing the particles returning t o film. This new system combines the
the orbiter as a result of TSS-1R electron image intensifier and the charge-coupled
beam operation, and by investigating local device in the same package. The
wave particle interactions produced by advantage of charge-coupled devices over
TSS-1R operations. film is that they allow real-time
SPREE is mounted on the port side of observation of the image, unlike film,
the MPESS. The sensors for SPREE are which has to be processed after the
two pairs of electrostatic analyzers, each mission. The system also provides higher
pair mounted on a rotary table motor resolution in low-light situations than do
drive. The sensors measure the flux of all conventional video cameras.
electrons and ions in the energy range The imaging system will operate in
from 10 eV to 10 keV that impact the four configurations: filtered,
orbiter at the SPREE location. The interferometric, spectrographic, and
energy range is sampled either once or filtered with telephoto lens. The basic
eight times per second. The sensors system consists of a 55 mm F/1.2 or 135
measure the electrons and ions mm F/2.0 lens attached to the charge-
simultaneously over an angular field of coupled device equipment. Various slide-
view of 100 x 10 degrees. This field of mounted filters, an air-spaced Fabry Perot
view, combined with the motion of the interferometer, and spectrographic
rotary tables, allows SPREE measurements equipment will be attached to the
over all angles out of the payload bay. equipment so that the crew can perform
The Data Processing Unit (DPU) various observations.
performs all SPREE command and control In one mode of operation, the current
functions and handles all data and power developed in the Tethered Satellite System
interfaces to the orbiter. In addition, the is closed by using electron accelerators t o
DPU processes SPREE data for use by the return electrons to the plasma surrounding
crew and the ground support team. A the orbiter. The interaction between these
portion of the SPREE data is downlinked electron beams and the plasma is not well
in real time, and the full data set is stored understood. Scientists expect to gain a
on two SPREE Flight Data Recorders better understanding of this process and
(FDRs). Each FDR holds up to 2 gigabytes how it affects both the spacecraft and the
of data for postflight analysis. plasma by using the charge-coupled device
to make visual, spectrographic, and
interferometer measurements. Thruster
Tether Optical Phenomena gasses also may play a critical role in
Experiment (TOP) Tethered Satellite System operations. By
observing optical emissions during the
Stephen Mende, Associate Investigator buildup of the system-induced
Lockheed electromotive force (emf) and during gas
discharges, scientists can understand better
Using a hand-held camera system with the interaction between a charged
image intensifiers and special filters, the spacecraft and the plasma environment
TOP investigation will provide visual data and will increase their knowledge of how
that may allow scientists to answer a the current system closes at the poles of
variety of questions concerning tether the voltage source.
dynamics and optical effects generated by
TSS-1R. In particular, this experiment
will examine the high-voltage plasma Investigation of Electromagnetic
sheath surrounding the satellite. Emissions by the Electrodynamic
In pace of the image-intensified Tether (EMET)
conventional photographic experiment
package that has flown on nine previous Robert Estes, Principal Investigator
Shuttle missions, a charge-coupled device Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory
electronic system will be used instead of (SAO)

9
 below 10 kHz. Since the Tethered
Observations at the Earth's Surface of Satellite System operates in the
Electromagnetic Emissions by TSS ionosphere, it should radiate waves more
(OESEE) efficiently. For frequencies lower than 15
kHz, the radiated signals from a 1 k W
Giorgio Tacconi, Principal Investigator space transmitter may equal that from a
University of Genoa 100 kW ground transmitter.
Waves generated by the tether will
One goal of these investigations is t o move in a complex pattern within the
determine the extent to which waves that ionosphere and into the magnetosphere.
are generated by the tether interact with EMET and OESE science teams will
trapped particles and precipitate them. operate ground stations equipped with
Wave-particle interactions are thought t o magnetometers at remote sites along the
occur in the Van Allen radiation belts TSS ground track. The EMET sites on
where waves, transmitted from Earth, Mona Island (Puerto Rico) and Bribie
"jar" regions of energetic plasma and cause Island (Australia) are capable of measuring
particles to "rain" into the lower frequencies from near dc to 40 kHz. The
atmosphere. Although poorly understood, OESEE sites in the Canary islands and
wave-induced precipitation is important Kenya utilize Superconducting Quantum
because it may affect activity in the Interference Devices (SQUIDs) and coil
atmosphere closer to Earth. Various wave magnetometers to monitor frequencies
phenomena that need to be evaluated are below 100 Hz. Researchers at these sites
discrete emissions, lightning-generated will try to measure the emissions produced
whistlers, and sustained waves, such as by the TSS and will track the direction of
plasma "hiss." Wave receivers on the waves that are generated when electron
satellite detect and measure the accelerators in the orbiter payload pulse
characteristics of the waves, and particle the tether current as the orbiter passes
detectors sense wave-particle interactions, overhead. The incoherent scattering radar
including those that resemble natural and antenna at the Arecibo Radio
interactions in radiation belts. Ground Telescope facility will attempt to observe
stations may be able to detect faint the ionospheric perturbations produced by
emissions produced as waves disturb the TSS system.
particles and enhance ionization.
Furthermore, the current is carried away
from the tethered system through the Investigation and Measurement of
ionosphere by electromagnetic waves. Dynamic Noise in the TSS (IMDN)
Also, investigators want to know what
type of wave predominates in this process Gordon Gullahorn, Principal Investigator
and whether the tether-ionosphere current Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory
closure occurs near the system or hundreds
of kilometers away. Ground-based Theoretical and Experimental
measurements may be able to shed light on Investigation of TSS Dynamics (TEID)
this question.
Another goal is to determine how well Silvio Bergamaschi, Principal Investigator
the Tethered Satellite System can Institute of Applied Mechanics
broadcast from space. Ground-based
transmissions, especially those below 15 TSS-1R will be the longest structure
kHz, suffer from inefficiency. Since large ever flown in space, and its dynamic
portions of ground-based antennas are behavior will involve oscillations over a
buried, most of the power supplied to the wide range of frequencies. Although the
antenna is absorbed by the ground. major dynamic characteristics are readily
Because of the large antenna size and predicted, future applications of long
consequent high cost, very few ground- tethers demand verification of the
based transmitters operate at frequencies theoretical models. Moreover, higher

10
frequency oscillations, which are electron accelerators. Also of interest are
essentially random, are more difficult t o the plasma waves generated as the tether
predict. This behavior, called "dynamic current is modulated. All data collected on
noise," is analogous to radio static. An the mission will be combined to refine
understanding of its nature is needed if these models.
tethered platforms are to be used for Two- and three-dimensional
microgravity facilities and for studying mathematical models of the
fluctuations in the small-scale structure of electrodynamics of the tether system will
Earth's gravitational and magnetic fields. be developed to provide an understanding
These gravitational fluctuations are caused of the behavior of the electric and
by variations in the composition and magnetic fields and the charged particles
structure of Earth's crust and may be surrounding the satellite. These studies are
related to mineral sources. expected to model the plasma sheath
These two investigations will analyze (through which the satellite travels) under
data from a variety of instruments t o a variety of conditions. This includes
study Tethered Satellite System dynamics. those in which the motion of the tether
The primary instruments will be the and neutral gas emissions from the
accelerometers and gyros on board the thrusters are not considered, those that
satellite; however, tether tension and incorporate the effects of tether motion,
length measurements and magnetic field and those that factor in the gas emissions.
measurements also will be used. The The sheath surrounding the orbiter has
dynamics will be observed in real time at several unique features that are related t o
the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) the ability of the electron accelerators t o
Payload Operations Control Center control the orbiter's potential. Models of
(POCC) and will be subjected to detailed the orbiter's sheath, when small currents
postflight analysis. Basic models and are flowing in the tether, will consider the
simulations will be verified (and extended potential of the orbiter to be negative; for
or corrected as needed); then, these can be large currents, models will be developed
used confidently in the design of future assuming a positive orbiter potential. In
tethered missions, both of the Tethered this way, the sheath structures and
Satellite System and of other designs. The impedance characteristics of the
dynamic noise inherent to the system will orbiter/plasma interface can be studied.
be analyzed to determine if tethered The response of plasma to the
systems are suitable for sensitive electromotive force produced by the
observations of the geomagnetic and motion of the tether system through the
gravitational fields and, if required, t o geomagnetic field is another focus of the
develop possible damping methods. TMST investigation. Using data from
other studies, kinetic plasma processes will
be analyzed or numerically simulated by
Theory and Modelling in Support of computer to model the reaction of the
Tethered Satellite Applications ionosphere to the passage of TSS-1R.
(TMST) This investigation also models the
relationship between the efficiency of
Adam Drobot, Principal Investigator wave generation and the amount of
Science Applications International current flowing through the tether t o
Corporation (SAIC) examine how the tether antenna couples
to the ionosphere and how ultra-low-
This investigation will develop frequency (ULF) and very-low frequency
numerical models of the tether system's (VLF) wave propagate through the
overall current and voltage characteristics, ionosphere. These models will
of the plasma sheaths that surround the complement the information gathered by
satellite and the orbiter, and of the TSS-1R instruments at ground stations.
system's response to the operation of the

11
 The Subsatellite element (TSS-S) of the Tethered Satellite System (TSS)

Figure 1.7 TSS-S during TSS-1R Mission

The TSS-S is a Shuttle-tethered instrumented platform supporting dynamic and

electrodynamic investigations; it thus avails the unique opportunity offered by the tether
complex. The TSS-S has flown twice, first in August, 1992, then in February, 1996 and its
performance has exceeded expectations both times.
As shown in figure 1.7, the Satellite has a roughly spherical shape with an outer diameter of
1.6 m; it features two fixed and two deployable/retractible booms. One of the fixed booms
(with struts) is one meter long and it is meant for scientific instrument accommodation at its
tip and midpoint (2.5 kg overall), while the other fixed boom supports the subsatellite's RF
communications antenna. The two deployable/retractible booms (DRBs) are designed to take
science instrument packages weighing up to 1.5 kg per boom up to 2.35 m away from the
satellite shell in 14 mm steps.

As shown in fig. 1.8, the satellite is functionally divided into three "modules", namely the
Service Module (SM), the Auxiliary Propulsion Module (APM) and the Payload Module
(PM). The SM is the hemisphere located on the tether' side and it accommodates all
subsystems but for the power and command-data handling units interfacing with the
experiments; these, together with the science experiment equipment, are housed inside the
PM, i.e. the hemisphere opposite to the tether. The SM and PM are separated by, and join
at, the APM, which is made up by the equatorial plane, the propellant tank and all the valves,
piping and propellant management equipment. The TSS Satellite has an overall mass of about
521 kg, out of which up to 66 kg made up by science instruments and 61 kg by the gaseous
nitrogen propellant (GN2) for satellite attitude and rate control and for tether tension
augmentation to support early TSS-S deployment and to keep the tether taut during
proximity operations, when the gravity-gradient-originated tension is too weak to guarantee
that the tether does not become slack. Yaw thrusters are provided at the Satellite's equatorial
plane for yaw attitude and yaw rate control; each yaw thruster has two nozzles and provides
0.5 Nm pure torque about the "vertical" axis using about 1.7 g/s of on-board propellant. Yaw
attitude control accuracy is

12
 about 1 deg of the desired angle while yaw rate control is accurate to +/- 0.1 RPM for
rates in the range - 0.7 to + 0.7 RPM. The reference yaw angle and rate as well as the
associated control deadbands can be selected by telecommand.

Figure 1.8 TSS-S Exploded view

Thrusters are also present close to the equatorial plane to control pitch and roll
oscillation rates; in-plane and out-of-plane thrusters control the pitch and roll rates,
respectively; they provide a 0.8 Nm torque about the relevant axis. The in-plane (pitch
control) thrusters also generate pure forces along the x (roll) and z (yaw) axes, about 0.7 and
1 N in magnitude, respectively. Likewise, the out-of-plane (pitch control) thrusters give rise
to pure force components along the y (pitch) and z axes, about 1.9 and 1 N in magnitude,
respectively. In-plane and out-of-plane thrusters use about 4.4 and 3.8 g/s of GN2 each,
respectively, and can be actuated one at a time only. They can operate under external
command or under control from the TSS-S on board software in the so-called Auto Rate
Damping (ARD) mode. The TSS-S's tether-aligned thrusters, in-line 1 and 2, each providing 2
N pure thrust along the z axis, use about 3.2 g/s when active and can be actuated upon
external command either individually or together. They are meant for tether tension
augmentation and support TSS-S separation from the Orbiter during early deployment and
close-in approach to the Orbiter during final retrieval.
The Satellite is provided with a complete set of attitude detrmination sensors, i.e. 4 rate-
integrating gyroscopes, two bolometer-based optical Earth sensors (ES) and four Digital Sun
Sensors (FDSS). Satellite attitude determination is carried out on board he satellite with a +/- 1
deg accuracy whenever the satellite is in attitude hold mode; the on-board attitude
determination algorythm is based on gyroscope output and makes use of ES output for gyro
drift compensation. Ground-based algorythms have been developed by Alenia Spazio to more
accurately reconstruct the Satellite attitude history, even while in spin and passive mode, t o
support post-flight science data analyses; under normal operating conditions and data
availability, they can provide TSS-S attitude history reconstruction to better than 1'.
The TSS Satellite element also carries on board a set of four Ag-Zn batteries to support
the deployed mission; they can provide up to 10.6 kWh, depending on their discharge profile
and thermal conditions, as ascertained by both ground testing and flight experience. Out of
the total, science experiments are allocated about 2.5 kWh overall, with a 100 W maximum
overall power level. Twelve individually switched and fused power lines are provided for use

13
by the TSS-S science experiments, 4 with 5 A rating and 8 with 1.5 A rating, at 30 +/- 6 V
input voltage.
The TSS-S provides a 16 kbps continuous telemetry stream, out of which about 4 kbps
subsystem housekeeping, 10.25 kbps science instrument telemetry (housekeeping and science
data) and about 1.75 kbps service (sunchronisation) words. Discrete, analog and 16-bit serial
monitors can be acquired from the science instruments and inserted into the telemetry
stream; analog monitors are A/D converted to 8-bit words. The TSS-S supports a 2 kbps
maximum telecommand bitrate; the corresponding telecommand rate depends on whether the
telecommands require processing by the Satellite on-board software, and can reach the
maximum value of about 20 commands/s in case no processing is required.Science
experiments can be provided relay-driving, discrete commands as well as 16-bit serial digital
commands; no OBDH processing is provided on science experiments commands but routing
to the end user. The TSS-S has a 40-slot Time Tagged Command Buffer (TTB), where
commands can be stored for execution at a later time. Out of these, up to 30 can be allocated
to the science experiments; TTB time tag resolution is about 32 sec, i.e. time tags can differ
by 32 sec as a minimum, but commands with the same time tag are executed within 128 msec
of each other in a FIFO order.
Besides engineering resources and capabilities, the experiments on board the TSS-S are
provided with a magnetic cleanliness program which ensures that DC magnetic field generated
by the satellite does not exceed about 20 nT at the fixed boom tip, with a very high stability
(a few nT). Additionally, the TSS-S outer shell is coated with a 100-120 micron-thick
conductive paint layer applied directly on the shell bare metal (Al); the paint helps keeping
the resistance opposed by the skin to the electric current flow to a few tens of Ohms, the
exact value depending on paint thickness and applied voltage. Ground testing and flight data
have proved both the magnetic cleanliness level and the TSS-S overall conductivity to match
or exceed the science requirements.
The TSS-S is equipped with two "standard" science support equipment items, namely the
Satellite Ammeter (SA) and the Satellite Linear Accelerometer (SLA). The SA is a four scale
(±5, ±0.5, ±0.1, ±0.02 A), auto-ranging instrument capable of providing measurements of the
electric current flowing in the tether with a 7-bit accuracy over each range; SA data are
provided 16 times a second in the satellite telemetry stream. The instrument, however, also
has a 1 kHz bandwidth analog output, allowing other satellite experiments to directly sample
current impulse waveforms. The SLA is a three-axis accelerometer with inductive-mechanical
(coil-spring) control loop and capacitive pick-off; the instrument provides three mutually
orthogonal acceleration measurements in the range -60 - +20 milli-g (z axis) and -20 - +20
milli-g (x, y axes), each available 16 times a second inside the satellite telemetry, with
accuracies ranging from 100 micro-g (z axis) to 10 micro-g (x, y axes). The instrument
measurement bandwidth is 4.5 Hz.
The experience acquired with the two performed flights has allowed very accurate
characterisation of all TSS-S performance characteristics and has provided Alenia Spazio with
expertise and S/W tools which allow the Company to provide in-depth and extensive support
to both dynamics and electrodynamics analyses as well as to mission analysis, preparation
and support.

Contacts for the TSS Project:

· M. Calabrese, R. Carovillano, T. Stuart - NASA Hqts.

· C. Bonifazi, M.Dobrowolny - ASI
· F.Giani, B.Strim, - Alenia
· N.Stone, R. McBrayer - NASA/MSFC
· TSS Investigator Working Group

14
1.2 The Small Expendable Deployer System (SEDS): SEDS-1 and SEDS-2
Missions

The SEDS project started as a Small Business Innovative Research contract awarded t o
Joe Carroll by NASA MSFC. SEDS hardware proved to be able to succesfully deploy a 20 km
tether in space. Both flights of SEDS-1 (March 29, 1993) and SEDS-2 (March 9, 1994) flew
as secondary payloads on Delta II launches of GPS satellites. After the third stage separation
the end-mass was deployed from the second stage. SEDS-1 demonstrated the capability of
deorbiting a 25 kg payload from LEO. SEDS-2, on the other end, demonstrated the use of a
closed loop control law to deploy a tethered payload along the local vertical.

SEDSÕ hardware, as shown in figure 1.9, consists of a deployer, brake/cutter and

electronics box. All the components that are in contact with the tether, except for the brake
post, are coated with teflon. The deployer consists of baseplate, core, tether and canister.
The tether is wound around the core. In addition there are three Light Emitting Diodes
(LED). Two of the LEDÕs are used to count the turns of deployed tether, while the third is
used to check when the tether is almost completely unwound. The canister provides a
protective cover for the tether and restrains it during deployment. The tether material is
SPECTRA-1000.

Figure 1.9 SEDS and Endmass on the Delta Second Stage

The brake/cutter components are: brake post, stepper motor, tensiometer, temperature
sensor, pyro cutter, exit guide. The tether post is coated with hard anodize. The stepper
motor is used to wrap or unwrap the tether to vary the deployment tension and the resulting
deployment velocity. The brake mechanism is a friction multiplier and the multiplier
function is proportional to the friction surface area between the tether and brake post. SEDS
functional diagram is shown in figure 1.10.

15
 Figure 1.10 SEDS Functional Diagram

The main differences between SEDS 1 and SEDS-2 are shown in table 1. SEDS-2 closed
loop was implemented by deploying the tether according to a pre-mission profile. The
deployment control logic acted on the brake mechanism by increasing or decreasing the
deployment velocity to follow the profile and bring the payload at the end of the tether
deployment to a smooth stop along the local vertical.

Table 1. Main differences between SEDS-1 and SEDS-2

SEDS-1 SEDS-2
Tether Cutter Pyrotechnics Active Inactive
Control Law Open Loop Closed Loop
Tether Solder Lumps Study Tension Pulses None
Tether Fabrication Tether Application Cortland/Hughes
Mission Initiation Prior to Depletion Burn After Depletion Burn
Brake Usage Minor Significant after 1 Km
Tether Stabilization None Yes

The end-mass payload (EMP) was developed by NASA LaRC in order to monitor the
dynamics of a tethered susbsatellite. EMP consisted of three primary science sensors: a three-
axis accelerometer, a three axis tensiometer and a three axis magnetometer. The EMP
measured 40.6X30.5X20.3 cm and weighted about 26 kg. The end-mass was completely
autonomous and carried its own battery, electronics, computer and S-band telemetry system.
As schematic of EMP is shown in fig. 1.11. The three axis tensiometer was also developed at
NASA LaRC.

SEDS-1 mission objectives were to demonstrate that SEDS hardware could be used t o
deploy a paylod at the end of a 20 km-long tether and study its reentry after the tether was
cut. The orbit chosen had an inclination of 34 degrees and a perigee altitude of 190 km and

16
 Figure 1.11 Schematic of SEDS EMP

an apogee altitude of 720 km. The EMP transmitted over 7900 seconds of data
before burning into the atmosphere (1Hz sampling rate for the magnetometer and 8 Hz for
the tensiometers and accelerometers). As predicted, SEDS-1 reentry was off the coast of
Mexico (see fig. 1.12a). NASA stationed personnel at Cabo San Lucas, Puerto Vallarta and
Manzanillo to make photographic and video observations. The Puerto Vallarta site was able
to obtain observational data as shown in figure 1.12b

Figure 1.12a SEDS-1 EMP reentry Figure 1.12b Observational Data of SEDS-
trajectory 1 reentry

SEDS-2 mission objectives were to demonstrate the feasibility of deploying a payload

with a closed-loop control law (i.e. a predetermined trajectory) and bring it to a small final
angle (<10 degrees) along the local vertical. A secondary objective was to study the long term
evolution of a tethered system. The orbit this time was chosen to be circular with an altitude
of about 350 km. The SEDS-2 tether was allegedly cut by a micrometeroid or debris after five
days. The EMP transmitted over 39,000 seconds of data before the battery died (1 Hz
sampling rate for all the three primary science sensors).

17
 SEDS-1 and SEDS-2 Flight Data

SEDS data base is available through anonymous ftp at the node [email protected]
(128.183.76.209) SEDS1 data are in the subdirectory /pub/projects/tether/SEDSMission1 and
SEDS-2 data are in the directory /pub/projects/tether/SEDSMission2. Each directory is
organized in different subdirectories with deployer data, EMP data, radar, etc.. Each content
of a directory is described in a read.me file.

SEDS-1

The turn counter data are shown in Figure 1.13a, the tension at the deployer is shown in
figure 1.13b and the tether rate in 1.13c. In order to compute the tether length and its rate,
the turns had to be mapped and converted into deployed length. Note that the velocity at the
end of the deployment was about 7 m/s explaining the huge jump in tension and the
consequent rebounds.

Figure 1.13a. SEDS Deployer Turns Figure 1.13b. SEDS Deployer Tension
Counts

Figure 1.13c. SEDS Deployer 10-sec Average Length Rate

18
 The magnetometer and tension moduli at the EMP are shown in figures 1.13d and
1.13e, respectively. Note that the magnetometer was affected by a bias estimated to be 3065
nT, -3355 nT and -4188 nT on the x, y and z axes, respectively. Procedures on the data
calibration and validation are given at the ftp site as well as are described in several papers
presented at the Washington Conference.

Figure 1.13d. EMP Magnetometer Modulus Figure 1.13e. EMP Tension Modulus

SEDS-2

The tether deployment rate and the tension at the deployer are shown in figure 1.14a,
and 1.14b, respectively. The deployment law was so effective that the final tether rate was
about 2 cm/s. As computed by the modulus of the EMP tension, shown in fig 1.14c, the final
libration was about 4 degrees, and it was confirmed also by the radar tracking. Even in SEDS-2
the magnetometer signal was affected by a bias anomaly that was estimated to be -1128 nT,
1312 nT, and 2644 nT on the x,y and z axes, respectively.

Figure 1.14a. Tether Rate Figure 1.14b. Tension at Deployer

19
 Figure 1.14c. EMP Tension Modulus

Contacts for the SEDS Project:

• J.Harrison , H.Frayne Smith, K.Mowery, C.C. Rupp - NASA/MSFC

• J.Carroll - Tether Applications
• J. Glaese - Control Dynamics
• M.L. Cosmo, E.C.Lorenzini, G.E. Gullahorn -SAO
• T.Finley ,R.Rhew, J.Stadler - NASA/LaRC
• W.Webster - NASA/GSFC

20
1.3 The Plasma Motor Generator (PMG)

The PMG experiment was designed to test the ability of a hollow cathode assembly
(HCA) to provide a low impedance bipolar electrical current between a spacecraft and the
ionosphere. The 500m-long tether was chosen to assure complete separation between the
grounded ends, forcing current closure through the ionosphere rather than with local overlap
of the two plasma clouds. In order to function properly, an electrodynamic tether needs to be
effectively ÒgroundedÓon both ends. The experiment aimed at demonstrating that such
configuration could function either as a orbit-boosting motor or as a generator converting
orbital energy into electricity, as shown in figure 1.15.

Figure 1.15 PMG investigation of an electrodynamic tether

The mission objectives were:

• HCA Operation
• End-mass separation greater than 200 m
• Induced voltage of 30 V or higher
• PMG Plasma clouds completely separated
• Achieve currents in the 0.1 -1 Amp
• Reverese current in tether using bias voltage
• Observe tether stability for gravity gradient vs. IXB forces
• Collect I-V Characteristics for full orbit

As shown in figure 1.16, PMG consisted of four major subsystems: The Far-End Package
(FEP), the Near-End Package (NEP), an electronics box (SEDS) and the Plasma Diagnostic
Package (PDP). The system was launched as a secondary payload on a Delta II on June 26,

21
1993. After the third stage separation, PMG was left in an elliptical orbit (193X869) at 25.7
deg inclination. The FEP was ejected upward with an initial velocity of about 2-3 m/s. PMG
was programmed to operate in three different data modes, by using a microprocessor t o
control selectable load resistors, to change 1) bias voltage levels, 2) polarity reversal 3)
bypass relays.

Figure 1.16 PMG Major hardware components

The SEDS deployer fixed spool concept was adapted for use, without the brake
mechanism to provide minimum friction deploymnet of the relatively massive tether. The
PDP experiment, developed by NASA/LeRC/U. of New Hampshire, was added in order t o
measure the deployer potential.
The NEP included a power ÒONÓ relay, a microprocessor based control/data module and
electrometer, and a tether bias voltage power supply.
Each HCA was equipped with a 1 liter gas bottle, on/off solenoid, gas metering block and
power supplies to produce a weakly ionized xenon cloud. Both end platforms carried a 28 volt
silver cell battery for a nominal 3-6 hours lifetime. The tether was a #18 AWG teflon
insulated copper wire.

After deployment, during the first 150 minutes, sets of I vs. V performance data were
obtained by applying bias voltages of +65V to -130V in series with the IXB induced emf,
while varying load resistance in steps from 200 to 700 ohms total tether current path
internal resistance (see figure 1.17). Total tether voltage was measure by placing a 2.2
MOhms resistance in series with the tether.
The PMG current showed to be fully reversible, operating either as a generator system
with electron current flow down the tether or as a motor with electron current driven up the
tether.

22
 Figure 1.17 PMG I-V Curves

The data confirmed that the HCAs were able to complete PMGÕs current loop and 100-
300 mA currents were observed in the daytime portion (probably due to the enhanced plasma
denity) of the orbit and 10-50 mA on the nightime side, as shown in figure 1.18.

Figure 1.18 PMG Electrometer Reading of 2.2 MOhms Load and all bias voltages

The induced emf was measured with total voltage biased from +150 to -90 volts, and also
with the bias turned off, by using only the induced emf. Variability of the induced emf has
been matched against different models of electrodynamic interactions.
A contingent study was the detection with ground-based radars and squid magnetometers
(see OESEE experiment on TSS1, G. Tacconi PI) of the plasma disturbances, ELF waves
radiated by the system, the HCA plasma clouds and their associated plasma/ionosphere
currents.
The experiment duration, in terms of plasma contactor operation and consequential
active environment interaction, lasted about seven hours, until the batteries expired.

23
 PMG data base is available through anonymous ftp at the node [email protected]
(128.183.76.209) under the directory /pub/projects/tether/PlasmaMotorGenExp.

Contacts for the PMG Project:

• J.McCoy - NASA/JSC
• J.Carroll - Tether Applications
• M.D.Grossi, R.Estes -SAO
• R.J.Jost - System Planning Corporation
• R.C. Olsen -Naval Postgraduate School
• I.Katz - S-Cubed
• G. Tacconi, L. Minna - U. of Genoa
• D.C. Ferguson -NASA/LeRC
• R.Tolbert -U. of New Hampshire
• W.Webster - NASA/GSFC

24
1.4 The Tether Physics and Survivability Spacecraft (TiPS)

TiPS Program Overview

The Tether Physics and Survivability (TiPS) Experiment was conceived as a quick
response, simple experiment to study the long term dynamics and survivability of tethered
space systems. The knowledge gained from this experiment will help DOD and the nation
gain experience with tethered systems for eventual use in operational spacecraft. The Naval
Research LaboratoryÕs, the Naval Center for Space Technology (NCST) designed, built and
now operates the experiment for the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO). The
experiment is a free flying satellite consisting of two end bodies connected by a 4 kilometer
non-conducting tether. In this respect it is different from other tether experiments, like
those flown on the Shuttle, where one endmass was connected to a massive host vehicle.

Figure 1.19 Artist Rendition of TiPS in Orbit. Ralph is on the bottom. TiPS has been in this
orientation since deployment.

TiPS was jettisoned from a host spacecraft on June 20, 1996, with the deployment of the
tether occurring shortly after jettison. The TiPS tether is intact through this writing
(12/9/96), while no other space tether has lasted longer than five days. TiPS is the sixth
known orbital tethered system flown to date.
To meet an early launch opportunity, TiPS had to be designed and built in approximately
one year. Due to a very tight budget, the experiment objectives were limited to only those
that had the highest payoff, these were : 1) Long term orbit and attitude dynamics and 2)
tether survivability.

TiPS Hardware

The program constraints of limited time and money dictated that the experiment design
be as simple as possible and consist largely of existing component hardware and/or designs.

25
 The experiment goals only required a Ralph. Ralph and Norton each have 18
simple electrical power system that used a optical retroreflectors mounted on them.
battery for all its electrical needs. The Fig. 1.20 is a picture of the completed
battery supported the initiation of satellite without its thermal blankets. In
deployment, recording of data on the this figure, several of the small round
deployment characteristics and retroreflectors can be seen.
transmitting this data to ground stations.
TiPS consists of two end bodies, dubbed
Ralph and Norton, connected by a 4
kilometer tether. Ralph contains a Small
Expendable Deployer System (SEDS)
tether deployer, a battery consisting of 10
Lithium Thionyl Chloride D cells, a timer
to initiate deployment, a SEDS data
acquisition electronics box and a
transmitter and antennas to downlink the
deployment data. The SEDS deployer,
SEDS electronics and the transmitter were
existing flight spare hardware from the
SEDS 2 tether experiment that was
successfully flown in space by NASA.
NASA provided this hardware to NRL for
the TiPS program. This was in keeping
with the approach of using off the shelf
components so that tight budgets and
short schedules could be met. Norton is an Fig 1.20 TiPS Satellite Without Thermal
inert body containing the ten spring Blankets. The small round objects are the
cartridges used to rapidly push the two laser retroreflectors.
bodies away from each other, pulling the
tether out of its deployer mounted on

Satellite Tracking and Dynamics

The motion of the end bodies is

observed by a ground based Satellite Laser
Ranging (SLR) network and by ground
based visual observations. Fig. 1.21 is an
image of TiPS taken as the two endmasses
were separating. The tracking data consists
largely of range data provided by timing
the two way round trip delay for a laser
bounced off the retroreflectors on the
spacecraft. The data is transmitted across
the Internet to NASA Goddard in
Greenbelt, Maryland.
The tracking data is analyzed, at NRL,
to determine the dynamic motion of the
tethered system. Since, there is no object
at the center of mass of the tethered Figure 1.21 Telescope image of TiPS
system, both the attitude motion and the during deployment (Image taken by
Starfire Optical Range at the Air ForceÕs
Phillips Laboratory).

26
orbital motion are inferred from observations of the endmasses only. This has proved to be a
difficult task requiring frequent observational data and new estimation algorithms that were
incorporated in the traditional orbit determination system used by NASA. The tracking data
is also processed to provide updates to the state vector used to predict the motion of the
endmasses. These predictions are used by the SLR sites for subsequent observations.
The requirement of determining the tether survivability will be met through ground based
radar tracking of TiPS which will determine when or if the tether is cut.

TiPS Findings to Date

The findings of the TiPS program are best summarized by saying that they provide
ÒconfidenceÓ that tether technology will be viable for future operational missions. There is
still a lot of technology development required before operational systems would be ready t o
incorporate this technology, but TiPS has provided a significant step in that direction. The
initial results show that tethers can be made to be survivable. With regard to the librational
motion, our estimates now indicate that the tether is librating with a smaller amplitude than
at deployment. Visual observations made shortly after the initial separation of the end-
bodies suggested that the tether was librating with an amplitude of 47 degrees with respect t o
vertical alignment. Over the course of the next three months, we have determined with high
confidence that the amplitude of that motion has decreased to approximately 12 degrees. At
this lower amplitude, the tether behaves much more predictably. During the month of
October, 1996, we were able to validate our ability to predict tether motion 6 to 12 hours
into the future. While this was only possible during a period when an abundance of data is
available, this provides a great deal of confidence in our ability to model tether dynamics.

NRL has set up a Web site where information and data can be obtained. The URL is
http://hyperspace.nrl.navy.mil/tips.

Contacts for the Tips Project:

• Shannon L. Coffey, William E. Purdy, NRL

27
1.5 The OEDIPUS Tethered Sounding Rocket Missions

OEDIPUS A

OEDIPUS stands for Observations of Electric-field Distribution in the Ionospheric Plasma - a

Unique Strategy. Canadian activities in space tethers began with OEDIPUS A which was
designed as a large double probe for sensitive measurements of weak electric fields in the
plasma of the aurora. It was launched using a Black Brant X, 3-stage sounding rocket. The
OEDIPUS program was a joint program between National Research Council of Canada and
NASA with participation of the Communication Research Center in Ottawa, Canada
(Principal Investigator), various Canadian universities, and the US Air Force Phillips
Laboratory, the payload prime contractor was Bristol Aerospace Ltd. The major objectives
of the OEDIPUS-A mission were:

• to make passive observations of auroral ionosphere, in particular, the natural magnetic-

field-aligned dc electric field E , utilizing a large double probe;
• to measure response of the large probe in the inospheric plasma;
• to seek new insights into plane- and sheath-wave rf propagation in plasma.

The rocket payload OEDIPUS A was flown on January 30, 1989 from And¿ya in Norway.
The tethered payload consisted of two spinning subpayloads with a mass of 84 and 131 kg,
with their own experiment complement and telemetry systems, that were connected by a
thin 0.85 mm diameter conductive and also spinning tether. The mission achieved its
scientific objectives to detect the natural magnetic-field-aligned dc electric field E utilizing a
large double probe, and to carry out novel bistatic propagation experiments. The flight
established a record for the length of an electrodynamic tether in space at that time: 958 m.
Although the mission was successful, flight data indicated that the aft subpayload experienced
a rapid increase in its coning angle to nearly 35 degrees (half angle). A post-flight
investigations concluded that the dynamic behavior was caused by interaction of the tether
with the subpayloads. This observation was unexpected due the fact that the tether mass was
negligible relative to masses of both subpayloads, and the tether dynamic interaction was
expected to be negligible in the relatively short time (11 minutes) of a suborbital flight.

The OEDIPUS-A payload configuration is shown in Fig. 1.22. The two subpayloads were
initially connected and ejected from a Black Brant X with a spin rate about the longitudinal
axis. The radial booms on the forward and aft payloads were used as dipoles for science
experiments. The ACS module, located at the aft end of the aft subpayload, was used to align
the spin axis to within 1 degree to the Earth's magnetic field. The tether was a teflon coated
stranded tin-copper wire and it was deployed from a spool-type reel located on the forward
subpayload. To separate the subpaylaods and deploy the tether, a spring ejection system was
provided and followed by the cold gas thruster system in the forward subpayload. A magnetic
hysteresis brake was provided to control the tether spool by applying a small constant torque,
to smoothly decelerate the relative motion of subpayloads.

28
 Figure 1.22 Some subsystems in the OEDIPUS-A payload configuration

Shortly after motor burn-out, the fairing was jettisoned along with a number of experiment
doors, and the two sets of radial booms were deployed. At T+121 seconds, the ACS maneuver
was initiated which aligned the payload within 1 degree of the local geomagnetic field line. At
this point, the separation using cold gas system was initiated. At T+448 s, apogee was reached
(about 512 km) and the payload separation was completed with tether length of 958 m. This
configuration was maintained for the remainder of the flight. Due to gravity-gradient torque
on the two-body system, the entire configuration experienced a slight rotation through-out
the flight. At approximately T+800 s the payload re-entered the atmosphere and was not
recovered.

Flight dynamics data are presented in Fig. 1.23. These are processed magnetometer data used
to compute the angular deviation of each payload's spin axis from the magnetic field vector.
Data is shown for both forward and aft subpayloads. The forward subpayload experienced a
tip-off at separation that caused a coning angle of approximately 7 degrees which varied only
slightly during the flight. The aft subpayload, which also experienced a small tip-off, had an
increase in the coning angle and it approached almost 35 degrees at the end of the flight. The
post-flight investigations concluded that the increase coning was the interaction between
tether and the aft subpayload.

OEDIPUS C

The second flight of OEDIPUS configuration, namely, OEDIPUS C took place on November
6, 1995 from the Poker Flat Research Range, located near Fairbanks, Alaska. The scientific
objectives of the mission were similar to the previous one but there were

29
Figure 1.23 OEDIPUS-A flight dynamics data showing the time history of the angle between
spin axis and the direction of the earth's magnetic field, for both subpayloads

important differences and extensions. The OEDIPUS-C payload was launched, using the
Black Brant XII Sounding Rocket, to a higher trajectory with apogee of 843 km and the
length of deployed tether was 1174 m. Thus, the trajectory had a greater range in plasma
density than OEDIPUS A and provided an extended perspective on plane and sheath waves
and their interaction with space plasma. To understand the importance of the electrically
conducting tether for the propagation of rf waves between the subpayloads, the tether was cut
from both ends on the downleg part of the flight. The experiments were also designed to help
understand how charged particles associated with the aurora affect satellite transmissions.
There were 13 experiments (three instruments from the Canadian Space Agency, seven from
the National Research Council of Canada, and three others from the University of
Saskatchewan and the US Air Phillips Laboratory in the USA). The OEDIPUS-C payload was
sponsored by the Canadian Space Agency and the payload contractor was Bristol Aerospace

30
Ltd. One of the main investigations on OEDIPUS C was the project funded by the CSA's
Space Science Program which involved controlled radio-wave experiments. The radio
instruments (HEX and REX) were built by CAL Corporation and Routes Inc., both from
Ottawa, Ontario, and the Principal Investigator was from the Communications Research
Center (CRC) in Ottawa, Canada.

The OEDIPUS-C configuration is presented on Fig. 1.24. The tethered payload consisted of
two spinning subpayloads with a mass of 115 and 93 kg, respectively. They were connected
by the same type of the tether as used in the OEDIPUS-A mission (0.85 mm diameter). The
subpayloads each had four long booms (Be-Cu BI-STEM elements), forming a V-dipole
antenna (13 m, tip-to-tip, on the aft subpayload; and 19 m on the forward subpayload). The
tether was a 24 gauge wire per MIL-22759/32 which has a 19 strand, tin-coated copper
conductor with white teflon insulation (radiation cross-linked, modified ETFE) rated at 600
V. Both subpayloads had video cameras for the determining the and the attitude solution and
the relative position between the forward and aft subpayloads. The payload performance
was captured in space by an aft payload video camera. The subpayloads telemetered data to a
ground station for about 15 minutes before they landed in the Arctic Ocean (non-retrievable).

A unique Tether Dynamics Experiment (TDE)

was one of the experiments flown during that
mission. It was sponsored by the Space
Technology Branch of the CSA in
collaboration with Bristol Aerospace,
University of Manitoba, University of British
Columbia, McGill University, Carleton
University and NASA Langley Research
Center. A description of the TDE is presented
in the following section.

OEDIPUS-C TETHER DYNAMICS

EXPERIMENT (TDE)

The planning for this technological

experiment was initiated in 1992, and
culminated with the sub-orbital flight on
November 6, 1995. The main objectives were
as follows:

• derive theory and develop simulation and

animation software for analyses of multi-
Figure 1.24 OEDIPUS-C configuration body dynamics and control of the spinning
with location of the TFS tethered two-body configuration;

• provide dynamics and control expertise, for the suborbital tethered vehicle and for the
science investigations, develop an attitude stabilization scheme for the payloads and
support OEDIPUS C payload development;

• acquire dynamics data during flight, and compare with pre-flight simulations t o
demonstrate that the design technology is valid.

31
 The TDE advanced space tether technology
significantly. The following are noteworthy.

• Several types of mathematical model

were investigated, including both linear
and non-linear approaches.
• A laboratory 'hanging spin test' facility
was established at the University of
British Columbia, which was able t o
demonstrate the essential dynamic
stability characteristics of spinning
tethered systems.
• A TEther LABoratory Demonstration
System (TE-LAB), developed in
conjunction with graduate engineering
program of Carleton University,
supported precise ground simulation of
the OEDIPUS dynamics. The TE-LAB
facility stimulated advances in gimbals
suspension and in non-contact attitude
measurement techniques, to meet
stringent requirements of zero-g
simulation in the one-g earth
Figure 1.25 TEther LABoratory Demonstration environment (Fig. 1.25).
System - TE-LAB, at DFL, CSA
• A unique precision 3-axis tether Force
Sensor (TFS) was designed by Bristol
Aerospace Ltd. in conjunction with
NASA Langley Research Center. The
design derived from the NASA's
experience with multicomponent wind
tunnel balances for the aerospace
industry. The TFS had two sets of strain
gauges: foil gauges and piezo-resistive
gauges. The TFS was manufactured by
Bristol Aerospace Ltd., and Modern
Machine & Tool Co., Newport News,
Virginia, and was calibrated by NASA,
CSA and Modern Machine & Tool Co.
(Fig. 1.26).
During the flight the subpayloads and all on-
board instruments met and exceeded
expectations. The deployment of the booms
and tether, including severance of the tether
from the payloads, was captured in space by
the aft payload camera, and provided an
overall confirmation of stability of the
Figure 1.26 Tether Force Sensor (TFS) flexure spinning subpayloads and tether dynamics.
An example of the processed flight dynamics
data - nutation angles of both subpayloads are
presented in Fig. 1.27.

32
 Figure 1.27 Nutation (coning) angles as function of time for OEDIPUS-C payload

The time history of the total tether force calculated based on the foil gauge outputs is
presented in Fig. 1.28. The deployment profile based on the flight data is showed in Fig. 1.29.
The major achievement was the implementation and demonstration of the major axis
spinner stabilization for the tethered OEDIPUS-C subpayloads. The ground tests also served
very well to understand the complicated dynamics of the spinning tethered two-body
configuration and the interaction between the rigid and flexible body modes. The analysis of
the damped gyroscopic modes of spinning tethered space vehicles with flexible booms turned
to be a very effective tool to understand the dynamics of the system.

33
 The actual spin rate during flight was 0.084
Hz well within the stable range. Full 3-D
computer animation of the tethered systemÕs
dynamic behaviour and of the damped
gyroscopic modes also served very well in
understanding the dynamics of this
configuration. The OEDIPUS-C tether
deployment system is presented in Figure
1.30. It was located in the aft end of the
forward subpaylaod and it is comprised of a
rotating spool, supporting structure, a
magnetic hysteresis brake to control tether
tension, a slip ring, high and low resolution
Figure 1.28 Tether tension vs. time measured by shaft encoders, a wire guard/snare retainer,
TFS during OEDIPUS C flight and forward tether cutter assembly.

Figure 1.29 OEDIPUS-C tether deployment profile from the spool encoder data

Figure 1.30
The Oedipus-C Tether Deployer

34
Contacts for the OEDIPUS Project:

• H. Gordon James - Communications Research Centre

• Alexander Jablonski - Canadian Space Agency
• George Tyc - Bristol Aerospace
• Frank Vigneron - Consultant, Canadian Space Agency

Contacts for the OEDIPUS-C Tether Dynamics Experiment (TDE):

• Alex Jablonski, Frank Vigneron - Canadian Space Agency

Tether Dynamics Experiment, Payload Stabilizazion and TE-LAB
• George Tyc - Bristol Aerospace
Tether Dynamics Experiment, Payload Stabilizazion
• Arun K. Misra - McGill University
Tether Dynamics
• Vinod J. Modi - University of British Columbia
Tether Dynamics
• Douglas A. Staley - Carleton University
TE-LAB
• Ray Rhew - NASA LaRC
TFS

35
SECTION 2.0 PROPOSED TETHER FLIGHTS

36
2.1 Electrodynamic Tethers For Reboost of the International Space Station

Propellantless Reboost for the ISS: An Electrodynamic Tether Thruster

The need for an alternative to chemical Orbital velocity

Plasma
thruster reboost of the ISS has become Contactor Deployer
Power Supply
increasingly apparent as the station nears
- + Space
completion. A new type of electrodynamic Station
tether attached to the Station (Figure 1) could Thrust
Direction of
be developed to generate an average thrust of current flow
Electrons ejected;
0.5-0.8ÊNewtons for 5-10 kW of electrical Station maintained
power. By comparison, aerodynamic drag on at low bias. Insulated segment
of tether
ISS is expected to average from 0.3 to 1.1N
Tether deployed
(depending upon the year). Geomagnetic vertically downward
field exerts
The proposed system uses a tether with a thrusting force (deflected somewhat
by reboost force).
kilometers-long uninsulated (bare) segment proportional
to current
capable of collecting currents greater than 10 A all along
from the ionosphere. The new design exhibits a tether.
Thrust Electrons collected
remarkable insensitivity to electron density from ionosphere
variations, allowing it to operate efficiently along positively
biased bare segment
even at night. A relatively short and light of tether.
tether (10 km or less, 200 kg) is required, thus
minimizing the impact on the ISS (center of
mass shift less than 5 m).
Figure 1. An electrodynamic tether reboost
system for the International Space Station.

High Tether Currents for ISS Reboost

ISS reboost (thrust forces of order 1ÊN) with a tether no longer than 10 km requires tether
currents of order 10 A. The critical issue is how to draw ionospheric electrons at that rate. The
standard tether carries insulation along its entire length, exchanging current with the ionosphere only
at the ends: TSS-1R carried a passive metallic sphere as anode; PMG carried an active (plasma-
ejecting) contactor.
Current collected to a passive, biased sphere in a magnetized plasma calculated by the standard
Parker-Murphy (PM) model (taking into account magnetic effects, which are dominant) grows as the
square-root of the bias voltage, an important fact for fixed-area collectors.
A preliminary analysis of the measured TSS-1R currents indicates that they were typically greater
than the PM model predictions (using values of the electron density and temperature estimated from
ionospheric models and a satellite voltage calculated with some uncertainty). The TSS-1R data do
not, however, appear to point to a dependence of current on voltage greatly different from that of
PM for higher voltages. Even though, for example, a TSS-1R current of 0.5A at 350ÊV bias may
surpass PM model estimates, it could still imply a voltage of roughly 35ÊkV to reach 5ÊA for the same
plasma parameters (which would require over 175 kW for a thrust of 0.7 N with a 10-km-long
tether!).
Active anodes (plasma contactors) have been developed in an attempt to solve both space-charge
shielding and magnetic guiding effects by creating a self-regulating plasma cloud to provide
quasineutrality and by emitting ions to counterstream attracted electrons and produce fluctuations
that scatter those electrons off magnetic field lines. The only tether experiment to use an active
anode so far was the PMG, which reached 0.3A in flight under a 130 V bias and the best ionospheric
conditions. Unfortunately, there is no way to scale the results to high currents. The discouraging fact
was that collected current decreased sharply with the ambient electron density at night.
Fortunately, there is another tether design optionÑÊthe bare tether - as proposed by Sanmart’n .

37
The Bare-Tether Breakthrough. The bare-tether design represents a breakthrough that makes short-
tether electrodynamic reboost with moderate power requirements for the ISS a possibility. To work
on the ISS, a reboost system must not only be capable of delivering adequate thrust (preferably night
and day); it must do so with small impact on the ISS environment while requiring minimal accom-
modation by the baseline ISS systems. It should also be simple to operate and maintain, and it must be
competitive in terms of its use of resources for the benefits it provides.
Our proposed design uses the tether itself, left uninsulated over the lower portion, to function as
its own very efficient anode. The tether is biased positively with respect to the plasma along some or
all of its length. The positively biased, uninsulated part of the tether then collects electrons from the
plasma.
The following features argue in favor of the bare-tether concept.
1. The small cross-sectional dimension of the tether makes it a much more effective collector of
electrons (per unit area) from the space plasma than is a large sphere (such as the TSS-1R
satellite) at equal bias. This is because the small cross dimension of the tether allows its current
collection to take place in the orbital-motion-limited regime, which gives the highest possible
current density.
2. The large current-collection area is distributed along the tether itself, eliminating the need for a
large, massive and/or high-drag sphere or a resource-using plasma contactor at the upper end of
the tether. This substantially reduces the center of gravity shift in both cases and reduces the cost
and complexity in the case of the active contactor.
3. The system is self-adjusting to changes in electron density. This is accomplished by a natural
expansion of the portion of the tether that is biased positively relative to the ionosphere
whenever the density drops (Figure 2).
Features (1) and (2) combine to provide an tether. A completely bare tether would draw the
ability to collect large currents with modest maximum
input power levels. We present below a
candidate system that can produce average
Orbital velocity
thrusts of 0.5-0.8ÊN, for input power of
LOWER ELECTRON
5-10ÊkW. Power Supply Plasma DENSITY
Contactor
Developing an ISS Reboost System. Our pre- - + - +
liminary design for an electrodynamic tether Thrust Thrust
Direction of
thruster capable of delivering 0.5-0.8ÊN of current flow
thrust to the ISS at a cost of 5-10ÊkW of
electrical power consists of an 10-km-long Geomagnetic Insulated
field exerts segment
aluminum tether in the form of a thick ribbon thrusting force of tether
(0.6 mm by 10Êmm). Despite its length, the proportional
to current
tether would weigh only around 200Êkg. Since all along
tether.
the bare portion of the tether is to act as our Thrust Thrust
electron collector, a downward deployment of
Electron
the tether is dictated by the physics of the east- collection Electron
ward-moving platform. collection
The upper part of the tether will be insu-
lated. There are two reasons for this. First, Zero bias point
there is the necessity for preventing electrical
contact from developing across the plasma
between the upper portion of the tether and the Figure 2. A bare-tether thruster designed t o
Space Station, which (when the system is adjust to lower electron density (as at night). A
operating) are separated by an electrical shift in the zero point of bias further down the
potential difference of around a kilovolt. tether increases the collecting surface and
Beyond that, the insulation provides for greater maintains a nearly steady thrust for constant
thrust at a given input power. This comes from input power and induced e.m.f.
the fact that the largest tether-to-plasma bias
occurs at the upper end, and decreases down the

38
current through the power supply, but the current would be strongly peaked at the upper end of the
tether. Keeping the input power constant, we can substantially increase the average current in the
tether, and hence the thrust, by insulating the tether over much of its upper portion, collecting
current with the lower portion, and having a constant current in the upper part.
Determining the optimal fraction to insulate is part of the design effort for a ÒbareÓ tether
reboost system. Our preliminary design has the upper 50% of the tether insulated. Even greater
thrust during daytime operation could be obtained with a higher fraction, but the nightÐtime adjust-
ability would suffer.
The system provides flexibility, in the sense that the thrust obtained depends almost linearly on
the input power, as seen in Figure 4.
The bare-tether design has essentially solved the problem of day/night thrust fluctuations. But
fluctuations in thrust due to fluctuations in the induced e.m.f. as the system encounters a varying
geomagnetic field around the orbit are a fact of life for any tether-based system. Figure 5 show the
thrust variations around the ISS orbit with different input power levels.

1
Avg. 0.79 N 10 kW

Thrust (Newtons)
Electron density 0.8
1.2
2X1012
Thrust (Newtons)

1 0.6

0.8
Electron density 0.4
2X1011
0.6
5 kW Avg. 0.46 N
0.2
0.4

0.2
0 50 100 150 200

4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 Time(minutes)

Input Power (Watts)
Figure 5. Comparison of thrust generated for
Figure 4. Variation of thrust with input input powers of 5 kW and 10 kW
power for nominal 10-km system. Motional
e.m.f.: 1.2 kV.

Given the level of the current the system may draw, the system will almost certainly require its
own cathodic plasma contactor at the Station end. The contactors currently under development at
NASA Lewis Research Center should be well suited for this function. If thrusts over 0.5 N are desired,
it is likely that the system will also have to rely on the ISSÕs plasma contactor as well, or on a second
dedicated contactor, since currents over the 10 A rating of the contactors could be required.
Before an operational electrodynamic tether reboost system for the ISS can be designed, a series
of ground and space-borne experiments and computer simulations must be performed. In addition,
thorough systems analyses must be performed to determine the physical integration and operational
issues associated with its implementation on the ISS.
Among the issues to be addressed in the analyses of the reboost system are the attachment
location for the tether, need for retrieval capability, microgravity impact, power interfacing, and
safety. These are in addition to design issues specific to the tether itself, such as tether material,
length, and geometry.

Assessment of Space Application and Benefits to the ISS

1) Mission Benefit. The value in an electrodynamic tether reboost system lies in its ability to couple
power generation with thrust. Heretofore the electrical and propulsion systems have been effectively
totally separate entities. Outfitting ISS with an electrodynamic reboost tether severs the most
critical and constraining dependency on Earth - propellant resupply. The Station can supply its own
power but not its own propellant. Without an electrodynamic tether, the specter of SkyLab and the

39
words "reentry" and "atmospheric burnup" will forever haunt the minds of anyone who has an
interest in the program. Add a tether and some additional storage capacity for supplies, and suddenly
a one year interval between visits to the Station becomes conceivable.
Even if the current frequency of resupply flights to the Station is maintained, with an
electrodynamic tether the Station Program has the option to trade kilowatts for increased payload
capacity. Resupply vehicles can deliver useful cargo like payloads, replacement parts, and crew
supplies rather than propellant. Within the range of 5 to 10 kW, a crude approximation of 1,000 kg
of user payload gained perÊkW expended per year appears reasonable; further analysis will refine this
estimate.
As a bonus, propellantless reboost is exhaustless reboost: external contamination around the
Station is considerably reduced. The Station reboost propellant is hydrazine. Any consumption of
propellant may result in residual chemical deposits and contamination on the Station's exterior
surface. An electrodynamic tether provides a means to reboost the Station without the
complications of chemical combustion. The purity of the external environment for science payloads
is enhanced, and beneficial operational impacts of reduced propellant exhaust on external systems
and optics will be realized. Electrodynamic thrust truly represents solar power at its finest.
Yet another dimension to propellantless reboost must be considered. Station users have been
allocated a minimum of 180 days of microgravity per year. Current planning essentially halts
science activity during reboost maneuvers. Low thrust electrodynamic tether reboost could be
performed over long duration, as opposed to short duration, high thrust propulsive maneuvers. The
0.5 to 0.8 N thrust provided by a 10Êkm tether more than counteracts the Station's atmospheric drag
on a daily basis. Thus the question arises, can an electrodynamic tether compensate for the drag
while it is occurring, without disrupting the microgravity environment? Fluctuations in the induced
voltages from the Earth's magnetic field and in electron densities will create "turbulence" through
which the electrodynamic tether driven Station must fly; can load-leveling control systems
compensate for these pockets and maintain microgravity levels? In this case a new realm of
possibilities opens up for long-duration microgravity experiments. The allure of this self-propelled
space facility is certainly remarkable, and offers potential advantages.
2) Risk Reduction. Aside from replacement of failed components, an electrodynamic reboost tether
on the Station makes the vehicle itself essentially independent of propellant resupply from Earth.
The primary resupply consideration becomes the inhabitants of the Station and not the Station itself.
This is a new view for development of space operations. There ceases to be concern over the
"180-day countdown to reentry at 150Ênautical miles" which currently permeates every aspect of
Station mission planning. With the multi-billion dollar investment in the vehicle virtually secured
and free from concern over long resupply vehicle launch delays, particularly Russian Progress or FGB
tanker delays, the Program will be able to focus much more strongly on the ISS mission rather than
on ISS itself.
3) Cost Pay Back. The cost of the proposed system comes in the form of the development, launch,
and installation of an operational tether reboost system on the Station. The payback comes in the
form of reduced propellant upmass requirement. For 2003 to 2012, nearly 90,000Êkg of propellant
must be launched. Using a figure of $20,000 per kg, this represents a sum of $1.8Êbillion. An
electrodynamic tether supplying 90Êpercent of this requirement would reduce the operational cost by
$1.6Êbillion, paying for itself many times over. More modest estimates still result in a return on
investment tens of times the cost of development and operation of an electrodynamic reboost
tether.

Contacts:
Les Johnson, NASA/MSFC
Joe Carroll, Tether Applications Company
Juan Sanmartin, Polytechnic University of Madrid
Robert D. Estes & EnricoLorenzini, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory
Brian Gilchrist, The University of Michigan Ann Arbor
Manuel Martinez-Sanchez, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

40
41
2.2 An Upper Atmospheric Tether Mission (ATM)

Introduction

The Atmospheric Tether Mission (ATM) is a Shuttle based scientific experiment that will
deploy a set of eleven instruments to collect valuable atmospheric data never before obtained. This
set of instruments will be housed in an endmass/spacecraft that is deployed downward from the
Shuttle by a 90 km tether. The instrument package will cut through the atmosphere, collecting data,
at three different altitudes over a six day mission. A team was formed at the Marshall Space Flight
Center (MSFC) to conduct a preliminary concept study defining a system that would accomplish the
objectives of the ATM. A detailed report will be published by the team at the conclusion of the study.

Science Instrument Requirements

A Science Definition Team (SDT) was formed by NASA Headquarters to define the scientific
objectives of the Atmospheric Tether Mission (ATM). The SDT proposed a set of eleven science
instruments that together would meet all of the ATM mission objectives. The instruments, their
requirements and locations are shown in Table 1 and in Fig. 6, respectively.
Instrument Sensor Electronics Sensor E-Box Instrument Telemetry
Description Dimensions Dimensions Mass Mass Power Rate
(cm) (cm) (Kg) (Kg) (W) (bps)
Tether
Ion Drift 12 dia 21x12x16 0.9 2.3 3 2000
Meter 7 deep

Retarding 12 dia 21x12x16 0.9 2.3 4 1000

Potential 7 deep
Analyzer Neutral Mass 3-Axis
Spectrometer Magnetometer
Ion Mass 18x12x11 18x12x16 1.8 2.0 6 500 Ion Drift Meter
Spectrometer
Neutral Wind Meter
Langmuir 1 dia 15x15x10 0.35 3.0 4 5600
Probe 15 long Retarding Potential
boom mount Analyzer Energetic Particle
Neutral Wind 16 dia 18x12x16 2.1 2.2 8 1000 Spectrometer
Meter 19 deep Ion Mass Spectrometer

Neutral Mass 18x12x11 18x12x16 2.0 2.5 10 1000

Spectrometer Langmuir
Probe
Energetic 19x15x18 Included 2.2 N/A 2 8000
Particle in Sensor
Spectrometer E-Field Double
Probes
E-Field 20 cm dia 12x12x8 18.0 3.0 10 50K
Double 6 deep (3x6)
Probes

IR 10x10x21 18x18x13 7.0 2.0 13 128K Figure 6. Preliminary drawing of the ATM
Spectrometer

inc.
endmass
UV 10x10x25 inc. in 2.8 5 320
Photometer sensor sens

3-Axis 8x8x21 18x18x13 1.0 2.5 2 1600

Magnetometer

Total Payload 39.1 21.8 67 199K

Table 1. Science Instrument Requirements

Mission Scenario

The baseline mission scenario is that the Orbiter will enter a 220 km circular orbit at a 57
degree inclination. The tether length for this scenario is 90 km and will operate in a deploy only
mode. On the first day the tethered endmass will be deployed downward 50 km to 170 km altitude
and remain there for two days. On day three, an additional 20 km will be deployed, lowering the
endmass to an altitude of 150 km for two days. On day five, the final 20 km of tether will be
deployed, lowering the endmass to its final 130 km altitude and will remain at this altitude for two

41
days. The Orbiter altitude will be maintained by use of the Primary Reaction Control System
(PRCS) thrusters on the Orbiter. On day seven, the tether is cut and the endmass begins a reentry
course. The current estimate of fuel required for this scenario is 1996 kg (4400 lb.).

Five of the science instruments are required to face the RAM direction with two in the wake. A
series of E-field double probes and Langmuir probes are placed at specific locations around the 1.6 m
diameter satellite shell. This concept shows an aerodynamic tail used to increase yaw stability.

Aerodynamic Analysis of Endmass

The drag for a spherical shaped endmass of 1.6 m in diameter ranges from 0.92N at 130 km
altitude to 0.11N at 170 km altitude. A bullet shaped endmass was considered to ease packaging
constraints of the endmass subsystems. The drag analysis showed that the drag for a sphere is 20
percent lower than the equivalent bullet shape endmass. The diameter of the spherical endmass was
increased from 1 m to 1.6 m in diameter to alleviate packaging constraints.

Endmass Attitude Control System

There are several constraints impacting the endmass attitude control system design. Two major
constraints on the system are; avoidance of large torques that will disturb the endmass force and
acceleration measurements, and the inability of using magnetic torquers because they cause
disturbances in the magnetic field flux measurements. The science instrument requirements state that
the endmass should be pointed within plus or minus 3 degrees of RAM with a plus or minus 0.1
degree post-flight knowledge requirement. An attitude control system combining the use of reaction
wheels and strategically placed cold gas thrusters is the current proposed baseline. The location of
thrusters will be determined using Direct Simulation Monte Carlo (DSMC) analysis to avoid
instrument and endmass contamination. The control system is estimated to weigh 15 kg.
Projected ATM EPS MASS
(Data Based on TSS-1R Config)
250
Electrical Power System Batt: Li/SOCL2
Mission Duration: 6-Days
Pwr @ S/C Loads: 180 w
The mission lifetime of six days requires 200
EPS Mass
seven Li/SOCL2 type batteries weighing 105
kg. The additional cables, harnesses and 155
distribution weights bring the electrical power 150

system to an estimated 155 kg. The total

106
desired power loads are estimated at 176.6 100
watts including a 25 percent contingency. Mass (Kg) Batt Mass
This total includes the science instruments and
electronics, and the endmass major subsystem 50 42 Cabl & Harn

equipment. A summary of the electrical Distr

8
power system mass versus mission durations is 0
seen in Figure 7. 0 48 96 144 192
(2-Days) (4-Days) (6-Days)
Mission Duration (Hours)

Fig. 7. ATM Electrical Power System Mass

42
41
Thermal Control System

A flowfield temperature analysis was

performed at an altitude of 130 km. The
temperature variations occur in shock-layers
ranging from 800 K to 12000 K. The
maximum aero-heating on the endmass surface
is shown in Figure 8.

A combination of thermal blankets and

heaters comprise the current endmass thermal
control system. The estimated weight of the
system is 7 kg requiring 4 W of power.
Fig. 8. ATM endmass thermal control

Endmass Structure

The recommended material for the endmass structure is Aluminum 2219. The endmass structure
is composed of an equatorial ring with a mounting panel with two hemispheres of four flanged
quadrants each. Local stiffening will be required for the mounting of deployables and some
instruments, and attachment of the aerodynamic tail. A smooth surface is desired for aerodynamics
requiring the use of closeouts. The estimated weight of the endmass structure is 81.9 kg.

Baseline Tether Concept

The current tether concept is a 1.65 mm

diameter Kevlar strength member surrounded
by a Nomex jacket with a total diameter of
2.16 mm. A magnification of the baseline
tether is shown in Figure 9. Nomex
Jacket
The tether has a break strength of 2892 (OD 2.16 mm)
N and weighs 4.03 kg per km. The tether is
non-conducting and is currently 90 km in
length. The probability of survival of the
baseline tether over a six day mission,
assuming a critical particle size of 0.3 of the
tether diameter, is approximately 0.93. The 1.65 mm Diameter
probability of survival is highly sensitive t o Kevlar Strength Member
critical particle size. A graph showing a
particle size of 0.2,0.3, and 0.5 of the tether Drawing not to scale
diameter is seen in Figure 10. Fig. 9. A magnification of the baseline tether.

43
41
 90 km Baseline Tether Survivability for Various Critical Particle Sizes
1.00 Several alternate tether designs are being
0.99
K = 0.5
considered like the Hoytape (see Failsafe
0.98 Multiline Tethers for Long Tether Lifetimes in
0.97
the Application section). The survival
0.96
diacritical =K * dia tether probability using a particle size of 0.3 of the
0.95
tether diameter jumps from 91 percent for a
0.94
single line tether to 99.99 percent for the
Hoytape. With a Hoytape type of tether,
0.93
there is increased surface area increasing the
Probability of Survival
0.92
K = 0.2 K = 0.3 overall drag on the tethered system. Other
0.91
Hoytape designs using smaller diameter
0.90
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 members will improve the drag concern while
Time (days)
maintaining a near 100 percent survival.

Fig. 10. Comparison of critical particle sizes

and the probability of survival versus time.

Atmospheric Drag and Tether Dynamics

The atmospheric drag on the tether and endmass will induce libration oscillations of the tether. This
is due to the fact that the atmospheric density is not constant thus affecting the in-plane libration of
the tether.
Based on the current analysis, a libration and/or satellite pitch attitude control scenario may be
required.

Deployment Dynamics

There are two types of deployers considered for the ATM mission. A modified Tethered
Satellite System (TSS) deployer and a Small Expendable Deployer System (SEDS). The TSS deployer
exists and has flown twice but must be modified for the ATM mission. The SEDS deployer is smaller
but is not Orbiter qualified and would require extensive modification. The current baseline deployer
of the ATM system is a modified TSS type deployer. Deployment dynamics are stable and have been
demonstrated in earlier missions. The TSS deployment control strategy is proven and suitable for
the expected endmass altitudes required in the ATM mission. The proposed ATM system will be
mounted on a Spacelab Pallet in a designated location in the Orbiter payload bay.

Weight Statement ¥ Endmass

Ð Science Instruments & Electronics Boxes 60.9 kg
The total estimated weight (without
contingency) of the endmass is 325.3 kg. The Ð Structures 81.9 kg
deployer reel, electronics, support structure Ð Electrical Power System 155.0 kg
and Spacelab pallet add an additional 2940 kg Ð C&DH System 5.5 kg
and the tether adds 500 kg. With a 30 percent Ð Thermal Control 7.0 kg
contingency the total weight of the ATM
system is 4895 kg. Table 2 details the ATM Ð Attitude Control System 15.0 kg
weight statement. ¥ Deployer
Ð Reel, Electronics, Support Structure, SLPallet 2940.0 kg
Ð Tether (120 km) 500.0 kg
¥ Contingency (30%) 1129.6 kg
Table 2. ATM weight statement. ¥ Total 4894.9 kg

44
41
ATM Development Schedule

From Authority To Proceed (ATP), the development of the ATM is planned to take
four years. A six month Phase A study for engineering design would begin immediately
followed by a nine month Phase B definition. Parallel to the beginning of the Phase A, an
Announcement of Opportunity (AO) would be released for the science instruments. The
selection of the instruments would occur at the beginning of the Phase B and the science
instrument design, development, fabrication and testing would begin. The development of
the endmass and tether would begin parallel to the instrument development with the deployer
development starting within the next quarter. All hardware would be delivered and integrated
into the Orbiter in the beginning of the fourth year with a projected launch in the third
quarter of the year.

Contacts:
• Les Johnson, NASA-MSFC
• B. Carovillano, T. Stuart, NASA-Headquarters
• R. Heelis, U. Texas

45
2.3 The Naval Research LaboratoryÕs Advanced Tether Experiment

The Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) plans to fly its second tether experiment, called
ATEx, in 1998. ATEx stands for Advanced Tether Experiment. The tether system is a
simple gravity-gradient dynamics and survivability research experiment.
Major program objectives include adding to the tether communityÕs understanding of
deployment dynamics and control via a constant-speed motor, in- and out-of-orbit plane
libration control via thrusters to excite and damp librations, and investigating the
survivability of long-life tether
materials.

Isometric Views of ATEx

Upper End-Body

Lower
End-Body

ATEx Deck Which

Remains Attached To
The Host Satellite

Upper End-Body: 7.6 x 62.2 x 52.0 cm

Lower End-Body: 60.9 x 48.2 x 38.1 cm

Mechanical Overview

The 83 kg tether system will fly as a payload on a host satellite in a circular altitude of
425 NM. A passive upper end-bodyÕs mass of about 12 kg has no instrumentation other than
green-filtered retroreflectors. A 6 km (12 kg) tether is composed of 0.004 inch thick by 1

46
inch wide low density polyethylene with 3 single strands of 215 denier Spectra¨ 1000
uniformly spaced across the width. The lower end-body, of 30 kg mass, remains attached to a
29 kg electronics deck for the 90-day attached phase of the mission. At the end of the 90-
day tether experiment, the lower end-body is separated from the electronics deck, which
remains with the satellite. The lower end-body and portions of the satellite are covered with
IR-filtered retroreflectors.
To accomplish some of the missionÕs science objectives, the lower end-body is
instrumented with a 3-axis tensiometer at the tether attach point, a 3-axis accelerometer, a
reel turn-counter, and a sensor to detect some discrete angles of tether departure with respect
to the lower end-body.

Deployment Scenario

After achieving a near-circular orbit, the 3-axis stabilized momentum-bias satellite will
orient with ATEx radially away from Earth. ATExÕs upper end-body will separate away
from the lower end-body via a constant speed motor at 2 cm/s. The stepper-motor will drive
a pair of pinch rollers pulling the tether off a level-wound reel; but, the motor and reel
cannot reverse direction. The entire deployment sequence has been specified and includes
satellite pitch motions to maintain a tether departure angle nearly perpendicular to the lower
end-body.
Analysis showed the in-plane system libration angle will initially be fifty degrees and
throughout the deployment oscillate at significantly lower angles to result in a final libration
angle near zero degrees.

Libration Control Demonstrations

For the remaining 87 days of post-deployment activities, tether dynamics will focus on
exciting and damping in- and out-of-plane librations. The satellite has thrusters located on
all four sides of the vehicle to force the satellite and lower end-body (now acting as one large
end-body) forward-and-back in the orbit plane and left-and-right out the orbit plane. Details
of these activities have not been defined; however, a thruster would be fired and observations
made of tension, acceleration, satellite attitude perturbations, and end-body positions. The
results would be interpreted in a quick-look scheme via the dynamics simulations.

Satellite Laser Ranging (SLR) Tracking

Each end-body has 43 retroreflector optics or Òcorner cubesÓ. A retroreflector returns

light back to the source independent of retroreflector orientation thus permitting the end-
bodies to be observed by the global SLR network. The different coating on each end-body is
sensitive to a different laser frequency to assist in identifying the end-body. Early in the
mission, telescope observations will guide the laser beam to the end-body.
Later in the mission, perhaps the tether motions will repeat regularly and orbit
determination will be straightforward such that a laser can target the end-bodies even in local
daylight.
The SLR ground stations require pointing information given by inter-range vectors
(IRVs). NRL will enhance the tether systemÕs orbit determination from
USSPACECOMMAND by including end-body motions. Initially, the tether dynamics models
of the in-plane and out-of-plane librations will be used to augment the IRV.
Later, as SLR data becomes routinely available, estimates of the orbit and refined
tether dynamics models from the SLR data should substantially improve end-body position
and rate estimates. The IRV can be fit to the observed tether dynamics to enhance the
acquisition and tracking, perhaps the SLR sites can acquire (in daytime) without telescope
assist. This will increase around the globe viewing opportunities.

47
 The Goddard Space Flight Center coordinates SLR observations within their
international network and distributes the IRVs to each site. We expect to collect tether data
for approximately one year. After that, we plan to occasionally request a series of SLR
tracks to confirm long-term tether motion and that the tether is still intact.

Tether Survivability

After the 87 days of libration control research, the lower end-body is separated from the
satellite. At this time, ATEx is completely unpowered, passive, and can only be observed by
the ground methods: SLR, radar, optical telescops. At this point, the ATEx mission is similar
to the TiPS project described in chapter 1 of this handbook. Analyses indicate that ATEx
will reenter into the atmosphere in 3-4 years. The model included the atmospheric heating
effects of the solar cycle.

Contacts:

• D. Spencer, M. F. Zedd - NRL

48
2.4 The AIRSEDS-S Mission

Several organizations have expressed a need for low cost tether solutions for the space
shuttle, International Space Station and unmanned launch vehicles. Furthermore, NASA and
ASI have expressed interest in flying a tethered satellite system in a downward deployed
mission called TSS-2.1 The scientific and engineering information to be gained from such a
mission would allow advances in our understanding and modeling capabilities of atmospheric
and ionospheric phenomena including satellite drag, the energy deposition from
magnetospheric currents and particle precipitation, and the spatial and temporal gradients in
ionospheric properties. Moreover, the next generation of tethered satellites and hypersonic
vehicles are being planned to fly through this atmospheric region. Before undertaking a
mission of the size and complexity of TSS-2 it may be prudent to explore the possibility that
a less complex mission might be performed, which utilizes many present tether technologies
and options for commercial sponsorship, to achieve a limited set of science and engineering
goals. In the fall of 1994 The Michigan Technic Corporation (TMTC) was awarded by
NASA Headquarters and Marshall Space Flight Center Phase A funding to conduct a
preliminary design of the AIRSEDS-S probe and mission plan. AIRSEDS-S,
Atmospheric/Ionospheric Research Small Expendable Deployed Satellite, will test and
demonstrate tether system dynamical interactions, flight qualify deployer systems and
reusable components for application to the Space Shuttle and the International Space Station
(ISS), verify models of tether and satellite aerothermodynamic behavior, and determine lower
thermosphere chemistry and composition. Figure 1 shows the system conceptually
integrated with the Hitchhiker-C Crossbay Structure. AIRSEDS-S, based on NASA's successful
and proven SEDS program, is a 90 km tether mission designed to collect atmospheric
information in the altitude range of 230-130 km via a tethered satellite lowered from the
Space Shuttle Orbiter to altitudes which cannot currently be explored using balloons or
aircraft. The AIRSEDS-S mission will provide the first horizontal in-situ sampling at low
altitudes in the Earth's upper atmosphere. In addition, the successful flight demonstration of
the AIRSEDS-S probe and deployer system could result in the future development of a low

49
cost deployer to conduct further exploration of the Earth's upper atmosphere and
ionosphere, and conduct payload return operations, ISS towing operations and microgravity
experiments from the space shuttle and the International Space Station.

The specific objectives of the AIRSEDS-S Mission are to:

(a) Flight qualify tethered satellite hardware on the Space Shuttle Hitchhiker-C and for
use, by inference, on the International Space Station.

(b) Conduct an investigation of the horizontal distribution of neutral atmosphere

composition and dynamics in the lower thermosphere.

(c) Understand the local atmospheric environment of the tethered probe, and compare
with current predictions.

(d) Test and demonstrate tether system dynamical interactions. This includes studying
the behavior of a tethered satellite system and analyzing the flight characteristics of the
probe in the EarthÕs upper atmosphere and comparing with current models.

(e) To provide educational opportunities to students in both pre-college and college

level.

The long term goal of TMTC and the participants of the AIRSEDS-S mission including
the University of Texas at Dallas, the University of Iowa, the University of New Hampshire,
The AIRSEDS Institute, Tether Applications, Tethers Unlimited, The Smithsonian
Astrophysical Observatory, and NASA Marshall and Goddard Space Flight Centers, is t o
provide a low-cost reusable modular tether facility for the International Space Station (ISS)
and the Space Shuttle Hitchhiker-C programs. Such a facility may be further developed t o
support experiments conducting remote sensing, electrodynamic operations, microgravity
studies and payload return. Most of the components for the AIRSEDS-S mission will have
direct application on future ISS applications and shuttle based missions including the deployer
system, the tether, avionics, payload ejection and payload support systems including data
systems, end mass attitude control, communication and data collection.

For further information please refer to the AIRSEDS Internet Central web site at
http://www.airseds.com/.

Contacts:
• A. Santangelo - The Michigan Technic Corporation

50
2.5 The RAPUNZEL Mission

The small tether project RAPUNZEL was started in 1991 by the Institute of
Astronautics, Munich Technische Universitat (TU) and the Kayser-Threde Company t o
design a low cost tether experiment. In collaboration with the Samara State Aerospace
University (SSAU), Russia, the initial mission intended to fly the German re-entry capsule
MIRKA on a Russian Photon capsule. Later on, in collaboration with SSAU and the former
NPO Energia, the project split into three different missions on Resurs, Photon, and Progress
spacecraft, respectively.
The TU team designed and built a deployer based on textile technology, which would
ensure both high reliability and low cost (Fig. 1). SSAU is building a small re-entry capsule t o
fly on Resurs.
Lately, the main effort has been the
development and test of the deployer. In Fig. 2 shows a schematic of the
November 1995, a campaign of parabolic mission sequence. When the endmass is
flights tested the deployer under ejected by springs (1) the deployment
microgravity conditions. The first tests starts (2). After reaching the full tether
have shown good results and proven the length of 52 km, the tether is cut (3) and
concept feasibility. The laboratory tests the capsule reenters the earth atmosphere
were followed by numerical simulations of (4) and lands on parachute (5).
the payload deployment and its re-entry in Preliminary simulations have shown that
the atmosphere. even though the atmospheric drag induces
small oscillations in the system, the
endmass lands safely in the Kasakstan
region.

1
52 km
2
3
4
260 km
5
Figure 1. Breadboard model of tether
deployer Figure 2. Schematic view of the
deployment sequence

Contacts:

• Manfred Krischke, Kayser-Threde GmbH, Munich, Germany

• Dieter Sabath - Technische Universitat Munich, Germany

51
2.6 Tether Mechanism Materials and Manufacture Project

The ESA funded Tether Mechanism Materials and Manufacture (TMM&M) project has
been performed by Alenia Spazio (Italy), as prime contractor, and SABCA (Belgium) and
SENER (Spain) as subcontractors.

One important class of low-cost tether mechanisms and related space missions was
identified in the development of expendable tether systems that did not require complex
mechanism operations and the associated technology development. For the TMM&M ESA
technology development activity, a EURECA-based tether initiated material or sample re-
entry model mission, with a 150-kg mass capsule and a 20-km tether, was adopted for the
expendable tether mechanism design and its breadboard model selected to be manufactured
and tested.

A particular challenge in the

expendable tether mechanism design,
associated with a near-horizontal tether
deployment operation, was represented by
the deployment control, tension and rate
ranges and accuracy requirements. Various
simple tether mechanism design solutions
were traded-off and a spool-reel
configuration solution, in which no
(passive) control is applied in the early
tether spool deployment operation and
active reel-brake (rate-feedback) actions
are implemented to control the remaining
part of deployment accurately, was
adopted and bread-boarded. The TMM&M
Project expendable tether mechanism
bread-board model (fig. 1) was functionally Figure 1. Expendable tether mechanism
tested on a suitably designed and breadboard model
manufactured test facility capable of
performing tether deployment testing for
a vast range of preselected length, rate and
tension reference profiles.

Contacts:
• R. Licata, P. Merlina - Alenia
• J.M. Gavira - ESA/Estec

52
 2.7 The Space Tether Experiment (STEX)

Description

The Space Tether Experiment (STEX)

has been proposed by ISAS to fly onboard
the Space Flight Unit (SFU) follow-on
mission as one of the science and
technology experiments.
SFU orbit is 500 km and circular and
the spacecraft attitude is sun-oriented.
SFU can carry 1000 kg of payload. The
major objective of STEX is to assess the
tether technology for future scientific
missions.

Mission Scenario

In order to evaluate the performance

of different control logics, a 40-kg
subsatellite will be deployed up to 10 km Figure 1. STEX on board SFU
and retrieved several times. During
stationkeeping the susbatellite will be
stabilzed along the vertical with impulsive
thrusts.

Instrumentation

The subsatellite will be equipped with a vacuum gauge, plasma probes and wave
receivers to study SFU electromagnetic environment. A tether deployment and retraction
system has been developed for laboratory tests, a schematic is shown in figure 2. The
deployment/retrieval speed, tether tension and reponse of the feedback system have been
analyzed using this system.

Figure 2. Schematic of STEX Deployment/Retrieval System

Contacts:
¥ K.I. Oyama, S.Sasaki, ISAS

53
SECTION 3.0 TETHER APPLICATIONS

54
 3.1 General

This section provides a summary of various tether applications proposed thus far, concentrating on near-
term, mid-term, and innovative applications. In some cases, these applications are general ideas, and in
others, they are well-defined systems, based on detailed study and computational analysis. These applications
have been divided into eight general categories. In cases where an application can be logically placed in more
than one, it has been placed in the one considered most appropriate. To avoid redundancy, variations of a
particular system concept are not described separately. Instead, Section 3.2 contains a listing of the
applications by category, page number, and possible cross reference to other categories. Descriptions of
proposed applications follow this listing. For these descriptions, a standardized format is used to allow quick
and easy comparisons of different applications. This format is designed to effectively serve as wide a
readership as possible, and to conveniently convey the pertinent details of each application. Readers with
different interests and needs can find the information and level of detail they desire at a glance.

The Category and title of each application is presented at the top of the page. The "Application"
subsection provides a brief statement of the application, and the "Description" subsection provides a brief
description of the system design and operation. A picture is located in the upper right of the page to
supplement the description, by providing a diagrammatic representation of the system and its operation. The
"Characteristics" subsection exhibits the major system design and operation parameters in bullet form. The
last characteristic is always a bullet entitled "Potential for Technology Demonstration". This entry attempts
to classify both the conceptual maturity of an application, and the amount of technological development
required to demonstrate the particular application. When applicable we have mentioned the availability of
flight data that somehow may support the feasibility of the application. Three descriptors have been used to
indicate the demonstration time-frame:

• Near-Term: 5 years or less,

• Mid-Term: 5-10 years, and
• Far-Term: 10 years or greater.

The date of this printing may be assumed to be the beginning of the Near-Term period. Together, these
subsections present a brief and complete summary of the system's application, design, and operation.

The "Critical Issues" subsection, lists the developmental and operational questions and issues of critical
importance to the application. The "Status" subsection indicates the status of studies, designs, development,
and demonstrations related to the application. The "Discussion" subsection presents more detailed
information about all aspects of the application. Following this, the "Contacts" subsection lists the names of
investigators who are involved with work related to the application, and who may be contacted for further
information. (See "Contacts" section, for addresses and telephone numbers.) Finally, the "References"
subsection lists the reference used in the preparation of the application description.

Many of the applications that follow are subject to similar critical issues which are more or less "generic"
to tethers. These are issues such as damage from micrometeoroids or other space debris, dynamic noise
induced on platforms, high power control electronics technology, rendezvous guidance and control, tether
material technology development, and system integration. Many of the figures presented in the "Tether
Data" section address these critical issues.

55
 3.2 Tether Applications Listing

Following is a list of abbreviations used to identify cross references to other

categories. The application listing has been arranged in alphabetical order by
category and application within each category.

AE AERODYNAMICS
CN CONCEPTS
CG CONTROLLED GRAVITY
EL ELECTRODYNAMICS

PL PLANETARY
SC SCIENCE
SS SPACE STATION
TR TRANSPORTATION

Category/Title Page Cross Reference

AERODYNAMICS
Station Tethered Express Payload System 59 SC SS TR
Multiprobe for Atmospheric Studies 60 SC SS
Shuttle Continuous Open Wind Tunnel 61 SC

CONCEPTS
Gravity Wave Detection Using Tethers 62 SC
Tethered Lifting Probe 64 AE TR
External Tank Space Structures 65 CG SS
Alfven Engine for Interplanetary Exploration 66 EL PL TR
Earth-Moon Tether Transport System 68 PL TR
Mars Moons Tether Transport System 69 PL TR

CONTROLLED GRAVITY
Rotating Controlled-Gravity Laboratory 71 SC PL
Tethered Space Elevator 73 SS SC

ELECTRODYNAMICS
Electrodynamic Power Generation 75 SS PL TR
Electrodynamic Thrust Generation 77 SS PL TR
ULF/ELF/VLF Communication Antenna 79 SC SS

PLANETARY
Aerocapture with Tethers for Planetary Exploration 81 AE TR
Comet/Asteroid Sample Return 83 SC
Jupiter Inner Magnetosphere Maneuvering Vehicle 85 EL TR
Mars Tethered Observer 87 AE SC
Tethered Lunar Satellite for Remote Sensing 89 SC

56
Category/Title Page Cross Reference

SCIENCE
Science Applications Tethered Platform 90 CG EL SS
Shuttle Science Applications Platform 92 CG EL
Tethered Satellite for Cosmic Dust Collection 93 PL

SPACE STATION
Microgravity Laboratory 94 CG SC
Shuttle Deorbit from Space Station 96 TR
Tethered STV Launch 98 TR
Variable/Low Gravity Laboratory 100 CG SC
Attitude Stabilization and Control 102 CG

TRANSPORTATION
Generalized Momentum Scavenging from Spent Stages 103 SS
Internal Forces for Orbital Modification 105 PL
Satellite Boost from Orbiter 107 SC
Shuttle Docking by Tether 109 SS
Tether Reboosting of Decaying Satellites 110 SS
Tether Rendezvous System 111 PL SS
Upper Stage Boost from Orbiter 112 PL
Tether Assisted Transportation System (TATS) 114 SS
Failsafe Multiline Tethers for Long Tether Lifetimes 116 PL SS

57
3.3 Tether Applications

58
 -- AERODYNAMICS --

Station Tethered Express Payload System (STEPS)

APPLICATION: Provides a way to return small payloads from the International Space
Station to earth between shuttle flights, without the safety hazards of handling rocket
motors or propellants.

DESCRIPTION: Payloads are tied down inside a

mini-Apollo capsule small enough to fit through
the robotic airlock in the Japanese Experiment
Module. The capsule is ejected downward and
deploys using a SEDS-1 (deploy-swing) strategy.
The tether is cut free at the station end, and it
orients the capsule for reentry before burning off.
(This "kite tail" effect was validated by SEDS-1.)

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Tether length: 30-33 km
• Payload: 30 kg, 100 liters
• Timescale: Near-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Tether deployment control for proper swing
• Implications of micrometeoroid cut (~0.7%
risk)
• Accelerations of ~4 microgee on station
during swing

STATUS:
• Tether Applications has contract to deliver protoflight capsule & deployer Feb 1998.
• Capsule can be tested as Delta or Progress secondary payload; both are under study.

DISCUSSION: The tether deployer is a smaller easily reloadable version of SEDS. It

mounts in a reusable capsule balancer/ejector/deployer assembly that remains with the
station.
For test flights, the deployer and flight computer mount inside the capsule. This simplifies
integration on the host vehicle and maximizes hardware recovery for inspection and
potential re-use. Baseline recovery scenario involves soft mid-air capture of gliding
parachute by helicopter.

CONTACTS:
• Joe Carroll
• Chris Rupp
• Paul Kolodziej

REFERENCES:
A Station Tethered Express Payload System (STEPS), available from Tether
Applications

59
 -- AERODYNAMICS --

Multiprobe for Atmospheric Studies

APPLICATION: Measurement of spatial geophysical gradients.

DESCRIPTION: A one-dimensional
constella-tion of probes is lowered by the Shuttle
or Space Station into the atmosphere in order to
provide simultaneous data collection at different
locations.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Physical
Characteristics:Mission related
• Potential For
Technology
Demonstration: Near-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Crawling systems might be necessary
• Operational sequence for deployment and retrieval

STATUS:
• Configuration study performed by Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory
• Analysis of scientific applications performed at University of Texas ,
Dallas

DISCUSSION: This constellation configuration could prove very valuable in low altitude
measurements requiring simultaneous data collection at the various probe positions. Good
time correlation of the measurements is one benefit of this system.

CONTACTS:
• Enrico Lorenzini
• Rod Heelis

REFERENCES:
Proc. of Fourth International Conference on Tethers in Space, Washington DC,
10-14 April 1995

60
 -- AERODYNAMICS --

Shuttle Continuous Open Wind Tunnel

APPLICATION: Obtain steady-

state aerothermo-dynamic research data
under real gas conditions without
experiencing limitating effects inherent
in ground-based wind
tunnels.

DESCRIPTION: A tethered
aerodynamically shaped research vehicle
is deployed downward form the Space
Shuttle to obtain data in the free
molecule, transition, and upper
continuum flow regimes.
Characterization of the free-stream,
measurement of gas-surface interactions,
flow field profiling, and determination of
state vectors are to be accomplished.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Length: 100-120 km
• Mass: Variable, dependent on mission requirements
• Power Required: TBD, for instruments and data handling only
• Potential For
Technology
Demonstration: Near-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Quantitative definition of data requirements
• Define method for flow-field profiling
• Quantitative analysis of orifice effects vs. altitude

STATUS:
• Prototype experiment and instrument package proposed for ATM mission

DISCUSSION: Unique measurements are possible due to low Reynold;s number and high
Mach number regime. Measurements in real-gas will provide more dependable data
regarding fluid flow, turbulence, and gas-surface interactions.

CONTACTS:
• Giovanni Carlomagno
• Franck Hurlbut
• George Wood

REFERENCES:
Proc. of Fourth International Conference on Tethers in Space, Washington DC,
10-14 April 1995
61
 -- CONCEPTS --

Gravity Wave Detection Using Tethers

APPLICATION: To detect gravity

waves from sources such as binary stars,
pulsars, and supernovae.

DESCRIPTION: The system would consist of two

masses on each end of a long tether with a spring at its
center. As this tether system orbits the Earth,
gravitational waves would cause the masses to oscillate.
This motion would be transmitted to the spring, which
would be monitored by a sensing device. Analysis of the
spring displacement and frequency could then lead to the
detection of gravity waves.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Mass: 20 kg (Each End
Mass)
• Tether Length:25 km
• Tether diameter: 0.6 mm
• Spring Constant: Ks = 2.3 x 103 dyne/cm
• Orbital Altitude: ≥ 1000 km • Potential For Technology Demonstration:
Long-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Existence of gravity waves
• Gravity wave noise level from other bodies
• Excitation of oscillations from other sources

STATUS:
• Preliminary calculations have been performed at SAO, Caltech, and
Moscow State University

DISCUSSION: This gravitational wave detector would operate in the 10 - 100 MHz
frequency band that is inaccessible to Earth-based detectors because of seismic noise. If
gravitational waves do exist in this region, a simple system such as a tether-spring detector
would prove of great value.

CONTACTS:
• K. Thorne
• Marino Dobrowolny

REFERENCES:
V.B. Braginski and K.S. Thorne, "Skyhook Gravitational Wave Detector," Moscow
State University, Moscow, USSR, and Caltech, 1985.

62
B. Bertotti, R. Catenacci, M. Dobrowolny, "Resonant Detection of Gravitational
Waves by Means of Long Tethers in Space," Technical Note (Progress Report),
Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, Cambridge, Massachusetts, March 1977.

63
 -- CONCEPTS --

Tethered Lifting Probe

APPLICATION: The lifting body controls the

altitude of the probe in atmospheric tether
missions.

DESCRIPTION: A hypersonic lifting body is

used for the probe in an atmospheric mission.
Changes in lift forces on the probe can be used
to control the probe altitude without changing
the length of the tether. Required changes in
probe attitude can be accomplished using a
movable tether attachment point or
aerodynamic control surfaces.

CHARACTERISTICS:
l Tether Length: 10-200 km
l Probe Area: 10-50 m 2
l Potential For
Technology
Demonstration: Mid-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
l Development of control laws to maintain probe attitude.

STATUS:
l Preliminary results indicate the feasibility of using lift as a control mechanism for
probe altitude.
l Current studies favor the use of a movable tether attachment point as a simple and
highly effective attitude control mechanism.

DISCUSSION: The lifting probe provides an ideal control mechanism for the altitude of an
atmospheric tether system. The alternative is to slowly change the tether length by using a
reel mechanism. This may not be effective in situations where probe altitude must be
maintained in the presence of atmospheric uncertainties. In addition, the use of a lifting
body can increase the atmospheric penetration of the probe without increasing its mass.
This concept can be applied to a wide range of tether atmospheric missions from upper
atmosphere research to aerocapture.

CONTACTS:
l Jordi Puig-Suari
l Brian Biswell

REFERENCES:
Biswell, B., and Puig-Suari, J. “Lifting Body Effects on the Equilibrium Orientation
of Tethers in the Atmosphere,”AIAA-96-3597, AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics
Conference, San Diego, CA, 1996.
Keshmiri, M., and Misra, A.K. “Effects of Aerodynamic Lift on the Stability of
Tethered Subsatellite System,” AAS-93-184, AAS/AIAA Spaceflight Mechanics
Meeting, Pasadena, CA, 1993.

64
65
 -- CONCEPTS --

External Tank Space Structures

APPLICATION: Utilize Shuttle

external tanks in a raft format to
form a structure in space.

DESCRIPTION: Tethers are

used to separate rafts composed of
external tanks. These can either be
used as a "Space Station" or as
structural elements in an evolving
Space Station.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Tether Length:10 - 20
km
• Potential For
Technology
Demonstration: Long-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Space operations required to adapt tanks to proposed applications
• External tank induced contamination environment
• Stability/controllability of proposed configuration
• Assembly/buildup operations
• Drag makeup requirements

STATUS:
• Preliminary analysis performed
• Further analyses effort deferred

DISCUSSION: Most likely use of this concept would be as a "space anchor" for tether
deployment concepts.

CONTACTS:
• Joe Carroll

REFERENCES:
Carroll, J. A., "Tethers and External Tanks, Chapter 3 of Utilization of the
External Tanks of the Space Transportation System," California Space Institute,
La Jolla, California, Sept. 1982.

Carroll, J. A., "Tethers and External Tanks: Enhancing the capabilities of the
Space Transportation System," Dec. 1982

66
 -- CONCEPTS --

Heliocentric Alfven Engine for Interplanetary Transportation

APPLICATION: Generation of
propulsion for interplanetary travel
by using the electromagnetic
interaction of a conducting tether and
the interplanetary magnetic field.

DESCRIPTION: An insulated
conducting tether, connected to a
spacecraft and terminated at both
ends by plasma contactors, provides
interplanetary propulsion in two
ways. The current induced in the
tether by the solar wind magnetic
field is used to power ion thrusters.
The interaction between the tether
current and the magnetic field can
also be used to produce thrust or drag.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Tether Length:1000 km
• Cooling: Helium (2°K)
• Current: 1000 A
• Power: 2 MW
• Materials: Superconducting Niobium-Tin
• Potential For Technology Demonstration: Far-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• How does this system compare with others, such as nuclear or solar sail
• Feasibility and controllability have not been established

STATUS:
• TSS-1R flight to demonstrate electrodynamic interaction with surrounding
plasma
• More detailed study and evaluation of this application are required

DISCUSSION: The solar wind is a magnetized plasma that spirals outward from the sun
with a radial velocity of about 400 km/sec. The magnetic field of the solar wind is 5 x 10-5
Gauss, producing an electric field of 2 V/km, as seen by an interplanetary spacecraft. If a
conducting tether, connected to the spacecraft and terminated at both ends by plasma
contactors, were aligned with the electric field, the emf induced in it could yield an electric
current. This current could be used to power ion thrusters for propulsion. The current
could be maximized by using superconducting materials for the tether. (This system was
proposed by Hannes Alfven in 1972). It has been calculated that a 1000 km
superconducting wire of Niobium-tin could generate 1000 A (2 MW). To achieve
superconduction temperatures, this wire could be housed in an aluminum tube with flowing

67
supercooled (2° K) helium. The tube would be insulated and capped at each end with a
refrigeration system.

In addition to the ion thrusters, the interaction of the tether current and solar wind
magnetic field would produce thrust or drag. As current flowed in the tether, the magnetic
field would exert an IL x B force on the tether. If the spacecraft were moving away from
the sun (with the solar wind), a propulsive force would be exerted on the tether as its
electrical power was dissipated. A drag would be exerted on the tether if current from an
on-board power supply were fed into it against the induced emf. When moving toward the
sun (against the solar wind), the opposite conditions would apply.

This system could be used to spiral away from or toward the sun, or to move out of
the ecliptic. Theoretically, such a spacecraft could attain the solar wind velocity of 400
km/sec. Use of the electromagnetic interaction between a conducting tether system and
the solar wind may allow much shorter transfer times and larger payloads for planetary
missions.

CONTACTS:
• Mario Grossi
• Jim McCoy
• Nobie Stone

REFERENCES:
Applications of Tethers in Space, Vol. 1,2 Workshop Proceedings, NASA CP-
2365, March 1985

H. Alfven, "Spacecraft Propulsion: New Methods," Science, Vol. 176, pp. 167-
168, April 14, 1972.

68
 -- CONCEPTS --

Earth-Moon Tether Transport System

APPLICATION:
Transportation of material from
lunar to Earth orbit.

DESCRIPTION: Material
(probably Moon rocks) in lunar
orbit is collected by the LOTS
(Lunar Orbiting Tether Station),
half is transferred to an AFV
(Aerobraking Ferry Vehicle)
which transports it to LEO,
where it is transferred to the TAMPS (Tether And Materials Processing Station). The AFV
then returns to the Moon for more lunar material.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Physical Characteristics: Undetermined
• Potential For Technology Demonstration: Far-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Undetermined

STATUS:
• No detailed study on this application has been performed

DISCUSSION: Material (probably Moon rocks) in lunar orbit could be transported to Earth
orbit without the use of propellants with this tether transport system. (The material in
lunar orbit could have been placed there by the Lunar Equator Surface Sling; Application
"Lunar Equator Surface Sling"). It could be collected in orbit by a Lunar Orbiting Tether
Station (LOTS). The LOTS would proceed as follows: (1) catch the rocks, spin-up, catch
an Aerobraking Ferry Vehicle (AFV); (2) Load the AFV with half of the rocks; (3) spin-up,
throw the AFV into trans-Earth injection; (4) de-spin, load the other rocks on a tether; and
(5) spin-up and deboost the rocks for momentum recovery.
The AFV would proceed to Earth, where it would aerobrake into LEO for capture by the
Tether And Materials Processing Station (TAMPS). The TAMPS would proceed as
follows: (1) catch, retrieve, and unload the aerobraked AFV; (2) process moonrocks into
LO 2 , etc; (3) refuel and reboost the AFV toward the Moon; (4) recover momentum with an
electromagnetic tether; and (5) also capture, refuel, and reboost AFV's going to GEO and
deep space when required. The AFV returning to the Moon would be a rocket boosted into
trans-lunar injection and final lunar orbit for recapture by the LOTS.

CONTACTS:
• Joe Carroll

REFERENCES:
Applications of Tethers in Space, NASA CP-2422, March 1986.

69
 -- CONCEPTS --

Mars Moons Tether Transport System

APPLICATION: Transportation
of manned vehicles and
spacecraft from low Mars orbit
out to escape, or from escape to
low Mars orbit, using tethers
attached to the Moons of Mars.

DESCRIPTION: Long
tethers (Kevlar strength or
better) are attached above and
below both Phobos and Deimos
to ferry vehicles and other payloads between low Mars orbit and Mars escape without the
use of propulsion. For example, a vehicle is tethered upward from a low Mars orbit station,
released, and then caught by a downward hanging tether on Phobos. The payload is then
transferred to the upward deployed tether and released. The process is repeated at Deimos,
and results in escape from Mars. The process is reversible.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Length: 940 km (up), 1160 km (down) at Phobos
6100 km (up), 2960 km (down) at Deimos
• Tether Mass: 5000 kg to 90,000 kg
• Tether Diameter: 2 mm (or greater)
• Power: TBD
• Materials: Kevlar, or higher strength material
• Payload Mass: 20,000 kg
• Potential For
Technology
Demonstration: Far-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Tether dynamics analysis
• Comparison with other advanced propulsion methods
• Rendezvous feasibility
• Operations and cost
• Tether severing by micrometeoroids or debris

STATUS:
• A conceptual study defines the tether length and strength requirements, but
does not address construction, placement, and operation of the tether
station.

DISCUSSION: The two moons of Mars, Phobos and Deimos are near equatorial, and can
function as momentum banks in the transfer of mass from Mars low orbit to Mars escape
(or the reverse). The requirement is to place long tethers, upward and downward, on each
of the two moons of Mars. Example uses might be to transfer Deimos or comet material
70
to the Mars surface or to transfer astronauts from Mars surface to a waiting interplanetary
low thrust vehicle at Deimos, or to support materials processing in Mars orbit.
Tether stations on Phobos and Deimos may have to be manned for construction,
operation, and maintenance. Therefore, other human functions at these satellites would be
necessary to make this concept viable. It is best suited to a high activity scenario with
departures and arrivals at Mars daily or weekly. A station on Phobos alone would be
sufficient for near Mars operations, and could even be used for escape with a sufficiently
long upward tether. The mass of the two bodies is so great, (>10 15 kg) that their orbits
would not be affected for decades or longer.

CONTACTS:
• Joe Carroll
• Paul Penzo

REFERENCES:
Penzo, P. A., "Tethers for Mars Space Operations," The Case for Mars II, Ed. C. P.
McKay, Vol. 62, Science and Technology Series, p. 445-465, July 1984.

71
 -- CONTROLLED GRAVITY --

Rotating Controlled-Gravity Laboratory (Tethered Platform)

APPLICATION: Provide a readily accessible variable/controlled gravity laboratory,

capable of generating artificial gravity levels of up to 1 g and over, in Earth orbit.

DESCRIPTION: A tethered platform

composed of two end structures, connected by a
deployable/retractable 10 km tether. One end
structure includes the solar arrays, related
subsystems, and tether reel mechanism. The other
includes two manned modules and a propellant
motor. Artificial gravity is created in the manned
modules by extending the tether and firing the
motor, rotating the entire system about its center
of mass (the solar panels are de-spun). Tether
length is used to control the gravity level.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Length: Up to 10 km
• g-Level: Up to 1.25
• Rotation Rate: Up to 0.75 rpm
• Potential for Technology
Demonstration: Far-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Susceptibility to micrometeoroid/debris damage

STATUS:
• A detailed dynamic analysis has been performed at SAO
• A System study has been performed at Stanford University

DISCUSSION: Access to an orbiting variable/controlled-gravity laboratory, capable of

providing artificial gravity levels of up to 1 g and over, would allow vital experimentation
in this important gravity range, and provide an appropriate facility, should artificial gravity
be determined to be a physiological requirement for extended manned orbital missions.
Artificial gravity (in the form of centrifugal acceleration) would be created by rotating the
laboratory. The magnitude of the resulting centrifugal acceleration is equal to the square of
the angular velocity times the radius of rotation.

Three basic rotating lab configurations are possible - a torus or cylinder

(centrifuge), a rigid station, and a tethered platform. The centrifuge is the least attractive
because of its relatively small volume, large Coriolis force, and large dynamic disturbance
levels. Of the remaining two, the tethered system has several advantages over the rigid
one. It would provide a larger radius of rotation, reducing the rotational rate required to
produce a desired g-level. This, in turn, would reduce unwanted side effects, such as the
Coriolis force. The variable tether length would also allow a large variety of artificial
gravity environments. To spin the system, the tether would be extended to its full 10 km
72
length, and the motor fired. (The minimum necessary Delta-V has been calculated to be
125 m/s.) The tether length would then be adjusted to provide the desired g-level.
Assuming the end masses are equal and rotating about a common center, 0.08 g would result
from a tether length of 10 km at a spin rate of 0.12 rpm, 0.16 g (lunar gravity) from a
length of 8 km at 0.20 rpm, 0.38 g (Mars gravity) from a length of 6 km at 0.33 rpm, 1 g
from a length of 4.3 km at 0.65 rpm, and 1.25 g from a length of 4 km at 0.75 rpm. The
solar arrays would be de-spun and sun-oriented. However, a disadvantage is the high Delta-
V required to start and stop this spin. Another is the fact that the rotation would probably
have to be stopped to allow docking with a spacecraft.

This lab would allow experimentation at gravity levels ranging from low gravity,
through Moon, Mars, and Earth gravities, to more than 1 g. The effects of gravity on
plant and animal growth, and on human performance and medical processes (such as those
related to the cardiovascular, skeletal, and vestibular systems) could be studied for prolonged
periods of time. Gravity conditions on the Moon and Mars could be simulated, and the lab
could be used to prepare for the possible use of artificial gravity on manned interplanetary
missions. It could also provide Earth-like habitability at partial g. Such physical processes
as crystal growth, fluid science, and chemical reactions could be studied at various gravity
levels.

CONTACTS:
• Enrico Lorenzini
• Paul Penzo
• Chris Rupp

REFERENCES:
Applications of Tethers in Space, NASA CP-2422, March 1986

B.M.Quadrelli, E.C. Lorenzini, “Dynamics and Stability of a Tethered Centrifuge in

Low Earth Orbit”, The Journal of the Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 40, No. 1, 1992,
pp.3-25

Powell, J. David, Systems Study of a Variable Gravity Research Facility, Final

Report to NASA (Grant No. NCA2-208), April 1988.

72
 -- CONTROLLED GRAVITY --

Tethered Space Elevator

APPLICATION: The Space Elevator may

be used as a Space Station facility to tap different
levels of residual gravity, and a transportation
facility to easily access tethered platforms.

DESCRIPTION: The Space Elevator is an

element able to move along the tether in a
controlled way by means of a suitable drive
mechanism. The primary objectives of the
microgravity elevator mission are the
achievement of a new controllable microgravity
environment and the full utilization of the Space
Station support while avoiding the microgravity
disturbances on board the Space Station. A
shorter and slack cable could be used as both a
power and data link.

A ballast mass represents the terminal end

of the tether system. It could be any mass (e.g., a
Shuttle ET) or a tethered platform. The
objective of the transportation elevator
application is to access large tethered platforms
for maintenance, supply of consumables, or
module and experiment exchanges.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Length: 10 km
• Elevator Mass: 5,000 kg
• Ballast Mass: Up to 50,000 kg
• g-Level: 10 -7 to 10 -3
• Power Required: Up to 10 kW by Tether • Potential For
Power Line Link Technology
• Link Data Rate: Up to 40 Mb/s by Tether Demonstration: Mid-Term
Optical Fiber Link

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Space Station impacts
• Dynamic noise induced on the tether drive mechanism
• Gravity-measuring instrumentation
• Power link technology
• Optical fibers link technology

STATUS:
• ASI/Aeritalia Elevator Definition Study in initial design assessment phase,
Final Report issued in March 1988

73
 • Analysis of dynamics during deployment, station-keeping, and transfer
maneuvers carried out by the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory under
contract to NASA/MSFC

DISCUSSION: The most promising feature offered by the Space Elevator is the unique
capability to control with time the gravity acceleration level. In fact, since the radial
acceleration changes with position along the tether, the Elevator would be able to attain a
continuous range and a desired profile vs. time of residual gravity level by the control of
the Elevator motion. Moreover, the Elevator is able to fully utilize the Space Station
support (power, communications, logistics) and to avoid the Space Station contaminated
environment, from a microgravity point of view, by tether mediation.
Another way to exploit the Space Elevator capabilities is its utilization as a transportation
facility. The idea of using large tethered platforms connected to the Space Station by
power line and communication link (via tether technology) makes unrealistic frequent
operations of deployment and retrieval. On the other hand, the platform may require easy
access for maintenance, supply of consumables, module and experiment exchange. The
Space Elevator, as a transportation facility able to move along the tether to and from the
platform, may be the key to tethered platform evolution.

CONTACTS:
• Franco Bevilacqua
• Enrico Lorenzini
• Pietro Merlina

REFERENCES:
Applications of Tethers in Space, NASA CP-2422, March 1986

F. Bevilacqua and P. Merlina, "The Tethered Space Elevator System," Second

International Conference on Tethers In Space, Venice, Italy, 1987.

SATP Definition Study, Mid-Term Report, Aeritalia, TA-RP-AI-002, March 21,

1986.

Tethered Space Elevator Definition and Preliminary Design, Final Report,

Aeritalia, TA-RP-AI-009, 1988.

L.G. Napolitano and F. Bevilacqua, "Tethered Constellations, Their Utilization as

Microgravity Platforms and Relevant Features," IAF-84-439.

S. Bergamaschi, P. Merlina, "The Tethered Platform: A Tool for Space Science

and Application," AIAA-86-0400, AIAA 24th Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Reno,
Nevada, January 6-9, 1986.

Lorenzini, E.C., M.D. Grossi, D.A. Arnold, and G.E. Gullahorn, "Analytical
Investigation of the Dynamics of Tethered Constellations in Earth Orbit (Phase
II)," Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory Reports for NASA/MSFC, Contract
NAS8-36606. Quarterly Reports

Lorenzini, E.C., "A Three-Mass Tethered System for Micro-g/Variable-g

Applications," Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 10, No.3, May-
June 1987. (pp. 242-249)

Applications "Microgravity Laboratory" and "Variable/Low Gravity Laboratory"

74
 -- ELECTRODYNAMICS --

Electrodynamic Power Generation (Electrodynamic Brake)

APPLICATION: Generation of
DC electrical power to supply primary
power to on-board loads.

DESCRIPTION: An insulated
conducting tether connected to a
spacecraft and possibly terminated with
a subsatellite. Plasma contactors are
used at both tether ends or with the
bare tether (see sect. 2). Motion
through the geomagnetic field induces a
voltage across the orbiting tether. DC
electrical power is generated at the
expense of spacecraft/tether orbital
energy.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Power Produced: 1 kW - 1 MW
• Length: 10 - 20 km
• Mass: 900 - 19,000 kg
• Efficiency: ~90% • Potential For
• Materials: Aluminum Technology
Demonstration: Near-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Flight experiment validation of the current-voltage characteristics of
plasma contactor devices and operating at currents of up to 50 A in the
ionosphere are urgently needed to validate results from chamber tests and
theoretical models in space
• Flight experiment validation of the current-voltage characteristics of
the bare tether concept
• Flight experiment determination of the role played by ignited mode
operation in the ionosphere
• Ground and flight experiment validation of the theoretically predicted role
of plasma contactor cloud instabilities
• Characterization of the magnetosphere current closure path and its losses
• Characterization of the effects of large electromagnetic tether systems on
the LEO environment and other space vehicles
• Assurance of long-term insulator life
• Characterization of massive tether dynamics
• Development of space compatible insulation methods and power processing
electronics for multikilovolt operation
• Susceptibility to micrometeoroid/debris damage
• Understanding of current collection effects at resulting insulator defects and
their impacts on system performance (as in TSS1R)

75
STATUS:
• TSS-1 and -1R, PMG flights
• A wide variety of work is actively underway in the areas of electrodynamic
demonstrations, hollow cathodes, tether materials, and hardware
technologies including a demo flight (see section 2 and “bare tether”
concept)

DISCUSSION: An orbiting insulated tether, terminated at the ends either by plasma

contactors or by a bare section of tether, can be used reversibly as an electrical power or
thrust generator. Motion through the geomagnetic field induces a voltage in the tether,
proportional to its length and derived from the v x B electric field and its force on charges
in the tether. This voltage can be used to derive a DC electrical current in the tether.
Electrical power is generated at a rate equal to the loss in spacecraft orbital energy due to a
drag force of magnitude (ilB) where i is the tether current and l is the length. It has been
shown that this drag force functions as an electrodynamic brake and can be used to perform
orbit maneuvering in LEO or in the ionosphere of planets such as Jupiter or Saturn.

Three basic plasma contactor configurations have been considered in the studies
performed to date: (1) a passive large-area conductor at both tether ends; (2) a passive
large-area conductor at the upper (positive) end and an electron gun at the lower (negative)
end and (3) a plasma-generating hollow cathode configuration. Hollow cathodes as flown on
PMG are considered to be safer for spacecraft systems, since they establish a known vehicle
ground reference potential with respect to the local plasma. They also allow simple
reversibility of the tether current for switching between power and thrust generation.

CONTACTS:
• Les Johnson
• Joseph Kolecki
• Jim McCoy
• Juan Sanmartin
• Nobie Stone

REFERENCES:

Proc. of Fourth International Conference on Tethers in Space, Washington DC,

10-14 April 1995

76
 -- ELECTRODYNAMICS --

Electrodynamic Thrust Generation

APPLICATION: Generation of electro-

magnetic propulsive thrust to boost the orbit
of a spacecraft.

DESCRIPTION: An insulated
conducting tether connected to a spacecraft
and possibly terminated with a subsatellite.
Plasma contactors are used at both tether
ends. Current from an on-board power
supply is fed into the tether against the emf
induced by the geomagnetic field, producing a
propulsive force on the spacecraft/tether
system. The propulsive force is generated at
the expense of primary on-board electric
power.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Thrust Produced: Up to 200 N • Materials: Aluminum
• Power Required: Up to 1.6 MW • Potential For
• Length: 10-20 km Technology
• Mass: 100-20,000 kg & Demonstration: Near-Term
power supply
• Efficiency: ~90%

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• The same as listed in Electrodynamic Power Generation application

STATUS:
• The same as listed in Electrodynamic Power Generation application

DISCUSSION: An insulated conducting tether, terminated at the ends by plasma

contactors, can be used reversibly as an electromagnetic thruster or electrical power
generator. A propulsive force of IL x B is generated on the spacecraft/tether system when
current from an on-board power supply is fed into the tether against the emf induced in it
by the geomagnetic field.

Recommendations have been made through the years to use electrodynamic tethers to
provide drag compensation and orbital maneuvering capability for the International Space
Station, other solar array powered satellites, and to use higher power tethers (up to about 1
MW) for orbital maneuvering of the Space Station and other large space systems. Design
tradeoffs were also recommended, including:

77
 • Use of counterbalancing tethers deployed in opposite directions to provide
center-of-mass-location control
• Use of shorter tethers operating at low voltage and high current versus
longer tethers operating at high voltage and low current
• Definition of electrical/electronic interface between the tether and the user
bus.

CONTACTS:
• Marino Dobrowolny
• Les Johnson
• Joseph Kolecki
• Jim McCoy
• Juan Sanmartin
• Nobie Stone

REFERENCES:

Proc. of Fourth International Conference on Tethers in Space, Washington DC,

10-14 April 1995

78
 -- ELECTRODYNAMICS --

ULF/ELF/VLF Communications Antenna

APPLICATION: Generation of
ULF / ELF / VLF waves by an orbiting
electrodynamic tether for worldwide
communications.

DESCRIPTION: An insulated
conducting tether connected to a
spacecraft, and terminated at both ends
with plasma contactors. Variations in
tether current can be produced to
generate ULF/ELF/VLF waves for
communications. This tether antenna
can be self-powered (using the current
induced in it by the geomagnetic field for
primary power) or externally powered
(fed by an on-board transmitter).

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Length: 20-100 km
• Tether Current: 10 A
• Potential For Technology Demonstration: Near-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Characterization of the transmitter
• Characterization of the propagation media (including the ionosphere at
LEO altitudes, the lower atmosphere, and ocean water)
• Analysis of the sources of background noise and the statistical structure of
that noise at the receiver
• Characterization of the instabilities and wave due to large current densities
in the Alfven wings
• More advanced mathematical models are required for an adequate
understanding of tether antenna systems, including the need to supersede
the present cold-plasma based models with more accurate warm-plasma
based models
• Determination of optimum ground station locations, including the
possibility of mobile receivers
• Correlation of signals received at different ground station locations to
subtract out noise

STATUS:
• TSS-1 and TSS- 1R flights

DISCUSSION: When a current flows through the tether, electromagnetic waves are
emitted, whether the current is constant or time-modulated. The tether current can be that
induced by tether motion through the geomagnetic field, or one generated by an on-board
transmitter. Modulation of the induced current can be obtained by varying a series
79
impedance, or by turning an electron gun on the lower end on and off, at the desired
frequency. Waves are emitted by a loop antenna composed of the tether, magnetic field
lines, and the ionosphere.

ULF/ELF/VLF waves produced in the ionosphere will be injected into the

magnetosphere more efficiently than those from present ground-based man-made sources.
These waves may provide instant worldwide communications by spreading over most of the
Earth via the process of ducting. With a 20-100 km tether and a wire current of the order
of 10 A, it appears possible to inject into the Earth-ionosphere transmission line power
levels of the order of 1 W by night and 0.1 W by day.

CONTACTS:
• Robert Estes
• Mario Grossi
• Giorgio Tacconi

REFERENCES:

Grossi, M. D., "A ULF Dipole Antenna on a Spaceborne Platform of the PPEPL
Class," Report for NASA contract NAS8-28203, May, 1973.

P.R.Bannister et al. “Orbiting Transmitter and Antenna for Spaceborne

Communications at ELF/VLF to Submerged Submarines”, Agard Conference
Proceedings 529, May 1993, pp. 33-1-33-14

Proc. of Fourth International Conference on Tethers in Space, Washington DC,

10-14 April 1995

80
 -- PLANETARY --

Aerocapture with Tethers for Planetary Exploration

APPLICATION: May provide

significant mass savings when used in
the exploration of the atmosphere-
bearing planets and satellites in the
solar system.

DESCRIPTION: The basic concept

involves an orbiter and a probe
connected by a long, thin tether. The
probe is deployed into the atmosphere
of a planet where aerodynamic drag
decelerates it from hyperbolic
approach speed to capture speed. The
tension on the tether provides the
braking effect on the orbiter, thus eliminating the need for a retro-propulsion maneuver.
During the maneuver the orbiter travels outside the atmosphere and does not require heat
shielding.

CHARACTERISTICS:
l Tether Length: 10-100 km
l Tether Diameter: 0.5-1.5 mm
l Orbiter Mass: 1000 kg
l Probe Mass: 1000 kg
l Probe Area: 500-3000 m2
l Potential for Technology Demonstration: Mid-term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
l Reducing the probe area without causing significant bending in the tether.
l Assessing the effect of parameter uncertainties (such as atmospheric density,
target altitude, ballistic coefficient and spin rate) on tether and maneuver
design.
l Developing guidance and control laws and mechanisms to handle these
uncertainties.

STATUS:
l Preliminary analyses demonstrate the feasibility of the concept.
l Reentry of SEDS-1 provides insight into the dynamics of a tether in an
atmosphere.

81
DISCUSSION: Analytical and numerical studies have considered the possibility of
using the aerobraking tether for the exploration of Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus,
Neptune and Titan as well as for returning to Earth from Mars. One study compares the
propellant mass of a typical rocket propulsion system to the tether mass required for the
aerobraking system. In every instance in this study, the tether mass turns out to be less
than the propellant mass.
The feasibility of the design is supported by studies that include flexibility, out-of-plane
effects and parameter uncertainties. As a passive system, the aerobraking tether is less
sensitive to parameter uncertainties than the typical aerobraking configuration.
For precise guidance, the system seems well suited to feedback control by adjusting the
tether length.

CONTACTS:
l James M. Longuski
l Jordi Puig-Suari
l Steven G. Tragesser

REFERENCES:
Puig-Suari, J., "Aerobraking Tethers for the Exploration of the Solar System," Ph.D.
Thesis, School of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Purdue University, West Lafayette,
IN, August 1993.

Proc. of Fourth International Conference on Tethers in Space, Washington DC, 10-14

April 1995

82
 -- PLANETARY --

Comet/Asteroid Sample Return

APPLICATION: Collection and

return to Earth of comet or asteroid
samples.

DESCRIPTION: Tethered
penetrators are launched from a
spacecraft during its rendezvous with a
comet or asteroid. They penetrate the
body's surface, collecting samples of
surface material. They are then reeled
aboard the spacecraft for return to
Earth. Using several penetrators,
samples could be collected from
different spots on one body, or from
more than one body.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Tether Length: 50-100 m
• Tether System: Single Reel
• Penetrator System:
Multiple Chambered
Turret
• Penetrators:Core Drilling and
Surface
• Deployment: Spring and Solid Rocket • Potential for Technology
Demonstration: Far-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Long-range, remote-controlled maneuvering and rendezvous
• Design and development of the penetrators, tether-reel subsystem, and
penetrator turret subsystem

STATUS:
• Preliminary definition of the mission and hardware has been performedat
JPL
• Detailed Analysis and design performed by Alenia for ESA’s ROSETTA

DISCUSSION: The conventional approach to collecting samples from comets and

asteroids would be for a spacecraft to rendezvous with them and release a lander. The
lander would attach itself to the body in some way, drill for a core sample, and return to the
spacecraft. The sample would then be returned to Earth. A typical scenario would require
the following capabilities: (1) close range verification of a suitable landing and drilling site;
(2) automated and highly accurate soft landing; (3) lander attachment to the body (since
some would have very low gravity); (4) a drill unit with sufficient power to core a sample;

83
(5) lander separation from the body; (6) automated rendezvous with the orbiter; (7) sample
transfer; (8) launch stage ejection; and (9) Earth return.

A tether approach would consist of the following sequence of events: (1) the
spacecraft rendezvous with the comet or asteroid; (2) a tethered penetrator is shot at the
target from a 50-100 m altitude; (3) on impact, sample material enters holes in the
penetrator shell and fills the sample cup inside; (4) an explosive seals the cup and ejects it
from the penetrator shell; (5) the cup velocity creates a tension in the tether as it rotates
it; (6) spacecraft thrusters control the cup retrieval as it is reeled aboard; (7) other tethered
penetrators retrieve samples from other areas or bodies; and (8) the spacecraft returns the
samples to Earth.

In addition to the penetrator design described above, another type, in which the
penetrator contains a core drill, could also be used. For this version, flanges would be
extended upon impact, to secure the penetrator shell to the surface while the core sample is
being drilled. The surfaces hardness would determine which type to use. Both types could
be launched from the spacecraft by a spring and then propelled by attached solid rockets to
the impact point. (This should impart sufficient momentum to permit a good surface
penetration.) To allow a single tether reel subsystem to handle many penetrators, a
rotatable turret with multiple, chambered penetrators could be used.

This tether system has the advantage of being simpler than a lander system (not
requiring many of the capabilities listed for a lander system), and of allowing the collection
of samples from more than one spot or body. The cost of such a tether mission has been
estimated to be about $750 M, as opposed to about $1-2 B for a lander mission. However,
the two methods are complementary in that the lander provides a single very deep sample
and the penetrator provides smaller samples from different areas or bodies.

CONTACTS:
• Pietro Merlina
• Paul Penzo

REFERENCES:

"Tether Assisted Penetrators for Comet/Asteroid Sample Return," by Paul A.

Penzo (JPL); paper presented at 1986 AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Conference.

“Feasibility Assessment of a Tethered Harpoon for the ROSETTA backup

Sampling”, Alenia Spazio, SD-RP-AI-040, January 1990

“CSNR, Mission and System Definition Document”, ESA SP-1125, June 1991

84
 -- PLANETARY --

Jupiter Inner Magnetosphere Maneuvering Vehicle

APPLICATION: Generation of electro-

magnetic thrust or drag for maneuvering within
the inner Jovian magnetosphere.

DESCRIPTION: An insulated conducting

tether connected to a spacecraft and possibly
terminated with a subsatellite. Plasma contactors
are used at both tether ends. When used
selectively with an on-board power supply
(probably nuclear) or a load, it interacts with the
Jovian magnetic field to produce thrust, drag and
electrical power as required to change orbital
altitude or inclination.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Physical Characteristics: Undetermined
• Potential For Technology Demonstration: Far-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Successful operation of hollow cathodes or related active collectors
as plasma contactors
• Assurance of long-term insulator life
• Susceptibility to micrometeoroid/debris damage
• Successful operation of a power supply (probably nuclear) with
sufficient output power density
• Characterization of the performance of an electromagnetic tether
in the Jovian Magnetosphere

STATUS:
• TSS-1, demonstrating electrodynamic applications, is scheduled for
a 1991 launch
• No detailed system design study for this application has been
performed

DISCUSSION: Since Jupiter's magnetic field is about twenty times that of Earth, an
electromagnetic tether should work well there. Because of Jupiter's rapid rotation
(period = 10 hrs), at distances greater than 2.2 Jovian radii from its center, the
Jovian magnetic field rotates faster than would a satellite in a circular Jovian orbit.
At these distances, the magnetic field would induce an emf across a conducting
tether, and the dissipation of power from the tether would produce a thrust (not
drag) on the spacecraft/tether system. At lesser distances, the satellite would rotate
faster than the magnetic field, and dissipation of tether power would produce drag
(not thrust). Examples of induced tether voltages are:
-10 kV/km (for drag) in LJO; and +108, 50, 21, and 7 v/km (for thrust) at Io,
Europa, Ganymede, and Callisto, respectively.

85
 Inside the Jovian magnetosphere, at distance > 2.2 Jovian radii, the
spacecraft could decrease altitude (decelerate) by feeding power from an on-board
power supply into the tether against the induced emf. Below 2.2 radii, power from
the tether could be dissipated. To return to higher altitudes, the process could be
reversed.

Since the gravitational attraction of Jupiter is so strong, the energy required

to descend to (or climb from) a very low Jupiter orbit is prohibitive for any
conventional propulsion system. To descend to the surface of Jupiter from a
distance of, say, 100 Jovian radii, an energy density of a little over 200 kW-hr/kg
would be required for propulsion. Using this as a conservative estimate of the
required performance of a tether system, it should be well within the capability of a
nuclear power supply.

Recommendations were made at the Tether Workshop in Venice (October

1985) for a Jupiter inner magnetosphere survey platform to operate in the range
from one to six Jovian radii. The electromagnetic tether in this application would
be used primarily for orbital maneuvering. It could also assist a Galileo-type
satellite tour (all equatorial), sampling of the Jovian atmosphere, and rendezvous
with a Galilean satellite.

CONTACTS:
• Paul Penzo
• James McCoy

REFERENCES:
Applications of Tethers in Space, NASA CP-2422, March 1986.

Gabriel, S. B., Jones, R. M., and Garrett, H. B., "Alfven Propulsion at

Jupiter," Tether Int. Conf. 1987.

Penzo, P. A., "A Survey of Tether Applications to Planetary Exploration,"

AAS 86-206, AAS Int. Conf. 1986.

86
 -- PLANETARY --

Mars Tethered Observer

APPLICATION: Provide instrument access to low

orbital altitudes for periodic in-situ analysis of the upper
Martian atmosphere.

DESCRIPTION: An instrument package attached

by a deployable tether (up to 300 km in length) to an
orbiting Mars Observer spacecraft.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Length: Up to 300 km
(Tether is
not vertical)
• Satellite Altitude: 350 km • Potential For
• Instrument Technology
Altitude: Down to 90 km Demonstration: Mid-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Tether material (graphite is a potential candidate) and Orbiter fuel
consumption

STATUS:
• System performance analysis for various altitudes and different mission
scenarios of the probe performed by the Smithsonian Astrophysical
Observatory

DISCUSSION: The purpose of the mission itself is to analyze the composition and
chemistry of the Martian atmosphere for one Martian year. The tether would allow
instruments to be lowered periodically for in-situ measurements at lower altitudes and
collection martian dust during storms thus saving on landers’s costs. A tether ( Up to 300
km long) could be used with the observer as it orbits Mars at an altitude of 350 km. The
instrument package would be deployed for a few hours at a time, perhaps every two
months, or so. Additional propulsion capability would be required for the observer for
altitude maintenance. Although addition of the tether system would increase the mission
cost, it should greatly enhance its scientific value.

CONTACTS:
• Enrico Lorenzini
• Paul Penzo
• Monica Pasca

87
REFERENCES:
Proc. of Fourth International Conference on Tethers in Space, Washington DC,
10-14 April 1995

Lorenzini, E.C., MD, Grossi, and M. Cosmo, " Low Altitude Tethered Mars Probe,"
Acta Astronautica, Vol 21, No.1, 1990, pp. 1-12.

Pasca M. and E. C. Lorenzini, “Optimization of a Low Alitude Tethered Probe for

Martian Atmospheric Collection”, The Journal of the Astronautical Sciences, Vol.
44, No.2, 1996, pp.191-205

88
 -- PLANETARY --

Tethered Lunar Satellite for Remote Sensing

APPLICATION: Provide instrument access to low,

unstable, lunar orbital altitudes.

DESCRIPTION: An instrument package at low

altitude, suspended by a tether from a satellite in a
higher, stable, polar orbit around the moon.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Tether Length: 90 -250km

• Instrument Altitude: up to 50 km

• Potential For Technology Demonstration: Far-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Assurance of acceptable strength and flexibility for the tether material
• Susceptibility to micrometeoroid/debris damage

STATUS:
• PROTEUS (PRObe Tethered for Exploration of Uncovered Satellites) study
performed by ALENIA Spazio. Analysis of mission scenarios and scientific
objectives

DISCUSSION: Due to Sun and Earth perturbations, close lunar satellites would be unstable
and short lived (perhaps a few months). However, as proposed by Giuseppe Colombo,
access to low lunar orbits could be achieved by tethering an instrument package to a
satellite in a stable lunar orbit. The package could be lowered as close to the Moon as
desired. One proposed configuration would tether an instrument package 50 km above the
lunar surface from a satellite in a stable 300 km orbit. By using a polar orbit, complete
coverage of the lunar surface could be obtained. Occasional adjustments to the tether
length may be required to keep the package at a safe altitude. Sensitive measurements of
lunar magnetic field and gravitational anomalies could be performed.

CONTACTS:
• Pietro Merlina
• Paul Penzo

REFERENCES:
Colombo G., et al., “Dumbbell Gravity Gradient Sensor: A New Application of
Orbiting Long Tethers, SAO Report in Geoastronomy No. 2, June 1976

Merlina P, “PROTEUS-PRObe Tethered for Exploration of Uncovered Satellites:

The Proteus Lunar Mission, ESA WPP-081, 1994, pp.512-527

89
 -- SCIENCE --

Science Applications Tethered Platform

APPLICATION: Provides a remote platform to

the Space Station for space and Earth observation
purposes.

DESCRIPTION: A platform, attached to the

Space Station by a multifunction tether (power link,
data link), provides a new means to allow high
precision pointing performance by the combination
of disturbance attenuation via tether and active
control of a movable attachment point.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Length: 10 km
• Mass: 10,000 kg
• Power required: Up to
15 kW by Tether
Power Line Link
• Link Data Rate: Up to 20 Mb/s by Tether • Potential For
Optical Fibers Link Technology
• Pointing Accuracy: Up to 10 Arcseconds Demonstration:
Mid-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Space Station impacts
• Dynamic noise induced on tether
• Movable attachment point control
• Power link technology
• Optical fibers link technology
• Tether impact protection technology

STATUS:
• ASI/Aeritalia SATP Definition Study in initial design assessment phase,
mid-term report issued in March 1986. Final report for the current study
phase issued in May 1987
• Ball Aerospace, Selected Tether Applications Study Phase III

DISCUSSION: A tethered pointing platform would take advantage of the facilities of the
station for maintenance and repair while being isolated from contamination and mechanical
disturbances. As an initial step, a medium size pointing platform seems the most suitable
facility for a class of observational applications. In fact, if ambitious astrophysical projects
justify the design of a dedicated complex free-flyer, medium observational applications of
relatively short duration could take advantage of a standard pointing facility able to arrange
at different times several observational instruments. This pointing facility could allow
reduction of costs, avoiding the cost of separate service functions for each application.

90
CONTACTS:
• Franco Bevilacqua
• Pietro Merlina
• James K. Harrison

REFERENCES:
Applications of Tethers in Space, NASA CP-2422, March 1986.

SATP Definition Study, Mid-Term Report, Aeritalia, TA-RP-AI-002, March 21,

1986.

SATP Definition and Preliminary Design, Final Report, Aeritalia, TA-RP-AI-006,

1987.

Proc. of Fourth International Conference on Tethers in Space, Washington DC,

10-14 April 1995

91
 -- SCIENCE --

Shuttle Science Applications Platform

APPLICATION: Provides a remote

platform to the Space Shuttle for various science
and applications purposes.

DESCRIPTION: A platform, attached to

the Space Shuttle by a tether, provides a unique
means by which remote applications may be
performed.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Physical Characteristics: TBD
• Potential For
Technology
Demonstration: Near-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Dynamic noise induced on tether
• Micrometeoroid damage

STATUS:
• Various investigators (listed below) have examined preliminary concepts

DISCUSSION: Possible uses for a remote platform include stereoscopic sensing,

magnetometry, atmosphere science experiments, and chemical release experiments.

CONTACTS:
• Franco Angrilli
• Franco Bevilacqua
• Franco Mariani
• Antonio Moccia
• Sergio Vetrella

REFERENCES:
Applications of Tethers in Space, NASA CP-2422, March 1986.

Proc. of Fourth International Conference on Tethers in Space, Washington DC,

10-14 April 1995

92
 -- SCIENCE --

Tethered Satellite for Cosmic Dust Collection

APPLICATION: To collect
micrometeoric material from the upper
atmosphere.

DESCRIPTION: A satellite
tethered to the Space Shuttle is lowered
into the upper atmosphere. The surface
of the satellite contains numerous small
collecting elements which would
document the impact of cosmic dust or
actually retain the particles for analysis
back on Earth.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Tether Length: 100 km
• Operating Altitude: 120 km
• Tether Diameter: 1 meter
• Power Requirements: Minimal, enough to operate • Potential For
solenoid activated irises Technology
Demonstration: Near-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Efficient analysis of large collector surface areas to detect micron-sized
particles and impact craters

STATUS:
• Preliminary concept design investigated at Indiana University Northwest

DISCUSSION: This concept proposes to collect intact cosmic dust particles smaller than 2
microns which impact the collector surface at velocities less than 3 km/sec, and the study
of impact craters and impact debris which result from impacts of all sized particles at
velocities greater than 3 km/sec. It is estimated that at a 120 km altitude, between 1 x 103
and 1 x 104 particles will survice collection intact per square meter per day, and between 2
x 10 4 and 2 x 105 impact craters will be recorded per square meter per day. The figure in
the illustration above represents the "survivable" impact cones for particles striking a
tethered satellite. For a maximum impact velocity of 3 km/sec, a is approximately 22
degrees.

CONTACTS:
• George J. Corso

REFERENCES:
G.J. Corso, "A Proposal to Use an Upper Atmosphere Satellite Tethered to the
Space Shuttle for the Collection of Micro-meteoric Material," Journal of the British
Interplanetary Society, Vol. 36, pp. 403-408, 1983.

93
 -- SPACE STATION --

Microgravity Laboratory

APPLICATION: Provide a readily accessible

laboratory in Earth orbit with the minimum gravity
level possible.

DESCRIPTION: A laboratory
facility on board the Space Station at its
vertical center of gravity. Two opposing
tethers with end masses are deployed
vertically from the Space Station (one
above and one below). Their lengths are
varied to control the Space Station center
of gravity, placing it on the microgravity
modules to minimize their gravity
gradient acceleration (artificial gravity
level).

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Physical Characteristics: TBD

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Evaluation of the overall impacts to the Space Station
• Determination of just how good the lab's microgravity would be
• Identification of the process and technologies to be studied in microgravity,
and the laboratory facilities and capabilities they will require
• Development of the necessary gravity-measuring instrumentation
• Evaluation of the tether system's cost effectiveness

STATUS:
• A JSC tethered gravity laboratory study (addressing the issues of active
center-of-gravity control, identification of low-gravity processes to be
studied, and evaluation of the laboratory g-level quality)
• SEDS-1 and -2 missions abd TSS-1 and TSS-1R have provided
measurements of the acceleration fields and associated noise
during tether and payload deployment

DISCUSSION: To allow the performance of experiments under microgravity conditions

(10 -4 g and less) for extended periods of time, a microgravity laboratory facility could be
incorporated into the Space Station. The laboratory modules would be located on the Space
Station proper, at its center of gravity. Two opposing TSS-type tethers with end masses
would be deployed vertically from the Space Station (one above and one below), to assure
that the station center of gravity is maintained within the lab modules. Its exact location
would be controlled by varying the upper and lower tether lengths, allowing prolonged and
careful control of the residual microgravity magnitude and direction inside the lab. A
nearly constant microgravity could be maintained. These tethers would lower the gravity-
gradient disturbances transmitted to the experiments being performed while enhancing
94
station attitude control. Although people would be a major source of disturbances, human
access to microgravity experiments is preferred (at least initially) over remote access. This
configuration would easily accommodate this preference.

One candidate microgravity lab currently under study for the Space Station, is the
Materials Technology Lab (MTL). It is projected to be a common module, equipped as a
lab, to perform a variety of experiments related to materials technology. Biological
experiments may also be performed in microgravity in another module.

Although this is the preferred microgravity lab configuration, two alternatives are
also possible. One would be to have the lab connected by a crawler to a single tether from
the Space Station. The crawler would position the lab on the station-tether system center
of gravity. The other configuration would be to fix the lab to a single tether from the
station. The lab would be positioned at the system center of gravity by varying the tether
length. Both alternatives have the advantage of isolating the lab from disturbances, but
they have the disadvantages of reducing human access and probably precluding the use of
the microgravity modules planned for the initial Space Station.

CONTACTS:
• Franco Bevilacqua
• Mario Cosmo
• Pietro Merlina
• Enrico Lorenzini

REFERENCES:
Applications of Tethers in Space, NASA CP-2422, March 1986. (pp. 223-238)

G. Von Tiesenhausen, ed., "The Roles of Tethers on Space Station," NASA TM-
86519, Marshall Space Flight Center, October 1985.

Lorenzini, E.C., "A Three-Mass Tethered System for Micro-g/Variable-g

Applications," Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 10, No.3, May-
June 1987, pp. 242-249

95
 -- SPACE STATION --

Shuttle Deorbit from Space Station

APPLICATION: Allows the Shuttle

Orbiter to be deboosted to Earth while the
Space Station is boosted to a higher orbit.

DESCRIPTION: Upon completion of a

Shuttle re-supply operation to the Space
Station, the Shuttle is deployed on a tether
toward the Earth. The Space Station,
accordingly, is raised into a higher orbit,
causing excess momentum to be transferred
from the Shuttle orbit to the Space Station
orbit. After deployment, the Shuttle is
released causing the Shuttle to deorbit.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Initial Space Station/Shuttle Orbit: 500 km • Potential For
• Tether Length: 65 km Technology
• Final Space Station Orbit: 518 x 629 km Demonstration: Mid-Term
• Final Shuttle Orbit: 185 x 453 km
• Estimated Mass: 250,000 kg
(Space Station)
100,000 kg (Shuttle)

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Excess angular momentum scavenged by Space Station must be used in order
to beneficially use this application
• Dynamic noise induced by tether deployment and separation
• Alignment of tether to Space Station to eliminate torques

STATUS:
• Martin Marietta, Selected Tether Applications Study, Phase III
• NASA-MSFC System study

DISCUSSION: This application potentially could be one of the most cost effective uses of
a tether. The main disadvantage is that the excess momentum transferred to the Space
Station must be efficiently used, otherwise the station will be in an orbit too high for
subsequent Shuttle re-supply missions. Several ideas on use of this excess momentum have
been studied, such as altering STV boosts by the Space Station with Shuttle re-supply
missions (see Application "Tethered STV Launch"). Another method is using an
electrodynamic tether (see Application "Electrodynamic Power Generator") to generate
power at the expense of orbital energy to deboost the Space Station.

CONTACTS:
• James K. Harrison
• Les Johnson
96
REFERENCES:

G. Von Tiesenhausen, ed., "The Roles of Tethers on Space Station," NASA TM-
86519, Marshall Space Flight Center, October 1985.

97
 -- SPACE STATION --

Tethered STV Launch

APPLICATION: Allows an STV to be

boosted to a higher orbit at the expense of Space
Station angular momentum.

DESCRIPTION: An STV would be deployed

from the Space Station on a tether away from
Earth, in preparation for launch. Upon separation
from the tether, orbital angular momentum is
transferred from the Space Station to the STV,
causing the Space Station Altitude to be lowered
while that of the STV is raised.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Initial Space Station/
STV Orbit: 500 km
• Tether Length: 150 km
• Final Space Station
Orbit: 377 x 483 km
• Final STV Orbit: 633 x 1482 km • Potential For
• Estimated Masses: 250,000 kg Technology
(Space Station) Demonstration: Far-Term
35,000 kg (STV)

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Angular momentum taken away from the Space Station must be resupplied
in order to beneficially use this application
• Dynamic noise induced by tether deployment and separation
• Alignment of tether to Space Station to eliminate torques

STATUS:
• Martin Marietta, Selected Tether Applications Study Phase III

DISCUSSION: Martin Marietta has studied the application of tethered deployment of the
STV as well as Shuttle from the Space Station. Either of these applications alone would
cause an unacceptable change in altitude of the Space Station. When combined, properly
sequencing STV launches and Shuttle deorbits, the orbital angular momentum of the Space
Station may be preserved while providing a large net propellant savings for the Shuttle,
STV and Space Station.

98
CONTACTS:
• James K. Harrison
• Les Johnson

REFERENCES:
Applications of Tethers in Space, NASA CP-2422, March 1986.

G. Von Tiesenhausen, ed., "The Roles of Tethers on Space Station," NASA TM-
86519, Marshall Space Flight Center, October 1985.

Application "Shuttle Deorbit From Space Station"

Proc. of Fourth International Conference on Tethers in Space, Washington DC,

10-14 April 1995

99
 -- SPACE STATION --

Variable/Low Gravity Laboratory

APPLICATION: Provide a readily

accessible laboratory in Earth orbit with a
variable, low-gravity level.

DESCRIPTION: A laboratory facility,

attached by a crawler to a tether deployed
vertically from the Space Station. The gravity
gradient between the station-tether system
center of gravity and the laboratory produces an
artificial-gravity force throughout the lab. The
lab gravity level, with a constant vertical
direction, is varied by changing the lab and
crawler distance from the system's center of
gravity. The lab can attain microgravity levels
if it can move to the center of gravity.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Physical Characteristics: TBD • Potential For
• g-Level: Up to 10 -1 Technology
Demonstration: Far-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Evaluation of the overall impacts to the Space Station
• Determination of just how good the lab's low gravity would be
• Identification of the processes and technologies to be studied in low gravity,
and the laboratory facilities and capabilities they will require
• Development of the necessary gravity-measuring instrumentation
• Evaluation of the tether system's cost effectiveness
• Determination of how gravity-level medical experiments should be
performed in a Space Station system
• Design of a tether crawler and lab module
• Development of systems for the remote control of the lab experiments

STATUS:
• A study by Alenia-SAO-Padua U. for NASA-JSC on tethered gravity
laboratory study (addressing the issues of active center-of-gravity control,
identification of low-gravity processes to be studied, and evaluation of the
laboratory g-level quality)
• A study by SAO for NASA-MSFC on tethered variable gravity elevators.
• TSS-1 and -1R, SEDS-1 and -2 have provided measurements of the
acceleration field change and associated noise during tether and payload
deployment

100
DISCUSSION: To allow the performance of experiments under conditions of constant or
variable low gravity (up to 10-1 g) for extended periods of time, a variable/low gravity lab
could be attached to a crawler on a tether deployed vertically from the Space Station. The
artificial gravity at any point along the tether is produced by the gravity gradient between
that point and the station/tether system center of gravity, and is proportional to the
distance between them. The lab could vary its gravity level, with a constant direction, by
varying its distance from the system center of gravity. A constant gravity level could be
maintained by adjusting the lab position to compensate for orbital variations in the system
gravity level. The lab could also attain microgravity levels if it could move to the center
of gravity. This lab could study processes with both gravity and time as variables. It has
been calculated the the lab could attain g-levels of 10-6 , 10 -4 , 10 -2 , and 10-1 at distances
above the center of gravity of about 2 m, 200 m, 20 km, and 200 km, respectively.

In addition to easy gravity control, the use of a tether system for a low gravity lab
would have other advantages. It would reduce disturbances transmitted to the lab (to about
10 -8 g), minimize the gravity gradient acceleration inside the lab, and enhance overall
system attitude control. It would have the disadvantage of reducing human access to lab
experiments, requiring the increased use of remote controls. Also, it could only provide a
gravity level of up to 10-1 g.

This lab could be used to examine the effects of low gravity on both physical and
biological processes. Some biological processes of interest would be plant and animal
growth, and human performance and medical processes (such as those related to the
cardiovascular, skeletal, and vestibular systems). Such physical processes as crystal growth,
fluid science, and chemical reactions could be studied. Conditions on low gravity bodies
(such as asteroids) could be simulated to examine natural processes (such as meteor
impacts). Of particular interest would be the determination of the gravity threshold for
various processes.

CONTACTS:
• Chris Rupp
• Silvio Bergamaschi
• Franco Bevilacqua
• Mario Cosmo
• Enrico Lorenzini
• Pietro Merlina

REFERENCES:
Applications of Tethers in Space, NASA CP-2422, March 1986.

G. Von Tiesenhausen, ed., "The Roles of Tethers on Space Station," NASA TM-
86519, Marshall Space Flight Center, October 1985.

F. Bevilacqua and P. Merlina, "The Tethered Space Elevator System," Second

International Conference on Tethers In Space, Venice, Italy, 1987.

E.C. Lorenzini et al., “Dynamics and Control of the Tether Elevator Crawler
System”, Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 12, No.3, pp. 404-411
1989

101
 -- SPACE STATION --

Attitude Stabilization and Control

APPLICATION: Provides the Space Station with

restoring torques around pitch and roll axes

DESCRIPTION: A tethered ballast could be

deployed to serve as an attitude stabilizer. This
feature could be used on a temporary basis during
STABILIZER
the construction of the Space Station or on a EXTENDED
ACS EMERGENCY
permanent basis to alleviate the CMG’s
requirements as well as function as a backup
facility in case of ACS failure.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Mission Duration: up to some
days
• Masses: Deployer ~ 650 Kg;
Y
Tether ~ 400 Kg;
Ballast ~ 1400 Kg
Z
• Tether Length: 6000 m
• Potential For
Technology
Demonstration: Mid-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Attitude dynamics of the tether-stabilized Station during -deployment of ballast.
• Assessment of mass, propellant, CMG's sizing, redundancy philosophy and contingencyreboost
scenario.

STATUS:
• Feasibility analysis performed by Alenia and SAO for NASA/JSC

DISCUSSION: The typical configuration of the Space Station results in a spacecraft that requires a complex
and careful design of the Attitude Control System. CMG's sizing and RCS propellant allocated depend on
several nominal and emergency operations that need to be managed. The attitude tether stabilizer concept
seems to have the potential for being an effective way of overcoming some of the above difficulties The
advantages include: system simplicity, relatively low costs and reusability.

CONTACTS:
• Pietro Merlina
• Enrico Lorenzini
REFERENCES:
"Tethered Gravity Laboratories Study". Performed by ALENIA Spazio and SAO under NASA-JSC
Contract NAS9-17877.

102
 -- TRANSPORTATION --

Generalized Momentum Scavenging from Spent Stages

APPLICATION: Scavenge angular

momentum from a spent stage for the
benefit of the payload.

DESCRIPTION: After the

injection of an upper stage and its
payload into an elliptical park orbit, the
payload is tethered above the spent stage.
At the proper time, the payload is
released which causes a payload boost and
spent stage deboost.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Physical Characteristics : TBD
• Potential For
Technology
Demonstration: Mid-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Mass of tether and reel equipment versus payload performance gain
• Integration impact on systems

STATUS:
• Preliminary evaluation completed by MIT , Michoud and Tether
Applications
• Detailed analysis in progress at SAO in collaboration with Tether
Unlimited

DISCUSSION: This concept appears to be impractical due to mass relationships and

integration costs. The most immediate application is for newly developed upper
stage/payload combinations and those having a high ratio of spent upper stage to payload
mass.

CONTACTS:
• Manual Martinez-Sanchez
• Joe Carroll
• Les Johnson
• Enrico Lorenzini

103
REFERENCES:
J.A. Carroll "Guidebook for Analysis of Tether Applications," Contract RH4-
394049, Martin Marietta Corporation, March 1985. Available from the author

M. Martinez-Sanchez, "The Use of Large Tethers for Payload Orbital Transfer,"

Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1983.

G. Colombo, "The Use of Tethers for Payload Orbital Transfer," NASA Contract
NAS8-33691, SAO, Vol. II, March 1982.

104
 -- TRANSPORTATION --

Internal Forces for Orbital Modification (Orbital Pumping)

APPLICATION: To change the

orbital eccentricity of a Space Station
or platform without the use of
propulsion systems.

DESCRIPTION: The internal

mechanical energy of a Space Station
(in the form of excess electrical
energy transferred to a motor) is used
to vary the length of a tether
attached to an end mass. The length
is changed in phase with the natural
libration of the tether, which is
known as libration pumping. Proper
timing of tether deployment and
retrieval done in this fashion can be
used to change the orbital
eccentricity.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Physical Characteristics: Undetermined
• Potential For
Technology
Demonstration: Mid-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Internal vs. external energy trade-off
• Power required and heat generated by the operation
• Change in orbits is relatively slow

STATUS:
• Preliminary feasibility shown by Martin Marietta Denver

DISCUSSION: Orbit eccentricity can be increased by libration pumping as is shown in the

illustration. At (1) the mass is fully extended, and libration starts. At (2), with the mass in
a prograde swing, the retrieval motor pulls the spacecraft toward the mass, adding energy to
the orbit. At (3), which is the new apogee of the orbit, the tether length is at a minimum.
At (4), with the mass in a retrograde swing, the tether is re-deployed and the retrieval
brakes are used to dissipate orbital energy in the form of excess heat. At (5), the new
perigee, the mass is again fully deployed. This procedure is repeated until the desired
eccentricity is reached.

CONTACTS:
• Manual Martinez-Sanchez
• Joe Carroll
105
REFERENCES:
G. Von Tiesenhausen, ed., "The Roles of Tethers on Space Station," NASA TM-
86519, Marshall Space Flight Center, October 1985.

Breakwell, J. V., Gearhart, J. W., "Pumping a Tethered Configuration to Boost its

Orbit Around an Oblate Planet," AAS 86-217, Int. Conf. 1986.

106
 -- TRANSPORTATION --

Satellite Boost from Orbiter

APPLICATION: Boost a satellite

payload into a circular or elliptical orbit
higher than the Orbiter orbit.

DESCRIPTION: A satellite is deployed

along a tether "upward" (away from the
Earth) from the Shuttle Orbiter. Libration
begins and momentum is transferred from the
Shuttle orbit to the satellite. The satellite is
released and placed into a higher orbit while at
the same time giving the Shuttle a deboost to
return to Earth. Less fuel is required for both
the satellite and the Orbiter. A TSS-derived
deployer could be used.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Length: Dependent on desired orbit (see "Discussion" below)
• Tether System: Either permanent or removable from Orbiter
• Potential For
Technology
Demonstration: Near-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Release mechanism for payload
• Airborne support equipment for Orbiter
• Micrometeorite damage

STATUS:
• Energy Science Lab development contract completed March 1987
• MIT, Martin Marietta-Denver have completed preliminary assessment
• Ball Aerospace, Selected Tether Applications Study, Phase III
• SAO analysis for “SEDSAT” mission

DISCUSSION: This application has been studied in various forms by several contractors as
noted above. One example studied is the tethered deployment of the AXAF (Advanced X-
Ray Astrophysics Facility) into its operational orbit. For this example, the AXAF is
assumed to have a mass of 9,070 kg and the Shuttle (after deployment) a mass of 93,000
kg. With the Shuttle and AXAF at an initial elliptical orbit of 537 x 219 km, the AXAF is
deployed along a 61 km tether. As momentum is transferred from Shuttle to AXAF, the
Shuttle orbit descends to a new 531 x 213 km and the AXAF orbit ascends to a new 593 x
274 km orbit. After tether separation, the AXAF is directly inserted into a 593 km
circular orbit. Simultaneously, the Shuttle takes on an elliptical 531 x 185 km orbit, from
which it will make a final OMS burn before its reentry.

107
CONTACTS:
• James K. Harrison
• Joe Carroll
• Les Johnson
• Enrico Lorenzini
• Manual Martinez-Sanchez

REFERENCES:
Applications "Upper Stage Boost from Orbiter" and "Small Expendable Deployer
System"

Carroll, J. A., "Guidebook for Analysis of Tether Applications," Contract RH4-

394049, Martin Marietta Corporation, Feb. 1985.

Proc. of Fourth International Conference on Tethers in Space, Washington DC,

10-14 April 1995

108
 -- TRANSPORTATION --

Shuttle Docking by Tether

APPLICATION: Enables Shuttle Orbiter to

dock to other structures such as the Space Station.

DESCRIPTION: A tether deployed by the

Space Station is attached to a docking module.
This module would capture and retrieve the Shuttle,
allowing a remote rendezvous.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Tether Length: 40-100 Km
• Potential For
Technology
Demonstration: Mid-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Accurate guidance system, such as
GPS needed
• Rendezvous and capture technique
definition required
• Post-rendezvous tether dynamics
• Alignment of tethertension with
Station center of mass

STATUS:
• Martin Marietta, Selected Tether Applications Study, Phase III

DISCUSSION: A tether, attached to a docking module, would be deployed toward the Earth
from the Space Station. The length of deployment is adjusted so that the velocity of the
docking module matches the velocity at apogee of an elliptical orbit of the Shuttle. This
would cause increased OMS propellant available to the Shuttle. This application would
probably be combined with Application "Shuttle Deorbit from Space Station".

CONTACTS:
• James K. Harrison
• Chris Rupp

REFERENCES:
Applications of Tethers in Space, NASA CP-2422, March 1986.

109
 -- TRANSPORTATION --

Tether Reboosting of Decaying Satellites

APPLICATION: To retrieve, repair, and reboost a

defective or decaying satellite.

DESCRIPTION: A permanent tether attached to

the Space Shuttle is used to rendezvous with a decaying
satellite. It can then either be repaired by Shuttle
crewmen and/or reboosted into a higher orbit. This would
eliminate the need to launch a replacement for the
defective or decaying satellite.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Physical Characteristics: Undetermined
• Potential For
Technology
Demonstration: Near-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Mechanisms and rendezvous techniques to capture satellite
• Compatibility with existing satellite systems
• Trade-off of the mission and reboost requirements

STATUS:
• Preliminary analysis indicates feasible concept
• No defined mission requirement

DISCUSSION: Integration of this system may be costly. The concept appears to be

feasible, but the practicality has not been established. No mission drivers have yet been
determined.

CONTACTS:
• Joe Carroll

REFERENCES:
G. Von Tiesenhausen, ed., Tether Applications Concept Sheets, June 28, 1984.

110
 -- TRANSPORTATION --

Tether Rendezvous System

APPLICATION: Used to supplement the operations of

the Space Station and OMV.

DESCRIPTION: The Tether Rendezvous System would be

used to capture and retrieve payloads, OTVs or the Space Shuttle
to the Space Station. The system would consist of a "smart"
hook which would be able to rendezvous and attach to a payload
with or without human intervention.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Physical Characteristics: Undetermined
• Potential For
Technology
Demonstration: Mid-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Extent of system capabilities needs to be determined
• Dynamics in the tether and on the Space Station after rendezvous
• System design
• Rendezvous and capture techniques
• Hardware required

STATUS:
• Concept under study by Aeritalia
• Preliminary evaluations have been positive

DISCUSSION: The Tether Rendezvous System can supplement the operations of the
Space Station or any space platform by accomplishing remote rendezvous, increasing
flexibility, decreasing risk and saving a great amount of propellant for incoming vehicles
(STV, OMV, or the Shuttle Orbiter).

CONTACTS:
• Chris Rupp
• Joe Carroll
• Franco Bevilacqua

REFERENCES:
G. Von Tiesenhausen, ed., Tether Applications Concept Sheets, June 28, 1984.

Stuart, D. G., "Guidance and Control for Cooperative Tether-Mediated Orbital

Rendezvous," Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, 1988.

111
 -- TRANSPORTATION --

Upper Stage Boost from Orbiter

APPLICATION: Boost an upper stage

payload into a higher orbit.

DESCRIPTION: An upper stage is

deployed along a tether "upward" (away from
the Earth) from the Shuttle Orbiter. Libration
begins and momentum is transferred from the
Shuttle to the upper stage, enhancing the
performance envelope of the upper stage
motor. A SEDS-derived (e.g. no retrieval
capability) deployer system could be used.
The Orbiter could be deboosted along with the
upper stage boost. Spinup capability for some
upper stages may be required.

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Length: Dependent on desired final orbit
• Tether Deployment
System: Permanent or removable from Orbiter, TSS-derived
• Potential For
Technology
Demonstration: Near-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• Requirement for spinup capability may be difficult

STATUS:
• Ball Brothers, Selected Tether Applications Study, Phase III
• SEDSAT project at University of Alabama in Huntsville
• SEDSAT deployment study at SAO

DISCUSSION: This application could be tailored to the Space Transfer Vehicle (STV). An
expendable tether system or TSS-derived system could eliminate a major portion of the
STV propellant required and increase payload capability for a specific mission with a fixed
STV. The SEDSAT project (currently cancelled) was supposed to be the first space mission
to boost a satellite into higher orbit with a tether . The boosting effect was observed at
TSS-1R tether breakup

112
CONTACTS:
• James K. Harrison
• Les Johnson
• Enrico Lorenzini
• Mauro Pecchioli

REFERENCES:
"Study of Orbiting Constellations in Space," Contract RH4-394019, Martin
Marietta, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, December 1984.

Pecchioli, M., and Graziani, F., "A Thrusted Sling in Space: A Tether-assist
Maneuver for Orbit Transfer," Second International Conference on Tethers In
Space, Venice, Italy, 1987.

Proc. of Fourth International Conference on Tethers in Space, Washington DC,

10-14 April 1995

Applications "Satellite Boost from Orbiter" and "Small Expendable Deployer

System"

113
 -- TRANSPORTATION --

Tether Assisted Transportation System (TATS)

APPLICATION: TATS is a tether-based

system that provides the Space Station
Alpha with transport capability not TATS Module
A A-A
view looking outside
dependant on conventional propulsion 2

DESCRIPTION: The need and the

feasibility of the additional Tether 8

Assisted Transportation System have been 9

8 8
evaluated in the context of the 7 6

International Space Station Alpha. A 5 10

3
10

preliminary cargo's traffic analysis 1

indicated that large benefits in terms of A
mass and cost saving are expected by
tether deorbit of disposable cargoes. The
tether use was discovered to present also
additional benefits increasing the safety of
the Station and simplifying the execution 1 Structure of the TATS-module
of some operations. 2 Storage system for the re-entry
capsules
CHARACTERISTICS: 3 Manipulator on rails
4 Air lock to the space
• Mission Duration : up to some 5 Docking mechanism and air lock to
hours station
• Altitude : 400-450 Km 6 Tether system in operating position
7 Tether system in position during
• Active phase : < 1 day preparation
• Return to ground : Re-entry 8 Storage system for replaceable tether
Capsules units
• Accommodation : Space Station 9 Re-entry capsule in start position
• Mass Deployer : 300 Kg (typical) 10 Path tracking system
• Tether Mass : 40 Kg (typical))
• Capsule Mass: 150 Kg (typical)
• Tether length : about 37 Km

• Potential For Technology

Demonstration: Near-Term

CRITICAL ISSUES:
• System configuration analysis,trade-off and design
• Re-entry capsule architecture definition
• Space Station-based Operations definition
• Station storage system for capsules and waste containers design
• Station robotic for TATS elements handling definition
• Tether system deployment timing for proper prograde swing
• Dynamics of tether after payload release

114
DISCUSSION: A potential utilization scenario of an additional Tether Assisted Transportation System has
been devised to show the extent of its capabilities. As an example, the following evolution could be
considered:
Initial Capability
• Frequent Sample Return
• Raduga-type Capsule Deorbit
Waste Disposal
Small Payloads Disposal
Full Capability
• Frequent Sample Return
• Raduga-type Capsule Deorbit
• Waste Disposal
• Cargoes Deorbit (PROGRESS, ATV)
• Large Modules and Payloads Disposal

TATS consists of a set of re-entry capsules in a storage compartment, tools to allow the loading of the
processed samples, a separation system (springs), and a tether deployer to perform properly capsule
deployment and release. The analysis of possible ways to accommodate the TATS system on the Station has
been focused on the two main options for accommodation: External and Internal Accommodation. Several
possible options have been envisaged for possible accommodation of the system both at the ISSA US section
and at the ISSA RS section.

CONTACTS:
• Pietro Merlina

REFERENCES:
"Tether Assisted Transportation System (TATS)", ESA/ESTEC contract No. 11439/95/NL/VK, Alenia
Spazio/RSC Energia/DASA, 1995.

115
 -TRANSPORTATION --

Failsafe Multiline Tethers for Long Tether Lifetimes (Hoytether)

APPLICATION: Long-life, damage resistant tether system for

extended-duration, high-value, and crew-rated missions. Applications
include low-drag, long life tethers for atmospheric and ionospheric
science, electrodynamic tethers for in-orbit power and propulsion, and
high-strength tethers for LEO-GEO-Lunar transport systems.

DESCRIPTION: The lifetimes of conventional single-line tethers are

limited by damage due to meteorite and orbital debris impactors to
periods on the order of weeks. Although single-line tether lifetimes
can be improved by increasing the diameter of the tether, this incurs a
prohibitive mass penalty. The Hoytether, shown in the figure, is a
tether structure composed of multiple lines with redundant interlinking
that is able to withstand many impacts.
Hoytether Section

CHARACTERISTICS:
• Can be designed to have survival probabilities of >99% for periods of months to years.

CRITICAL ISSUES:
Development of methods to fabricate and deploy many-kilometer long multiline tethers.

STATUS:
• 1/2 km long samples of bi- and tri- line Hoytethers were fabricated during a Phase I SBIR effort.
• A 1/2 km bi-line Hoytether was successfully deployed from a SEDS deployer ground tests.
• Development of methods for fabricating and deploying multi-kilometer conducting and non-
conducting Hoytethers continues under a Phase II SBIR contract.

DISCUSSION: Analytical modeling, numerical simulation, and ground-based experimental testing of this
design indicate that this tether structure can achieve lifetimes of tens of years without incurring a mass
penalty. Moreover, while single-line tether survival probability drops exponentially with time, redundant
linkage in failsafe multiline tethers keeps the tether survival probability very high until the tether lifetime is
reached. The survival probability of a failsafe multiline tether is compared to that of an equal-mass single
line tether in next figure.

116
 1

0.8

Survival Probability
failsafe multiline
0.6 tether

0.4
single line tether
0.2

0
0 40 80 120 160 200
Time, Years
Lifetime comparison of equal-weight single line
and failsafe multiline tethers for a low-load mission.

CONTACTS:
l Robert P. Hoyt
l Robert L. Forward

REFERENCES:
Proceeding of the Fourth International Conference on Tethers in Space, Washington, DC, 10-14 April
1995.
R.L. Forward, R.P. Hoyt, Failsafe Multistrand Tether SEDS Technology Demonstration, Final
Report on NAS8-40545 SBIR 94-1 Phase I Research Study.
R.L. Forward, Failsafe Multistrand Tethers for Space Propulsion, Forward Unlimited, Final Report
on NAS8-39318 SBIR 91-1 Phase I Research Study.

117
SECTION 4.0 TETHER FUNDAMENTALS

118
4.1 GRAVITY GRADIENT

4.1.1 General

Gravity-gradient forces are fundamental to the general tether applications of controlled gravity, and
the stabilization of tethered platforms and constellations. The basic physical principles behind gravity-
gradient forces will be described in this section. This description will be in three parts. The first will
discuss the principles behind the general concept of gravity-gradient forces. The second will continue the
discussion, addressing the specific role of these forces in controlled-gravity applications. The third will
address their role in the stabilization of tethered platforms and constellations.

For the purposes of this discussion, it will be sufficient to describe the motion of the simple
"dumbbell" configuration, composed of two masses connected by a tether. Figure 4.1 shows the forces
acting on this system at orbital velocity. When it is oriented such that there is a vertical separation between
the two masses, the upper mass experiences a larger centrifugal than gravitational force, and the lower
mass experiences a larger gravitational than centrifugal force. (The reason for this is described later in the
discussion.) The result of this is a force couple applied to the system, forcing it into a vertical orientation.
This orientation is stable with equal masses, and with unequal masses either above or below the center of
gravity. Displacing the system from the local vertical produces restoring forces at each mass, which act to
return the system to a vertical orientation. The restoring forces acting on the system are shown in Figure
4.2 (see Ref. 1).

119
 Centrifugal
Force = M 1 r 1 ω 2
0

M1
Gravitational
Force = GMM 1 /r 12 Tether Tension

Center of
Gravity
• Center of Mass

Orbit
r0
Centrifugal Tether Tension
Force = M 2r 2 ω 2 ω0
0
M2
r2
Gravitational
Force = GMM 2 /r 22

Local Vertical

EARTH

Figure 4.1 Forces on Tethered Satellites

Since the gravitational acceleration changes nonlinearly with distance from the center of the Earth,
the center of gravity of the tethered system will not coincide exactly with its center of mass. The
separation becomes more pronounced as the tether length increases. However, the separation is not
dramatic for systems using less than very large long lengths. Therefore, for the purpose of this discussion
it will be assumed that the center of mass coincides with the center of gravity. Furthermore, to facilitate an
"uncluttered" discussion, the two masses will be assumed to be equal, and the tether mass will be ignored.

120
 Centrifugal-
Gravitational Force

Resultant
Restoring
Force
Component

Tether
Tension

Tether
Tension

Resultant
Restoring
Force
Component
Local
Centrifugal-
Vertical
Gravitational Force

EARTH

Figure 4.2 Restoring Forces on Tethered Satellites

The gravitational and centrifugal forces (accelerations) are equal and balanced at only one place:
the system's center of gravity (C.G.). The center of gravity (or mass), located at the midpoint of the tether
when the end masses are equal, is in free fall as it orbits the Earth, but the two end masses are not. They
are constrained by the tether to orbit with the same angular velocity as the center of gravity. For the center
of gravity in a Keplerian circular orbit, equating the gravitational and centrifugal force,

GMMo
= Mo r o ω 2o and
2
ro

GM
ω 2o = ; where
r 3o

G = universal gravitational constant (6.673 x 10-11 Nm2/kg2),

M = mass of the Earth (5.979 x 1024 kg),
Mo = total tether system mass (kg),
r = radius of the system's center of gravity from the center of the
Earth (m), and
ωo = orbital angular velocity of the center of gravity (s-1).

Since
121
 Vo
ωo = and
ro

2π
ωo = , where
To

Vo = orbital speed of the center of gravity, (m/s), and

To = orbital period of the center of gravity (s),

GM
Vo2 = and
ro

2 4 π 2 r o3
Τo =
GM

Note that the orbital speed, period, and angular velocity depend on the orbital radius, and are independent
of the tether system mass.

If the two end masses were in Keplerian circular orbits at their respective altitudes and were not
connected by a tether, their orbital speeds would be different from the tethered configuration. For the
upper mass, applying equations (1) and (2),

ω 12 = GM
and
(r o+ L)3

2 GM ; where
V1 =
(r o+ L)

L = tether length from the center of gravity to the mass (m).

Similarly, for the lower mass,

2 GM
ω2 = and
(r o- L) 3

2 GM
V2 =
(r o- L)

It can be seen that without the tether, the upper mass would move at a slower speed and the lower
mass would move at a higher speed. The tether, therefore, speeds up the upper mass and slows down the

122
lower mass. This is why the upper mass experiences a larger centrifugal than gravitational acceleration,
and why the lower mass experiences a larger gravitational than centrifugal acceleration. The resulting
upward acceleration of the upper mass and downward acceleration of the lower mass give rise to the
balancing tether tension. They also produce the restoring forces when the system is deflected from a
vertical orientation. The masses experience this tension as artificial gravity.

The artificial-gravity force and tether tension are equal to the gravity-gradient force. The gravity-
gradient force on a mass, m, attached to the tether at a distance, L, from the system's center of gravity is
equal to the difference between the centrifugal and gravitational forces on it. An approximate value for this
force is given by,

FGG ≈ 3L m ωo2

For mass m below the center of gravity, the gravity-gradient force is simply

FGG ≈ - 3L m ωo2 ,

indicating that the gravity-gradient force acts upward above the center of gravity and downward below it.
The force acts along the tether and away from the center of gravity. Furthermore, the gravity-gradient
acceleration and force increase as the distance from the center of gravity increases and as the orbital radius
123
of the center of gravity decreases. (A more rigorous derivation of this equation is presented in Ref. 2, and
also in Ref. 3). Figures 4.3 and 4.4 show the tether tension (artificial-gravity force) and artificial-gravity
acceleration as a function of tether length from the center of gravity for various system masses in LEO (see
Ref. 4). Figure 4.5 shows the tether mass and g-level as a function of tether length for a tether made of
Kevlar 29. This figure includes tapered tethers which are discussed below.

Figure 4.3 Tether Tension Due to Gravity Gradient Versus Tether Length From
Center of Gravity and Effective Satellite Mass In LEO

Figure 4.4 "Artificial Gravity" at Tethered Masses in LEO

124
Figure 4.5 Tether Mass and g-Level Versus Tether Length for Kevlar 29 Tethers

125
 Since the gravity-gradient force and acceleration in orbit vary with GM/ro3 (where M is the
planetary mass), they are independent of the planet's size, and linearly dependent on its density. The
acceleration is largest around the inner planets and the Moon (0.3-0.4 x 10-3g/km for low orbits, where g
is Earth gravity), and about 60-80% less around the outer planets. The gravity-gradient acceleration
decreases rapidly as the orbital radius increases (to 1.6 x 10-6 g/km in GEO).

Although the vertical orientation of the tether system is a stable one, there are forces which cause it
to librate (oscillate) about the vertical. These weak but persistent forces include atmospheric drag due to
the different air densities encountered in the northward and southward passes of non-equatorial orbits and
due to solar heating and electrodynamic forces (for conducting tethers). Station-keeping and other rocket
maneuvers would also contribute to driving (or damping) libration. The natural frequency for in-plane (in
the orbit plane) librations is √3 ωo = 1.732 ωo, and 2 ωo for out-of-plane librations (a detailed derivation is
contained in Ref. 2).

Since both the displacement and restoring forces increase linearly with tether length, libration
frequencies are independent of tether length. Therefore, the tether system will librate as a solid dumbbell
(except for very long tethers, where the gravity gradient itself varies). Libration periods, however, do
increase at large amplitudes. Since the tether constrains the motion of the masses, the sensed acceleration
is always along the tether. Furthermore, the tether can go slack if the in-plane libration angle exceeds 65°,
or if the out-of-plane libration angle exceeds 60°. The slackness can be overcome by reeling or unreeling
the tether at an appropriate rate. Additional information on tether libration is presented in Ref. 5 and also
Section 5.0.

Libration can be damped out by varying the tether length. It would be deployed when the tension
was too high and retracted when the tension was too low. Since the in-plane and out-of-plane librations
have different periods, they could be damped simultaneously. Shorter-period, higher-order tether
vibrations could also be damped in this way.

Since the portion of the tether at the center of gravity must support the tether as well as the masses,
the mass of long tethers must be taken into account. To minimize the tether's mass while maintaining its
required strength, its cross-sectional area could be sized for a constant stress at all points along its length.
The optimum design for very high tether tensions would be an exponentially tapered tether with a
maximum area at the center of gravity and minima at the end masses. Tethers of constant cross-section
have limited length, as indicated in Figure 4.5, whereas tapered tethers can have unlimited length; but then,
its mass will increase exponentially along with its cross-section. A detailed discussion of tapered tether
design is provided in Ref. 6.

In addition to the general areas of controlled gravity and tethered-platform and constellation
stabilization, gravity-gradient effects play a fundamental role in applications related to momentum
exchange and tethered-satellite deployment. These aspects are discussed in Section 4.3, entitled
"Momentum Exchange."

126
4.1.2 Controlled Gravity

As a first step in discussing the role of gravity-gradient effects in controlled-gravity applications, a

few definitions will be established. The definitions used in this book will be those recommended by the
controlled gravity panel at the tether applications conference in Venice, Italy in October 1985 (Ref. 4). The
term "controlled gravity" means the intentional establishment and control of the magnitude, vector
properties, time dependence, and associated "noise" (uncertainty) of the acceleration field within a
designated volume of space. In addition, the following definitions are also provided:
g = the acceleration on the equator at mean sea level on the Earth's surface (9.81 m/s2);
microgravity = 10-4 g and smaller;
low gravity = 10-1 g to 10-4 g;
Earth gravity = 1 g;
hypergravity = greater than 1 g;
reduced gravity = microgravity and low gravity; and
enhanced gravity = hypergravity.

There are two basic tether configurations which can be used to provide controlled-acceleration
fields: gravity-gradient-stabilized configurations (rotating once per orbit in an inertial frame), and rotating
configurations (rotating more rapidly than once per orbit). This section will cover gravity-gradient-
stabilized configurations. Rotating configurations are discussed later in Section 4.2.

In an orbiting, vertically-oriented, gravity-gradient-stabilized tether system composed of two end

masses connected by a tether, all portions of each end mass experience the same acceleration, caused by
the tether tension pulling on the end mass. This force is perceived as artificial gravity. As described
before, its magnitude is proportional to the tether length from the system's center of gravity, and may be
held constant or varied by deploying and retracting the tether. (For LEO, the gravity gradient is about 4 x
10-4 g/km.) Its direction is along the tether and away from the center of gravity.

This same principle can be used in more complex configurations (constellations) of three or more
bodies. For example, consider a three-body system stabilized along the gravity gradient. In this system, a
third body is attached to a crawler mechanism ("elevator") on the tether between the two primary end
masses. The crawler mechanism allows the third body to be moved easily to any point along the tether
between the end masses. The acceleration field (artificial gravity) in the third body can be controlled easily
by moving it up or down the tether. Its distance from the system's center of gravity determines the
magnitude of the artificial gravity within it. This artificial gravity acts in the direction along the tether and
away from the center of gravity. The two end masses experience the artificial gravity determined by their
distances from the center of gravity, as in the two-body system. The artificial gravity that they experience
can also be held constant or varied by increasing or decreasing the tether length.

When positioned at the center of gravity, the third body could experience an acceleration field as
low as about 10-8 g at the center of gravity, and 10-7 g and 10-6 g at distances from the center of gravity of

127
20 cm and 2 m, respectively. Using appropriate control laws, the third body's position could be
automatically adjusted to produce a desired g-level time profile or to minimize transient disturbing effects.

Gravity-gradient effects can also be used to control the location of the system's center of gravity.
This would be a very useful capability for the Space Station if microgravity experiments were to be
performed on-board. Two tethered masses would be deployed vertically from the Space Station - one
above and one below. By controlling the tether lengths, the position of the center of gravity could be
maintained at a particular point in the system or moved to the other points as desired. This means that the
artificial gravity at all points in the system would be correspondingly controlled to a fine degree of
resolution. For example, the center of gravity could be adjusted to coincide with the minimum possible
acceleration field.

All of these system configurations allow the generation and fine control of a wide range of g-
levels. Using appropriate control laws, tether lengths and the relative positions of system components can
be varied to produce desired gravity fields and their time profiles, to minimize transient disturbances to the
gravity field, and to carefully control the location of the system's center of gravity. In addition to all of
this, tethers also provide two-axis stabilization of the system.

Gravity-gradient systems have several advantages over rotating systems. They can provide
artificial gravity for large-volume structures more easily. Also, the gravity gradient and Coriolis
accelerations within these volumes are much less than those produced in rotating systems. One result of
this is a lower occurrence of motion sickness. However, one disadvantage of gravity-gradient systems is
that they would require very long tethers to achieve g-levels approaching 1 g or more. In fact, current
tether materials are not strong enough to support their own weight at such tether lengths. However, by
using moderate lengths and a relatively small rotation rate about the C.G, g-levels of 1 g or more can be
achieved, with some increase in the Coriolis acceleration and gravity gradient. Figure 4.6 provides
additional information concerning the acceptable values of artificial-gravity parameters (Ref. 4).

128
 ARTIFICIAL GRAVITY
PARAMETERS
• UNAIDED TRACTION REQUIRES 0.1 G
• ANGULAR VELOCITY SHOULD BE LESS THAN 3.0 RPM TO
AVOID MOTION SICKNESS
• MAXIMAL CENTRIPETAL ACCELERATION NEED NOT
EXCEED EARTH GRAVITY
• CORIOLIS ACCELERATION SHOULD NOT EXCEED 0.25
CENTRIPETAL ACCELERATION FOR A LINEAR VELOCITY
OF 3 FEET/SECOND IN A RADIAL DIRECTION
• GRADIENT SHOULD NOT EXCEED 0.01 G/FOOT
IN RADIAL DIRECTION
• TETHER MASS MIGHT BE LIMITED TO 10,000 TO 20,000
POUNDS
ARTIFICIAL GRAVITY PARAMETERS

Figure 4.6 Acceptable Values of Artificial-Gravity Parameters

Tether technology suggests a number of exciting application possibilities. For example, since a
tether can be used to attain a gravity field simply by deploying a counterweight along the gravity gradient,
the establishment of a desirable low-level gravity on-board the Space Station appears practical. The use of
0.01 - 0.1 g on-board the Space Station might permit simpler and more reliable crew-support systems
(such as eating aids, showers, toilets, etc.), operational advantages (no floating objects, easier tool usage,
and panels and controls which are operated as in ground training), and perhaps some long-term biological
advantages. The tether mass would be a significant part of the station mass to produce 0.1 g (using a
129
tapered 450 km tether), but would be relatively small for 0.05 g or less. However, careful consideration
will have to be given to the disadvantages of tether system mass and complexity, and to assurance of

130
survival in case of tether severing by meteoroid or debris impact. Such a system would also affect a
microgravity laboratory, requiring it to be moved from the Space Station to the C.G. location.

A variable/low gravity laboratory module could be attached by a crawler mechanism to a tether

deployed along the gravity gradient from the Space Station. A microgravity laboratory could also be built
as part of the Space Station at its center of gravity. These labs could be used to examine the effects of
microgravity and low gravity on both physical and biological processes. Some biological processes of
interest would be plant and animal growth, and human performance and medical processes (such as those
related to the cardiovascular, skeletal, and vestibular systems). The gravity-threshold values for various
biological phenomena could also be studied. Such physical processes as crystal growth, fluid science, and
chemical reactions could be studied. Many experiments in materials science and manufacturing could be
performed in these gravity ranges. Liquid propellant storage and refueling facilities could be tethered to
the Space Station. The artificial gravity produced by the tether would assist in propellant handling and
transfer. Figure 4.7 shows the tether lengths necessary to allow propellant settling for the proper transfer
of various propellants.

These are but a few of the possible applications of the artificial-gravity environments produced by
gravity-gradient effects. Detailed descriptions of applications utilizing these gravity-gradient effects are
contained in the "Tether Applications" (Section 3.0) of this handbook. Note that, due to the wide variety
of possible system configurations, all of these applications are contained in one category. There are
applications which overlap two or more categories and which could be logically listed under any one of
them. In these cases, a judgment has been made as to which category is the most appropriate for the
particular application and it is listed in that category. The applications related to the artificial gravity
produced by gravity-gradient effects appears in the "Controlled Gravity" and "Space Station" categories of
the "Applications" section, as appropriate.

Fluid Settling
• SETTLING REQUIREMENT
- GRAVITY DOMINATE SURFACE TENSION
• FLUID SETTLING PARAMETER IS BOND NUMBER (B )
o
ρ = FLUID DENSITY
ρAD2
Bo = σ = SURFACE TENSION COEFFICIENT
4σ
D = TANK DIAMETER
• FLUID SETTLES IF Bo > 10
- Bo = 50 CHOSEN TO BE CONSERVATIVE
PROPELLANT SETTLING ON A STATIC TETHER (Bo = 50)

131
Figure 4.7 Fluid Settling Properties of Various Liquid Propellants Under Conditions
of Artificial Gravity - Required Tether Length Versus Propellant

132
4.1.3 Constellations

Gravity-gradient forces also play a critical role in the stabilization of tethered constellations. A
tethered constellation is defined as a generic distribution of more than two masses in space connected by
tethers in a stable configuration. They can be configured in either one, two, or three dimensions. All of
the non-negligible forces or gradients available in low orbit come into play to stabilize these various
configurations. The vertical gravity gradient has the strongest influences, but differential air drag,
electrodynamic forces, the J22 gravity component (an harmonic of the Earth's gravitational potential), and
centrifugal forces also contribute. Different configurations utilize different combinations: 1-D vertical and
horizontal, drag-and gravity-gradient-stabilized and electromagnetically stabilized (2-D).

Tethered constellations are divided into the two basic categories shown in Figure 4.8 (Ref. 4, p.
296). These are "static" and "dynamic" constellations. Static constellations are defined as constellations
which do not rotate relative to the orbiting reference frame (they do rotate at the orbital rate when referred
to an inertial frame). Dynamic constellations, on the other hand, are defined as constellations which do
rotate with respect to the orbiting reference frame. These two basic categories are subdivided further.
Static constellations include gravity-gradient-stabilized (one-dimensional, vertical), drag-stabilized (one-
and gravity-gradient-stabilized (two-dimensional) constellations. Dynamic constellations include
centrifugally stabilized two dimensional and three-dimensional constellations. This section will address
only the static constellations.

133
Figure 4.8 Types of Tethered Constellations

134
 From the standpoint of stability and complexity, a gravity-gradient-stabilized, one-dimensional,
vertical constellation is the most desirable configuration. A diagram showing three bodies tethered in this
configuration is shown in Figure 4.9. Examples included the three-body configurations used for
variable/low gravity and microgravity labs, and for the position control of the system center of gravity.
Earlier discussion of vertical configurations included descriptions of their dynamics (including libration).
The dominant influence on these constellations is the vertical gravity gradient.

FLIGHT
DIRECTION

Figure 4.9 Example Configuration of 1-D, Gravity-Gradient-Stabilized,

Vertical Constellation

Stability in one-dimensional, horizontal constellations is provided by tensioning the tethers. (Such

a constellation is depicted in Figure 4.10.) By designing such a constellation so that the ballistic
coefficient of each of its elements is lower than that of the element leading it and higher than that of the
element trailing it, a tension is maintained in the tethers connecting them along the velocity vector. The
resulting differential drag on its elements prevents the constellation from compressing, and the tension in
its tethers prevents it from drifting apart. In principle, there is no limit to the number of platforms which
can be connected in this manner. However, it should be noted that drag takes orbital energy out of the
constellation, shortening its orbital lifetime unless compensated by some form of propulsion.

FLIGHT
DIRECTION

Figure 4.10 Example Configuration of 1-D, Drag-Stabilized,

Horizontal Constellation
135
 The fundamental parameter for one-dimensional, horizontal constellations is the differential ballistic
coefficient of the two end bodies. In the case of a massive front body and a voluminous rear body
(balloon), it is equal to the ballistic coefficient of the latter. Tether lengths and orbital lifetimes are
competing requirements and are never sufficiently satisfied in the altitude range of interest. Since the
vertical gravity gradient dominates over the differential air drag at the Space Station altitude and above, the
maximum horizontal tether length must be short for stability. At lower altitudes (150-200 km) where the
differential air drag becomes relatively strong, tether length may be longer, but the orbital lifetime will be
limited.
The "fish-bone" configuration was the first proposed two-dimensional constellation and it utilizes
both gravity-gradient and air-drag forces in order to attain its stability. A simple "fish-bone" constellation
is depicted in Figure 4.11. For analytical purposes, this constellation can be reduced to an equivalent one-
dimensional, horizontal constellation by lumping the overall ballistic coefficient of the rear leg (balloons
plus tethers) and the front leg at the ends of the horizontal tether. Additional information on the stability
analysis of the original "fish-bone" configuration shown in Figure 4.11 is presented in Ref. 4 (p.171-172)
and contains calculated values of its stability limits versus altitude. Analysis has revealed that this
configuration is less stable than a comparable one-dimensional, horizontal constellation. The necessity of
a massive deployer at the center of the downstream vertical tether subsystem greatly reduces the area-to-
mass ratio of that subsystem.

m11 , A1 m12 , A2

l1
θ
Flight
Direction c.g.
m 22 , A3
l2
h

m11 , A1

Local
Vertical m12 , A2

Figure 4.11 Example Configuration of 2-D, "Fish-Bone"

136
 Two additional designs for a two-dimensional constellation, utilizing gravity-gradient and air-drag
forces for stability, have been proposed. These drag-stabilized constellation (DSC) designs are depicted in
Figure 4.12. With this type of configuration, the gravity gradient is exploited for overall attitude stability
(the constellation's minimum axis of inertia must be along the local vertical), and differential air-drag
forces are used to stretch the constellation horizontally for shape stability. The drag force is fully exploited
to assure the minimum tension in the horizontal tethers, and not to counteract the gravity-gradient force as
it does in the "fish-bone" configuration. Design parameters for DSC systems are presented in Ref. 4 (p.
175-178).

Two designs for a two-dimensional constellation utilizing gravity-gradient and electromagnetic

forces for stability have been proposed. These electromagnetically stabilized constellation (ESC) designs
are shown in Figure 4.13. In these configurations, the gravity gradient is again used for overall attitude
stability (the minimum axis of inertia is vertical) and electromagnetic forces are used to stretch the
constellation horizontally for shape stability. (These electromagnetic forces are discussed in detail in Ref.
7 and section 4.4).

Figure 4.12 Two Designs of 2-D DSC Constellations Horizontally

In the quadrangular configuration, current flows in the outer-loop tethers, interacting with the
Earth's magnetic field, to generate electromagnetic forces in the outer loop. The current direction is chosen
such that these forces push the tethers outward, tensioning them (like air inside a balloon). Although the
shape is different in the pseudo-elliptical constellation (PEC) design, the same principle of electromagnetic
tensioning of the outer-loop tethers is applied. The two lumped masses provide extra attitude stability
without affecting the constellation shape. Moreover, since the resultant force is zero, the orbital decay rate
is provided by air drag only. Design parameters for ESC systems are presented in Ref. 4 (p. 176-177).

137
Figure 4.13 Two Designs of ESC 2-D Constellations Where Shape Stability is
Provided by Electromagnetic forces

138
 Preliminary conclusions on the design of two-dimensional constellations have been reached. The
"fish-bone" constellations are less stable than the one-dimensional, horizontal constellations. "Fish-bone"
constellations are stable with very short horizontal tethers (less than 100 m at 500 km altitude). The
alternative quadrangular DSC and ESC constellations (and PECs for special applications) exhibit a better
static stability. Suitable design parameters can provide good stability with a reasonably low power
requirement for ESCs and feasible balloons for DSCs.

Typical dimensions for these constellations are 10 km (horizontal) by 20 km (vertical) with balloon
diameters of about 100 m for DSCs, a power consumption of about 5.5 kW for ESCs and 2 kW for
PECs. The ESC constellations have greater tension in the horizontal tethers than the DSC constellations
and an orbital decay which is smaller by an order of magnitude. ESCs are suitable for low inclination
orbits. Moreover, since they tend to orient their longitudinal plane perpendicular to the Earth's magnetic
field (B vector), a small oscillation about the vertical axis at the orbital frequency is unavoidable even at
low orbital inclinations. DSCs, on the other hand, are suitable for any orbital inclination. In the DSCs,
the yaw oscillation occurs at high inclinations only due to the Earth's rotating atmosphere.

There are several proposed applications for one-dimensional, vertical constellations. A three-body
configuration could be used for microgravity/variable-gravity laboratories attached to the Space Station or
the Shuttle. A three-body system could be used on the Space Station to control the location of the center of
gravity. A system of 3 or more bodies attached to the Shuttle or Space Station could be used as a multi-
probe lab for the measurement of the gradients of geophysical quantities. A 3-body system could also
function as an ELF/ULF antenna by allowing a current to flow alternatively in the upper and lower tether
to inject an electromagnetic wave with a square waveform into the ionosphere. A space elevator (or
crawler) for the Space Station is yet another application.

There are several proposed applications for two-dimensional constellations. An

electromagnetically stabilized constellation could provide an external stable frame for giant orbiting
reflectors. Multi-mass constellations in general allow a separation of different activities while keeping
them physically connected, such as for power distribution, etc. Detailed analysis of these two-dimensional
structures may be found in Ref. 7.

4.2 ROTATION OF TETHER SYSTEMS

4.2.1 General

Tethers will almost always be involved in some form of rotational configuration. Any planet-
orbiting tether system, by nature, will rotate about the planet at the orbit angular velocity. The combination
of the centrifugal forces due to rotation and gravity gradient acting on the tether end masses causes it to be
stabilized in a vertical position about the planet center of mass. In many interplanetary applications,

139
rotation will be desired to cause an artificial-gravity environment or to create a centrifugally stabilized
configuration.

4.2.2 Controlled Gravity

A tether-mass system may desire controlled gravity for a number of applications. These may range
from an artificial-gravity environment for manned interplanetary missions to a controlled-gravity platform
for industrial space applications. The calculation of the acceleration at a point for purely circular motion is
presented here. With reference to Figure 4.14, we assume that point P (which would represent the mass)
is at a constant radius, r (the tether), from the center of our rotation system.

y ←
←
eθ er

r
θ
O x

Figure 4.14 Circular Motion of a Point.

The acceleration can then be found by the expression:

→a = ( - r ω2) →
.
er + (r ω) →
eθ ;
where,
→
a = acceleration at the point P (m/s2 ),
→
e r = unit vector in radial direction,
→
e θ = unit vector in tangential (velocity) direction,

r = radius (length of tether) (m),

ω = angular velocity (rad/s),

.
ω = angular acceleration (rad/s2 ).

Notice that if the angular velocity is constant the acceleration simplifies to

→
a = ( - r ω 2) →
er ;

140
where the negative sign indicates that the acceleration acts toward the center of rotation (see Ref. 8).

As an example, suppose it is desired to calculate the gravity level at a manned module rotating
about another similar module with angular velocity of 2.0 rpm, attached by a tether of length 200 meters.
The center of mass will be exactly between them, and, with this as the origin, the distance to each module
is 100 meters. Then, the calculation is,

a = r ω2
2
= (100 m) 2 rev 1 min 2 π rad
min 60 sec rev

= 4.38 m/s 2

141
To calculate the gravity level (as compared to Earth's):

4.38 m/s 2
a =
9.8 m/s 2

= 0.45 g .

4.3 MOMENTUM EXCHANGE

4.3.1 General-Conservation of Angular Momentum

Tethers can have useful space applications by redistributing the orbital angular momentum of a
system. A tether can neither create nor destroy system angular momentum, only transfer it from one body
to another. Angular momentum is defined (for a rotating system, Figure 4.15) as,

h = m→
→ → →;
r x v = mr 2 ω
where
→
h = angular momentum of system (kgm2 s-1 ),

m = mass of system (kg)

→
r = radius vector from center of rotating coordinate system
(usually the Earth) to system center of mass (m),
→
v = velocity of system center of mass normal to r (ms-1 ), and
→
ω = system angular velocity (s-1 ).

142
 →
h

→
v

→
ω

→
r

Figure 4.15 Angular Momentum in a Rotating System

In general, momentum exchange can be used for various tether applications using different
momentum exchange techniques. These techniques will be described first, followed by examples of their
application. A useful chart is presented in Subsection 5.4.4 of Section 5.0, "Tether Data".

4.3.2 Tether Payload Deployment

Consider a system composed of two bodies connected by a variable-length tether as in Figure 4.16
(see Ref. 9).
In order to initiate a tethered deployment, such as deploying a payload (M2) downward from the
Shuttle (M1), it is first necessary to provide an initial impulse to the payload to start separation. After a
certain length of tether has been deployed, the masses are in sufficiently different orbits so that gravity-
gradient and centrifugal forces continue the separation. If the two masses were not constrained by a tether,
mass M1 would acquire a lower orbital circular velocity and M2 would obtain a higher orbital circular
velocity in ther new orbits. This is because as M1 moves further away from the Earth's gravitational field,
its potential energy is raised and its kinetic energy is lowered. For M2 the exact opposite is true. Since the
masses are constrained by a tether, they also must move at the same orbital velocity. Mass M2, therefore,
will "drag" mass M1 along until libration occurs. Libration (pendulum motion) will continue due to the
centrifugal, gravitational, and tether tension restoring forces.

143
 Figure 4.16 Tethered Deployment

In this case, mass M1 gained angular momentum equal to an identical amount lost by M2. This amount of
angular momentum transferred is equal to:

∆h = M1 V ∆R1 = M2 V ∆R2 .

The momentum is transferred from M1 to M2 through the horizontal component of the tether tension. This
tension is caused by the Coriolis term of the acceleration expression of the librating masses.

If the tether is now cut, the upper mass, M1, is boosted into an elliptical orbit having higher energy
than it would have had due to its greater velocity. The point in the orbit where the tether is severed will
correspond to the perigee of M1. The situation is exactly reversed for M2, which will be at its apogee at
this point.

144
 The preceding discussion explains the basic mechanics of momentum transfer in tethers. There are
many variations of tethered deployment, many of which are beyond the scope of this text. Only some of
the more basic ones will be described here.

Static and dynamic tether deployment are basically the same, except that static deployment occurs
with the tether remaining under small angular displacements from the vertical, and dynamic deployments
utilize large angular displacements. For certain dynamic deployments, it is possible to impart additional
energy to one mass at the expense of the other. In order to implement this exchange, the deployment
begins with a large angular displacement, tether tension is purposely kept low until a desired length is
reached. When brakes are applied, a large angle prograde swing occurs. When the upper mass (payload)
leads the lower mass, the tether is severed. In this way, an added boost due to the additional velocity of
the prograde swing is accomplished.

Another method of tethered deployment is libration pumping. The tether is initially deployed then
alternately extended and retrieved in resonance with tether tension variations during libration. (In-plane
libration causes these tension variations due to Coriolis effects.) Spin pumping is yet another method,
whereby libration pumping is carried further to the point that the tether system is caused to spin. In both
cases, the added energy increases the departure velocity of the payload, just as in the dynamic tethered
deployment case.

4.3.3 Orbit Variations

If the payload deployment described previously is carefully done, the orbits of both masses can be
changed for one or both of their benefits. The Shuttle, for example, can boost a payload into a higher orbit
and at the same time deboost itself back to Earth. Conversely, the Shuttle could perform a tethered
deployment of its external tanks, whereby the tanks are deboosted back to Earth and the Shuttle is boosted
to a higher orbit. Applications such as these are termed "momentum scavenging" since excess momentum
is utilized for a beneficial purpose. The trick with this approach is that excess momentum must be
available. One major application which is described in the applications section of the handbook is the
Space Station-Shuttle deboost operation. This is an excellent example where both masses benefit.
Resupply missions of the Space Station by the Shuttle are finalized by a tethered deployment of the
Shuttle. In this way, the Space Station is boosted to a higher orbit and the Shuttle is de-boosted back to
Earth. In order to utilize the additional momentum of the Space Station, tethered deployments of an STV
are alternated with those of the Shuttle. Fuel savings can be obtained by both Shuttle and STV in this
example. Tethers can also be used to change orbit eccentricity. This is done by libration pumping of
tethered mass, phased as in Figure 4.17 (Ref. 9).

145
Figure 4.17 Orbit Eccentricity Change
146
 At (1) the mass is fully extended, and libration commences. At (2), with the mass in a prograde
swing, the retrieval motor pulls the spacecraft toward the mass, adding energy to the orbit (through the use
of excess electrical energy transferred to the motor). At (3), which is the new apogee of the orbit, the
tether length is at a minimum. At (4), with the mass in a retrograde swing, the tether is re-deployed and
the retrieval brakes are used to dissipate orbital energy in the form of excess heat. At (5), the new perigee,
the mass is again fully deployed.

4.4 ELECTRODYNAMICS

4.4.1 General

Electrodynamic tether systems can be designed to produce several useful effects by interacting with
magnetic fields. They can be designed to produce either electrical power or thrust (either a propulsive
thrust or a drag). They can also be designed to alternately produce electrical power and thrust. In
addition, they can be designed to produce ULF/ELF/VLF electromagnetic signals in the upper atmosphere,
and shape-stability for orbiting satellite constellations. Electrodynamic systems can be designed to
produce electrical power.

4.4.2 Electric Power Generators

The discussion of electric power generation by tether systems will begin with electrodynamic
systems in low Earth orbit. Consider a vertical, gravity-gradient-stabilized, insulated, conducting tether,
which is terminated at both ends by plasma contactors. A typical configuration is shown in Figure 4.18
(Ref. 9, 10). As this system orbits the Earth, it cuts across the geomagnetic field from west to east at
about 8 km/s. An electromotive force (emf) is induced across the length of the tether. This emf is given
by the equation:

→ → →
V = ∫along
( v x B ) • dl
length of tether
where
V = induced emf across the tether length (volts),
→
v = tether velocity relative to the geomagnetic field (m/s)
→
B = magnetic field strength (webers/m2 ), and
→
dl = differential element of tether length - a vector pointing in the
direction of positive current flow (m).

For the special case where the tether is straight and perpendicular to the magnetic field lines everywhere
along its length, the equation for the emf simplifies to:

147
 → → →
V = (v x B)•L ;
where
→
L = tether length - a vector pointing in the direction of positive
current flow (m).

The equation for the induced emf across

the tether in this special case can also be
written as:

V = L v B sin θ ;
where

→ →
θ = angle between v and B .

(From these equations, it can be seen that

equatorial and low- inclination orbits will
produce the largest emfs, since the
maximum emf is produced when the
tether velocity and the magnetic field are
perpendicular to each other.)

148
 Figure 4.18 Power Generation With an Electrodynamic Tether

The emf acts to create a potential difference across the tether by making the upper end of the tether
positive with respect to the lower end. In order to produce a current from this potential difference, the
tether ends must make electrical contact with the Earth's plasma environment. Plasma contactors at the
tether ends provide this contact, establishing a current loop (a so-called "phantom loop") through the
tether, external plasma, and ionosphere. Although processes in the plasma and ionosphere are not clearly
understood at this time, it is believed that the current path is like that shown in Figure 4.19. The collection
of electrons from the plasma at the top end of the tether and their emission from the bottom end creates a
net-positive charge cloud (or region) at the top end, and a net-negative charge cloud at the bottom. The
excess free charges are constrained to move along the geomagnetic field lines intercepted by the tether ends
until they reach the vicinity of the E region of the lower ionosphere where there are sufficient collisions
with neutral particles to allow the electrons to migrate across the field lines and complete the circuit.

To optimize the ionosphere's ability to sustain a tether current, the tether current density at each end
must not exceed the external ionospheric current density. Plasma contactors must effectively spread the
tether current over a large enough area to reduce the current densities to the necessary levels. Three basic
tether system configurations, using three types of plasma contactors, have been considered. They are: (1)
a passive large-area conductor at both tether ends; (2) a passive large-area conductor at the upper end and
an electron gun at the lower end; and, (3) a plasma-generating hollow cathode at both ends.

149
 Figure 4.19 The Current Path External To An Orbiting
Electrodynamic Tether System

In the first configuration, the upper conductor (probably a conducting balloon) collects electrons. The
lower plasma contactor in this configuration (perhaps a conductive surface of the attached spacecraft)
utilizes its large surface area in a similar way to collect ions.

To achieve higher currents, it is possible to replace the passive large-area conductor at the lower
end with an electron gun, providing the equivalent of collecting a positive ion current by ejecting a negative
electron current. Ejecting these electrons at a high energy distributes them over an effectively large contact
region. Unfortunately, electron guns are active plasma contactors, requiring on-board electrical power to
drive them.

The third configuration is quite different from the first two. Based upon research results and
performance modeling up to this point, it is projected to be the most promising of the three systems.
Instead of relying on a passive and physically large conducting surface to collect currents, a hollow
cathode at each tether end generates an expanding cloud of highly conductive plasma. The plasma density
is very high at the tip of the tether and falls off to ionospheric densities at a large distance from the tip.
This plasma provides a sufficient thermal electron density to carry the full tether current in either direction
at any distance from the tether end, until it is merged into the ambient ionospheric plasma currents. This
case of current reversibility allows the system to function alternately as either a generator or a thruster,
with greater ease than either of the other two configurations (as will be discussed in more detail in the next
section). Hollow cathodes are also active plasma contactors, requiring on-board electrical power and a gas
supply to operate. However, they require much less power than an electron gun, and the gas supply
should not impose a severe weight penalty. Two diagrams of a hollow cathode plasma source are shown
in Figure 4.20. Additional diagrams and information relating to the construction and operation of the
PMG hollow cathode plasma contactor are given in Figures 4.21, 4.22 and 4.23. Typical characteristics
of a hollow cathode and an electron gun are compared in Figures 4.24 and 4.25. More information on the
TSS and PMG flights results are given in Section 1.

150
 TSS-1R flight showed that larger tether currents can be generated and at much lower satellite
potentials than were theoretically predicted. A final assessment on the performance of hollow cathodes
flown on PMG compared to other configurations cannot be given as long as TSS-1R data analysis is
completed and more flights test are verified. In addition, there may be particular applications for which
passive contactors or electron guns are desirable. On the other hand, using hollow cathode plasma
contactors should also be safer for spacecraft systems, since they establish a known vehicle ground
reference potential with respect to the local plasma.

151
 Figure 4.20 Diagrams of a Hollow Cathode Plasma Contactor

Figure 4.21 Diagram of the Plasma Motor/Generator (PMG) Hollow Cathode Assembly

152
Figure 4.22 Plasma Cloud Expansion for PMG Hollow Cathode Plasma Contactor

153
Figure 4.23 Electron Current Flow To/From the Ionosphere for PMG
Hollow Cathode Plasma Contactor

154
 Figure 4.24 Comparison of the IV Characteristics of a Hollow Cathode and Electron Gun

Electron Gun Hollow Cathode

• Current Range Ie < 1A Ie > 10 A (Nominal)

• Power Consumption ~ 1 KW ~ 10 KW
• Life Time Similar Similar
• Automatic Switching No Yes
• Main Applications Basic Science Low Impedance
Exp. and Power Coupling

155
 Dissipation Thrusting and Power
Generation

Figure 4.25 Comparative Characteristics of an Electron Gun and a Hollow Cathode

156
 The current passing through the tether can be controlled by any one of several methods, depending
upon the type of plasma contactors used. For systems with passive conductors at both ends, control is by
variable resistance, inserted between the tether and one of the plasma contactors. For systems using an
electron gun as a plasma contactor, tether current is controlled by the current emitted by the electron gun.
Unfortunately, these methods are very inefficient. They not only waste all of the I2R power lost in the
resistors, plasma sheaths (around the plasma contactors), and electron gun impedance, but they also
transfer most of it as heat back into the spacecraft, where it may cause significant thermal control and heat
rejection problems.

The basic equation of the current loop (circuit) is:

VIND = IR + ∆VLOW + ∆VUP + ∆VION + ∆VLOAD ;

where VIND = emf induced across the tether (volts),

I =tether current (amps),
R = resistance of the tether (ohms),
∆VLOW = voltage drop across the space charge region around the lower plasma
contactor (volts),
∆VUP = voltage drop across the space charge region around the upper plasma
contactor (volts),
∆VION = voltage drop across the ionosphere (volts), and
∆VLOAD = voltage drop across a load (volts),

This equation simply states that the emf induced across the tether by its motion through the magnetic field
is equal to the sum of all of the voltage drops in the circuit. The IR term in the equation is the voltage drop
across the tether due to its resistance (according to Ohm's Law).

To provide an expression for the working voltage available to drive a load, this equation can be
rewritten as:

∆VLOAD = VIND - IR - ∆VLOW - ∆VUP - ∆VION .

The voltage drop across the space charge region (sheath, electron gun, or plasma cloud) at each
tether end is caused by the impedance of that region. The voltage drop across the ionosphere is likewise
due to its impedance. The problem with these equations is that the impedances of the charge regions
around the tether ends are complex, nonlinear, and unknown functions of the tether current. The
impedance of the ionosphere has not been clearly determined. Although some laboratory studies have
been performed, and estimates made, detailed flight test measurements will have to be performed before
these quantities can be clearly determined.

157
 It has been calculated that the ionospheric impedance should be on the order of 1-20 ohms (Ref.
11). The highest impedance of the tether system are encountered at the space charge sheath regions around
the upper and lower plasma contactors. Reducing these impedances will greatly increase the efficiency of
the tether system in providing large currents. PMG data indicate that plasmas released from hollow
cathode plasma contactors greatly reduce the sheath impedance between the contactors and the ambient
plasma surrounding them. Although processes in these plasmas and in the ionosphere are not well
understood and require continued study and evaluation through testing, preliminary indications are that
feasible tether and plasma-contactor systems should be able to provide large induced currents.

As indicated earlier, the electric currents induced in such tether systems can be used to power loads
on board the spacecraft equipped with them. They can also be used as primary power for the spacecraft.
It has been calculated that electrodynamic tether systems should be capable of producing electrical power in
the multikilowatt to possibly the megawatt range (Ref. 4, p. 161-184). Calculations a 200 KW system is
given in figure 4.26.

There is a price to be paid for this electrical power, however. It is generated at the expense of
spacecraft/tether orbital energy. This effect is described in detail in the next section .

In principle, electrodynamic tether systems can generate electrical power not only in Earth orbit,
but also when they move through the magnetic fields of other planets and interplanetary space. The
magnetic field in interplanetary space is provided by the solar wind, which is a magnetized plasma
spiralling outward from the sun.

References 1 (p. 1-22 through 1-24, 3-49 through 3-65), 2, 4 (p. 153-184, 547-594), 10,11, and
data from Dr. James McCoy (NASA/Johnson Space Center) are the primary references for this section.

158
PMG - 200 KW REFERENCE SYSTEM

TETHER LENGTH 20 KM (10 UP+10 DN) WORKING TENSI0N 42 N

NOMINAL VOLTAGE 4 KV WORKING ANGLE 17 DEG

RATED POWER 200 KW RATED THRUST 25 N

PEAK POWER 500 KW PEAK THRUST >100 N

#00 AWG ALUMINUM WIRE 3640 KG

CONDUCTOR
DIAMETER 9.3 MM @ 20¡C
RESISTANCE 8.4 OHNS @ 20¡C
7.7 OHMS @ 0¡C
7.1 OHMS @ -20¡C

INSULATION 0.5 MM TEFLON (100 VOLTS/MIL)

278 KG
FAR END MASS 50 AMP HOLLOW CATHODE ASS'Y
(INCLUDING ELECTRONICS & CONTROL) 25 KG

TETHER CONTROLLER ELECTRONICS & MISC. HDWR. 94 KG

(POWER DISSIPATION LOSSES @1% = 2 KW)
ARGON SUPPLY & CONTINGENCY RESERVE 163 KG

TOTAL 4,200 KG

________________________________________________________________

TETHER DYNAMICS CONTROL PASSIVE, IXB PHASING

TETHER CURRENT/P0WER CONTROL DC IMPEDANCE MATCHING
TETHER OUTSIDE DIAMETER 10.3 MM
TETHER BALLISTIC DRAG AREA 206 SQ METERS

DRAG FORCE @ 10
-11KG/M3 12 N .96 KW

(300 KM 1976 USSA-400 KM SOLAR MAX)

I2R LOSSES @ 200 KW 19.25 KW
HOLLOW CATHODE POWER 2.50 KW
IONOSPHERIC LOSS @ 50 AMP 1.25 KW
________

TOTAL PRIMARY LOSSES 23.96 KW

EFFICIENCY ELECTRIC (177 KW NET @ 50 AMP/200KW) 88.5%

OVERALL (201 MECH. TO 177 ELEC. KW) 88.1%

INCLUDING CONTROLLER/POWER PROCESSOR LOSSES @ 1% 2.00 KW

_________

TOTAL (NET POWER OUT 175.0 KW) 25.96 KW

FINAL EFFICIENCY ELECTRIC = 87.5% OVERALL = 87.1%

Figure 4.26 Calculated Performance of an Electromagnetic Tether System

159
4.4.3 Thrusters

As mentioned in the previous two sections, electrodynamic tether systems can be used to generate
thrust or drag. Consider the gravity-gradient-stabilized system in Earth orbit, for example. Its motion
through the geomagnetic field induces an emf across the tether. When the current generated by this emf is
allowed to flow through the tether, a force is exerted on the current (on the tether) by the geomagnetic field
(see Figure 4.27). This force is given by:

→ → → → →
F = ∫ ( I dl ) x B = I ∫ dl x B ;
along length of tether along length of tether

where

→
F = force exerted on the tether by the magnetic field (newtons),

I = tether current (amps),

→
dl = differential element of tether length - a vector pointing in the direction
of positive current flow (m), and
→
B = magnetic field strength (webers/m 2)

160
Figure 4.27 Thrust Generation With An Electrodynamic
Tether System

161
For the special case of a straight tether, this equation simplifies to:

→ → →
F = IL x B ;
where
→
L = tether length - a vector pointing in the direction of positive
current flow (m).

This equation for the electromagnetic force on a straight tether can also be written as:

F = ILB sin θ ;
where
→ →
θ = angle between L and B .

Its maximum value occurs when the tether is perpendicular to the magnetic field.

Depending on the relative orientation of the magnetic field to the tether velocity, this force can have
a component parallel to the velocity and one perpendicular to the velocity. Considering the parallel
(inplane) component, whenever the current induced in the tether by the magnetic field is allowed to flow,
this component of the force always acts to reduce the relative velocity between the tether system. In low
Earth orbit, where the orbital velocity of the tether is greater than the rotational velocity of the geomagnetic
field and they are rotating in the same direction, this force is a drag on the tether. This means that when
electric power is generated by the system for on-board use, it is generated at the expense of orbital energy.
If the system is to maintain its altitude, this loss must be compensated by rockets or other propulsive
means.

When current from an on-board power supply is fed into the tether against the induced emf, the
direction of this force is reversed. This force follows the same equation as before, but now the sign of the
cross product is reversed, and the force becomes propulsive. In this way, the tether can be used as a
thruster. Therefore, the same tether system can be used reversibly, as either an electric generator or as a
thruster (motor). As always, however, there is a price to be paid. The propulsive force is generated at the
expense of on-board electrical power.

It is necessary to distinguish between tether systems orbiting at subsynchronous altitudes, and

those orbiting at altitudes greater than the synchronous altitude, where the sense of the relative velocity
between the satellite and the magnetic field rest frame is reversed (often thought of in terms of a concept
known as the "co-rotating field"). An analogous situation exists in orbits around Jupiter for altitudes
greater than 2.2 Jovian radii from its center (the Jovian synchronous altitude: i.e., the altitude at which the
rotational angular velocity of an orbiting satellite equals the rotational velocity of Jupiter and its magnetic
field). Another analogous situation exists in interplanetary space if a spacecraft moves outward at a speed
of 400 km/s). In such cases, dissipation of the induced electrical current would produce a thrust (not a

162
drag) on the tether. Again, the force acts to bring the relative velocity between the tether and the magnetic
field rest frame to zero. In such cases, feeding current into the tether against the induced emf would
produce a drag. When moving in a direction opposite to the direction of motion of the magnetic field, the
effects would be reversed.

Systems have been proposed to operate reversibly as power and thrust generators (Ref. 4 and 10).
Such systems could provide a number of capabilities. Calculations of the performance of a 200 KW
system is given in figure 4.26.

In addition to the in-plane component, the electromagnetic force on the tether current generally also
has an out-of-plane component (perpendicular to the tether velocity). For an orbiting tether system, the
out-of-plane force component acts to change the orbital inclination, while doing no in-plane mechanical
work on the tether and inducing no emf to oppose the flow of current in the tether. This makes
electrodynamic tethers potentially ideal for orbital plane changes. Unlike rockets, they conserve energy
during orbital plane changes. If the current is constant over a complete orbit, the net effect of this force is
zero (since reversals in the force direction during the orbit cancel each other out). On the other hand, if a
net orbital inclination change is desired, it can be produced by simply reversing the tether current at points
in the orbit where the out-of-plane force reverses its direction, or by allowing a tether current to flow for
only part of an orbit. Attention must be paid to this out-of-plane force when operating a tether alternately
as a generator and thruster, and when operating a tether system which alternately generates and stores
electrical energy. Strategies for using electrodynamic tethers to change orbits are shown in Section 5.0.

Electromagnetic forces also cause the tether to bow and produce torques on the tether system.
These torques cause the system to tilt away from the vertical until the torques are balanced by gravity-
gradient restoring torques. These torques produce in-plane and out-of-plane librations. The natural
frequencies of in-plane and out-of-plane librations are √3 times the orbital frequency and twice the
orbital frequency, respectively. Selective time phasing of the IL x B loading, or modulation of the tether
current, will damp these librations. The out-of-plane librations are more difficult to damp because their
frequency is twice the orbital frequency. Unless care is taken, day/night power generation/storage cycles
(50/50 power cycles) can actively stimulate these librations. Careful timing of tether activities will be
required to control all tether librations. Additional information on electromagnetic libration control issues is
shown also in Section 5.0.

4.4.4 ULF/ELF/VLF Antennas

As discussed in Section 4.4.2, the movement of an Earth-orbiting electrodynamic tether system

through the geomagnetic field gives rise to an induced current in the tether. One side effect of this current
is that as the electrons are emitted from the tether back into the plasma, ULF, ELF, VLF electromagnetic
waves are produced in the ionosphere (see Ref. 11).

In the current loop external to the tether, electrons spiral along the geomagnetic field lines and close
at a lower layer of the ionosphere (see Figure 4.28). This current loop (or so-called "phantom loop") acts

163
as a large ULF, ELF, and VLF antenna. (The phantom loop is shown in Figure 4.29). The
electromagnetic waves generated by this loop should propagate to the Earth's surface, as shown in Figure
4.30. The current flow generating these waves can be that induced by the geomagnetic field or can be
provided by a transmitter on board the spacecraft so that the tether is in part an antenna.

Messages can be transmitted from the tether (antenna) by modulating the waves generated by the
current loop. If the induced current is used to generate these waves, it is modulated by varying a series
impedance or by turning an electron gun or hollow cathode on the lower tether end on and off at the
desired frequency. If a transmitter is used, current is injected into the tether at the desired frequency.

The ULF, ELF, VLF waves produced in the ionosphere will be injected into the magnetosphere
more efficiently than those from existing ground-based, man-made sources. It is believed that the
ionospheric boundary may act as a waveguide, extending the area of effective signal reception far beyond
the "hot spot" (area of highest intensity reception, with an estimated diameter of about 5000 km) shown in
Figure 4.30. If this turns out to be the case, these waves may provide essentially instant worldwide
communications, spreading over the Earth by ducting. Calculations have been performed, predicting that
power levels of the order of 1 W by night and 0.1 W by day can be injected into the Earth-ionosphere
transmission line by a 20-10 km tether with a current of the order of 10 A. Such tether systems would
produce wave frequencies throughout the ULF (3-30 Hz) and ELF bands (30-300 Hz), and even into the
VLF band (about 3000 Hz).

164
 Figure 4.28
Electron Paths in
the Electrodynamic
Tether Generator

165
Figure 4.29 The "Phantom Loop" of the ULF/ELF Tether Antenna

166
 Figure 4.30 Propagation of ULF/ELF/VLF Waves To The Earth's
Surface From An Orbiting Tether Antenna

It should be noted that if the induced tether current is used to power the antenna, orbital energy will
be correspondingly decreased. A means of restoring this orbital energy (such as rocket thrust) will be
required for long missions.

4.4.5 Constellations

As mentioned earlier, electromagnetic forces exerted by the geomagnetic field on the current in
orbiting tethers can be used in conjunction with gravity-gradient forces to stabilize two-dimensional
constellations (see Figure 4.13). The force exerted on a current in a tether is exactly the force described in
Section 4.4.3. The tether currents used in these constellations can be those induced by the geomagnetic
field or those provided by on-board power supplies.

The basic concept is that gravity-gradient forces will provide vertical and overall attitude stability
for the constellation, and electromagnetic forces will provide horizontal and shape stability (see Ref. 1,
p.1-29, and 4, p. 150-203). This is accomplished in the quadrangular configuration by establishing the
current direction in each of the vertical tethers such that the electromagnetic forces on them push the side
arcs horizontally away from each other. Each side arc may be composed of a number of satellites
connected in series by tethers. The current directions for the tethers on each side arc will be the same,

167
providing a consistent outward force. Large masses are placed at the top and bottom juncture points where
the two sides join together. This provides additional stability for the constellation.

168
4.5 REFERENCES

1. Applications of Tethers in Space, Workshop, Williamsburg, Virginia, 15-17 June 1983,

Workshop Proceedings, NASA CP-2364 (Vol. 1), NASA CP-2365 (Vol. 2), March 1985.

2. Beletskii, V. V. and Levin, E. M., "Dynamics of Space Tether Systems," Advances in the
Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 83.

3. Arnold, D. A., "The Behavior of Long Tethers in Space," Journal of the Astronuatical Sciences,
Vol. 35, No. 1, p. 3-18, January-March, 1987.

4. Applications of Tethers in Space, Workshop, Venice, Italy, 15-17 October 1985, Workshop
Proceedings, NASA CP-2422 (Executive Summary, Vol. 1, Vol. 2), 1986.

5. Carroll, J. A., Guidebook for Analysis of Tether Applications, Contract RH4-394049, Martin
Marietta Corporation, Feb. 1985.

6. Pearson, J., "Anchored Lunar Satellites for Cislunar Transportation and Communication," Journal
of the Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 27, No. 1, p. 39-62, Jan.-Mar. 1979.

7. Lorenzini, E. C., "Novel Tether-Connected Two-Dimensional Structures for Low Earth

Orbits," Journal of the Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 36, No. 4, p. 389-405, Oct.-Dec. 1988.

8. Greenwood, D. T., Principles of Dynamics, Prentice Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey,
1965.

9. Tiesenhausen, G. von, ed., "The Roles of Tethers on Space Station," NASA-TM-86519,

NASA/MSFC, Oct. 1985.

10. McCoy, J. E., "Plasma Motor/Generator Reference System Designs for Power and Propulsion,"
AAS 86-229, Int. Conf. 1986.

11. Grossi, M. D., "Spaceborne Long Vertical Wire as a Self-Powered ULF/ELF Radiator," IEEE
Journal of Oceanic Engineering, Vol. OE-9, No. 3, p. 211-213, July 1984.

169
SECTION 5. TETHER DATA

152
5.1 General

This handbook would not be complete without providing the user with specific data and other
information relevant to the analysis of tether applications. To the authors' knowledge, the best summarization
of this data is contained in J. A. Carroll's Guidebook for Analysis of Tether Applications, published in 1985
under contract to the Martin Marietta Corporation. It provides a concise review of those technical areas
which are essential to tether analyses. For the uninitiated, it is the first exposure they should have to ensure
that they understand the broad implications of any application they might consider. From here, they can
explore the many references given in the Bibliography.

The Guidebook is reproduced here in full, except for its bibliography which would be redundant. J. A.
Carroll's introductory remarks and credits are presented below:

This Guidebook is intended as a tool to facilitate initial analyses of proposed

tether applications in space. The guiding philosophy is that at the beginning of
a study effort, a brief analysis of all the common problem areas is far more
useful than a detailed study in any one area. Such analyses can minimize the
waste of resources on elegant but fatally flawed concepts, and can identify the
areas where more effort is needed on concepts which do survive the initial
analyses.

In areas in which hard decisions have had to be made, the Guidebook is:

Broad, rather than deep

Simple, rather than precise
Brief, rather than comprehensive
Illustrative, rather than definitive

Hence the simplified formulas, approximations, and analytical tools included in

the Guidebook should be used only for preliminary analyses. For detailed
analyses, the references with each topic and in the bibliography may be useful.
Note that topics which are important in general but not particularly relevant to
tethered system analysis (e.g., radiation dosages) are not covered.

This Guidebook was presented by the author under subcontract RH4394049

with the Martin Marietta Corporation, as part of their contract NAS8-35499
(Phase II Study of Selected Tether Applications in Space) with the NASA
Marshall Space Flight Center. Some of the material was adapted from
references listed with the various topics, and this assisted the preparation
greatly. Much of the other material evolved or was clarified in discussions
with one or more of the following: Dave Arnold, James Arnold, Ivan Bekey,
Guiseppe Colombo, Milt Contella, Dave Criswell, Don Crouch, Andrew
Cutler, Mark Henley, Don Kessler, Harris Mayer, Jim McCoy, Bill Nobles,
Tom O'Neil, Paul Penzo, Jack Slowey, Georg von Tiesenhausen, and Bill
Thompson. The author is of course responsible for all errors, and would
appreciate being notified of any that are found.

153
5.2 Generic Issues

MAJOR CONSTRAINTS IN MOMENTUM-TRANSFER APPLICATIONS

CONSTRAINT: ORBIT TETHER TETHER TETHER

APPLICATION; BASICS DYNAMICS PROPERTIES OPERATIONS

All types Apside Forces on µmeteoroid Tether recoil

location end masses sensitivity at release

Librating Tether can Facility attitude

go slack & "g"s variable

Spinning High loads Retrieval can

on payload be difficult

Winching High loads Extremely high

on payload power needed

Rendezvous Orbit planes Short launch &

must match capture windows

Multi-stage Dif. nodal Waiting time

regression between stages

High deltaV Gravity Control of Tether mass Retrieval energy;

losses dynamics & lifetime Facility a alt.

MAJOR CONSTRAINTS WITH PERMANENTLY-DEPLOYED TETHERS

CONSTRAINTS: ORBIT TETHER TETHER TETHER

APPLICATIONS: BASICS DYNAMICS PROPERTIES OPERATIONS

All types Aero. drag Libration Degradation, Recoil & orbit

µmeteoroids & changes after
debris impact tether break

Electrodynamic Misc changes Plasma High-voltage

in orbit disturbances insulation

Aerodynamic Tether drag

& heating

Beanstalk Tether mass; Consequences

(Earth) debris impact of failure

Gravity Use:
Hanging Libration- <0.1 gee only,
Spinning Sensitive Docking awkward

154
5.3 Orbit Equations and Data

5.3.1 Orbits and Orbital Perturbations

KEY POINTS Basic orbit nomenclature & equations are needed frequently in following pages. Comparison of
tether & rocket operations requires orbit transfer equations.

The figures and equations at right are a summary of the aspects of orbital mechanics most
relevant to tether applications analysis. For more complete and detailed treatments and
many of the derivations, consult refs. 1-3.

The first equation in the box is known as the Vis Viva formulation, and to the right of it is
the equation for the mean orbital angular rate, n. Much of the analysis of orbit transfer ∆Vs
and tether behavior follows from those two simple equations. Some analyses require a close
attention to specific angular momentum, h, so an expression for h (for compact objects) is
also given here.

In general, six parameters are needed to completely specify an orbit. Various parameter sets
can be used (e.g., 3 position coordinates & 3 velocity vectors). The six parameters listed at
right are commonly used in orbital mechanics. Note that when i=0, Ω becomes
indeterminate (and unnecessary); similarly with ω when e=0. Also, i & Ω are here
referenced to the central body's equator, as is usually done for Low Earth Orbit (LEO). For
high orbits, the ecliptic or other planes are often used. This simplifies calculation of 3rd
body effects.

NOTES The effects of small ∆Vs on near-circular orbits are shown at right. The relative effects are
shown to scale: a ∆V along the velocity vector has a maximum periodic effect 4 times
larger than that of the same, ∆V perpendicular to it (plus a secular effect in θ which the
others don't have). Effects of oblique or consecutive ∆Vs are simply the sum of the
component effects. Note that out-of-plane ∆Vs at a point other than a node also affect Ω.

For large ∆Vs, the calculations are more involved. The perigee and apogee velocities of the
transfer orbit are first calculated from the Vis Viva formulation and the constancy of h.
Then the optimum distribution of plane change between the two ∆Vs can be computed
iteratively, and the required total ∆V found. Typically about 90% of the plane change is
done at GEO.

To find how much a given in-plane tether boost reduces the required rocket ∆V, the full
calculation should be done for both the unassisted and the tether-assisted rocket. This is
necessary because the tether affects not only the perigee velocity, but also the gravity
losses and the LEO/GEO plane change split. Each m/s of tether boost typically reduces the
required rocket boost by 0.89 m/s (for hanging release) to 0.93 m/s (for widely librating
release).

Note that for large plane changes, and large radius-ratio changes even without plane
changes, 3-impulse "bi-elliptic" maneuvers may have the lowest total ∆V. Such maneuvers
involve a boost to near-escape, a small plane and/or perigee-adjusting ∆V at apogee, and an
apogee adjustment (by rocket or aerobrake) at the next perigee. In particular, this may be
the best way to return aerobraking OTVs from GEO to LEO, if adequate time is available.

REFERENCES 1. A. E. Roy, Orbital Motion, Adam Hilger Ltd., Bristol, 1978.

2. Bate, Mueller, & White, Fundamentals of Astrodynamics, Dover Pub., 1971.
3. M. H. Kaplan, Modern Spacecraft Dynamics & Control, John Wiley & Sons, 1976.
155
Orbit & Orbit Transfer Equations

156
5.3.2 Orbital Perturbations

KEY POINTS Differential nodal regression severely limits coplanar rendezvous windows. Apsidal recession
affects STS deboost requirements from elliptical orbits. Third bodies can change the orbit
plane of high-orbit facilities.

The geoid (earth's shape) is roughly that of a hydrostatic-equilibrium oblate ellipsoid, with a
296:297 polar:equatorial radius ratio. There are departures from this shape, but they are
much smaller than the 1:297 oblateness effect and have noticeable effects only on
geosynchronous and other resonant orbits.

The focus here is on oblateness, because it is quite large and because it has large secular
effects on Ω and ω for nearly all orbits. (Oblateness also affects n, but this can usually be
ignored in preliminary analyses.) As shown at right, satellites orbiting an oblate body are
attracted not only to its center but also towards its equator. This force component imposes
a torque on all orbits that cross the equator at an angle, and causes the direction of the
orbital angular momentum vector to regress as shown.

& is largest when i is small, but the plane change associated with a given ∆Ω varies with
Ω
sin(i). Hence the actual plane change rate varies with sin(i)cos(i), or sin(2i), and is highest
near 45°. For near-coplanar rendezvous in LEO, the required out-of-plane ∆V changes by
78sin(2i) m/s for each phasing "lap". This is independent of the altitude difference (to first
order), since phasing & differential nodal regression rates both scale with ∆a. Hence even at
best a rendezvous may require an out-of-plane ∆V of 39 m/s. At other times, out-of-plane
∆Vs of 2sin(i)sin(∆Ω/2)Vcirc ( = up to 2 Vcirc!) are needed.

NOTES The linkage between phasing and nodal regression rates is beneficial in some cases: if an
object is boosted slightly and then allowed to decay until it passes below the boosting object,
the total ∆Ω is nearly identical for both. Hence recapture need not involve any significant
plane change.

Apsidal recession generally has a much less dominant effect on operations, since apsidal
adjustments (particularly of low-e orbits) involve much lower ∆Vs than nodal adjustments.
However, tether payload boosts may often be done from elliptical STS orbits, and perigee
drift may be an issue. For example, OMS deboost requirements from an elliptical STS orbit
are tonnes lower (and payload capability much higher) if perigee is near the landing site
latitude at the end of the mission. Perigee motion relative to day/night variations is also
important for detailed drag calculations, and for electrodynamic day-night energy storage
(where it smears out and limits the eccentricity-pumping effect of a sustained day-night
motor-generator cycle).

Just as torques occur when the central body is non-spherical, there are also torques when the
satellite is non-spherical. These affect the satellite's spin axis and cause it to precess around
the orbital plane at a rate that depends on the satellite's mass distribution and spin rate.

In high orbits, central-body perturbations become less important and 3rd-body effects more
important. In GEO, the main perturbations (~47 m/s/yr) are caused by the moon and sun.
The figure at right shows how to estimate these effects, using the 3rd body orbital plane as
the reference plane.

REFERENCES 1. A. E. Roy, Orbital Motion, Adam Hilger Ltd., Bristol, 1978.

2. Bate, Mueller, & White, Fundamentals of Astrodynamics, Dover Pub., 1971.

157
Orbital Perturbations

158
5.3.3 Aerodynamic Drag

KEY POINTS Tether drag affects tether shape & orbital life; atomic oxygen degrades tethers. Out-of-plane
drag component can induce out-of-plane tether libration. The main value of payload boosting
by tether is the increased orbital life. Unboosted orbital life of space facilities is affected by
tether operations.

The figure at right shows the orbiter trolling a satellite in the atmosphere, as is planned for
the 2nd TSS mission in the late 1980s. The tether drag greatly exceeds that on the end-masses
and should be estimated accurately. The drag includes a small out-of-plane component that
can cause φ-libration.

Tether drag is experienced over a range of altitudes, over which most of the terms in the drag
equation vary: the air density ρ, the airspeed Vrel, and the tether width & angle of attack. In
free-molecular flow, CL is small, and CD (if based on A ⊥) is nearly constant at 2.2. (CD rises
near grazing incidence, but then A⊥ is low.)

Only ρ varies rapidly, but it varies in a way which lends itself to simple approximations.
Empirical formulae have been developed by the author and are shown at right. They give
values that are usually within 25% of ref. 1, which is still regarded as representative for air
density as a function of altitude & exosphere temperature. These estimates hold only for
ρ>lE-14, beyond which helium & hydrogen dominate & the density scale height H increases
rapidly.

NOTES Note that over much of LEO, atomic oxygen is the dominant species. Hyperthermal impact
of atomic oxygen on exposed surfaces can cause rapid degradation, and is a problem in low-
altitude applications of organic-polymer tethers.

The space age began in 1957 at a 200-yr high in sunspot count. A new estimate of mean solar
cycle temperatures (at right, from ref. 2), is much lower than earlier estimates. Mission
planning requires both high & mean estimates for proper analysis. Ref. 2 & papers in the
same volume discuss models now in use.

If the tether length L is <<H, the total tethered system drag can be estimated from the total
A⊥ & the midpoint V & ρ. If L>>H, the top end can be neglected, the bottom calculated
normally, and the tether drag estimated from l.lρbottom * tether diameter * H * V 2 rel, with H &
Vrel evaluated one H above the bottom of the tether. For L between these cases, the drag is
bounded by these cases.

As shown at right, the orbital life of more compact objects (such as might be boosted or
deboosted by tether) can be estimated analytically if Tex is known. For circular orbits with the
same r, Vrel & ρ both vary with i, but these variations tend to compensate & can both be
ignored in first-cut calculations.

The conversion of elliptical to “equal-life” circular orbits is an empirical fit to an unpublished

parametric study done by the author. It applies when apsidal motions relative to the equator
and relative to the diurnal bulge are large over the orbital life; this usually holds in both low &
high-i orbits. For a detailed study of atmospheric drag effects, ref. 3 is still useful.

REFERENCES 1. U.S. Standard Atmosphere Supplements, 1966. ESSA/NASA/USAF, 1966.

2. K. S. W Champion, "Properties of the Mesosphere and Thermosphere and Comparison
with CIRA 72", in The Terrestrial Upper Atmosphere, Champion and Roemer, ed.; Vol 3, #1
of Advances in Space Research, Pergamon, 1983.
159
3. D. G. King-Hele, Theory of Satellite Orbits in an Atmosphere, Butterworths, London,
1964.

160
161
5.3.4 Thermal Balance

KEY POINTS Aerothermal heating of tethers is severe at low altitudes (<120 km). Tether temperature
affects strength, toughness, & electrical conductivity. Extreme thermal cycling may degrade
pultruded composite tethers. “View factors” are also used in refined micrometeoroid risk
calculations.

Preliminary heat transfer calculations in space are often far simpler than typical heat
transfer calculations on the ground, since the complications introduced by convection are
absent. However the absence of the "clamping" effect of large convective couplings to air or
liquids allows very high or low temperatures to be reached, and makes thermal design
important.

At altitudes below about 140 km in LEO, aerodynamic heating is the dominant heat input on
surfaces facing the ram direction. The heating scales with ρ as long as the mean free path λ is
much larger than the object's radius. It is about equal to the energy dissipated in stopping
incident air molecules. In denser air, shock & boundary layers develop. They shield the
surface from the incident flow and make Q& rise slower as ρ increases further. (See ref 1.)

Because tethers are narrow, they can be in free molecular flow even at 100 km, and may
experience more severe heating than the (larger) lower end masses do. Under intense heating
high temperature gradients may occur across non-metallic tethers. These gradients may cause
either overstress or stress relief on the hot side, depending on the sign of the axial thermal
expansion coefficient.

NOTES At higher altitudes the environment is much more benign, but bare metal (low-emittance)
tethers can still reach high temperatures when resistively heated or in the sun, since they
radiate heat poorly. Silica, alumina, or organic coatings >l µm thick can increase emittance
and hence reduce temperatures. The temperature of electrodynamic tethers is important
since their resistance losses (which may be the major system losses) scale roughly with Tabs .

For a good discussion of solar, albedo, and long wave radiation, see ref. 2. The solid geometry
which determines the gains from these sources is simple but subtle, and should be done
carefully. Averaged around a tether, earth view-factors change only slowly with altitude &
attitude, and are near 0.3 in LEO.

Surface property changes can be an issue in long-term applications, due to the effects of
atomic oxygen, UV & high-energy radiation, vacuum, deposition of condensable volatiles
from nearby surfaces, thermal cycling, etc. Hyperthermal atomic oxygen has received
attention only recently, and is now being studied in film, fiber, and coating degradation
experiments on the STS & LDEF.

Continued thermal cycling over a wide range (such as shown at bottom right) may degrade
composite tethers by introducing a maze of micro-cracks. Also, temperature can affect the
strength, stiffness, shape memory, and toughness of tether materials, and hence may affect
tether operations and reliability.

REFERENCES 1. R. N. Cox & L.F. Crabtree, Elements of Hypersonic Aerodynarnics, The English
Universities Press Ltd, London, 1965. See esp. Ch 9, “Low Density Effects”
2. F. S. Johnson, ed., Satellite Environment Handbook, Second Edition, Stanford University
Press, 1965. See chapters on solar & earth thermal radiation.
3. H. C. Hottel, "Radiant Heat Transmission," Chapter 4 of W.H. McAdams, HEAT
TRANSMISSION, 3rd edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1954, pp. 55-125.

162
Thermal Balance

163
5.3.5 Micrometeoroids and Debris

KEY POINTS Micrometeoroids can sever thin tethers & damage tether protection/insulation. Orbiting debris
can sever tethers of any diameter.

At the start of the space age, estimates of meteoroid fluxes varied widely. Earth was thought to
have a dust cloud around it, due to misinterpretation of data such as microphone noise caused
by thermal cycling in spacecraft. By the late 1960s most meteoroids near earth were
recognized to be in heliocentric rather than geocentric orbit. The time-averaged flux is mostly
sporadic, but meteor showers can be dominant during their occurrence.

There is a small difference between LEO and deep-space fluxes, due to the focusing effect of
the earth's gravity (which increases the velocity & flux), and the partial shielding provided by
the earth & "sensible" atmosphere. For a typical meteoroid velocity of 20 km/sec, these
effects combine to make the risk vary as shown at right in LEO, GEO, and beyond. The
picture of a metal plate after hypervelocity impact is adapted from ref. 3.

The estimated frequency of sporadic meteoroids over the range of interest for most tether
applications is shown by the straight line plot at right, which is adapted from ref. 4 & based on
ref. 1. (Ref 1 is still recommended for design purposes.) For masses <lE-6 gm (<0.15 mm diam.
at an assumed density of 0.5), the frequency is lower than an extension of that line, since
several effects clear very small objects from heliocentric orbits in geologically short times.

NOTES Over an increasing range of altitudes and particle sizes in LEO, the main impact hazard is due
not to natural meteoroids but rather to man-made objects. The plots at right, adapted from
refs 4 & 5, show the risks presented by the 5,000 or so objects tracked by NORAD radars (see
ref. 6). A steep “tail” in the 1995 distribution is predicted since it is likely that several debris-
generating impacts will have occurred in LEO before 1995. Such impacts are expected to
involve a 4-40 cm object striking one of the few hundred largest objects and generating
millions of small debris fragments.

Recent optical detection studies which have a size threshold of about 1 cm indicate a
population of about 40,000 objects in LEO. This makes it likely that debris-generating
collisions have already occurred. Studies of residue in small surface pits on the shuttle and other
objects recovered from LEO indicate that they appear to be due to titanium, aluminum, and
paint fragments (perhaps flaked off satellites by micrometeoroid hits). Recovery of the Long
Duration Exposure Facility (LDEF) later this year should improve this database greatly, and
will provide data for LEO exposure area-time products comparable to those in potential long-
duration tether applications.

REFERENCES 1. Meteoroid Environment Model—1969 [Near Earth to Lunar Surface], NASA SP-8013,
March 1969.
2. Meteoroid Environment Model—1970 [Interplanetary and Planetary], NASA SP-8038,
October 1970.
3. Meteoroid Damage Assessment, NASA SP-8042, May 1970. Shows impact effects.
4. D. J. Kessler, "Sources of Orbital Debris and the Projected Environment for Future
Spacecraft", in J. of Spacecraft & Rockets, Vol 18 #4, Jul-Aug 1981.
5. D. J. Kessler, Orbital Debris Environment for Space Station, JSC-20001, 1984.
6. CLASSY Satellite Catalog Compilations. Issued monthly by NORAD/J5YS, Peterson Air
Force Base, CO 80914.

164
Micrometeoroids & Debris

165
5.4 Tether Dynamics and Control

5.4.1 Gravity Gradient Effects

KEY POINTS “Microgee” environments are possible only in small regions (~5 m) of a LEO facility.
Milligee-level gravity is easy to get & adequate for propellant settling, etc.

The figure at right shows the reason for gravity-gradient effects. The long tank-like object is
kept aligned with the local vertical, so that the same end always faces the earth as it orbits
around it. If one climbs from the bottom to the top, the force of gravity gradually decreases
and the centrifugal force due to orbital motion increases. Those forces cancel out only at one
altitude, which is (nearly but not exactly) the altitude of the vehicle's center of mass.

At other locations an object will experience a net force vertically away from the center of
mass (or a net acceleration, if the object is allowed to fall). This net force is referred to as the
"gravity-gradient force." (But note that 1/3 of the net force is actually due to a centrifugal
force gradient!) Exact and approximate formulas for finding the force on an object are given
at right.

The force occurs whether or not a tether is present, and whether or not it is desirable. Very-
low-acceleration environments, which are needed for some types of materials processing and
perhaps for assembling massive structures, are only available over a very limited vertical
extent, as shown at right. Putting a vehicle into a slow retrograde spin can increase the
"height" of this low-gee region, but that then limits the low-gee region's other in-plane
dimension.

NOTES Since gravity gradients in low orbits around various bodies vary with µ/r3 , the gradients are
independent of the size of the body, and linearly dependent on its density. Hence the gradients
are highest (.3-.4 milligee/km) around the inner planets and Earth’s moon, and 60-80% lower
around the outer planets. In higher orbits, the effect decreases rapidly (to 1.6 microgee/km in
GEO).

The relative importance of surface tension and gravity determines how liquids behave in a
tank, and is quantified with the Bond number, Bo =ρar/σ. If B o >10, liquids will settle, but higher
values (Bo =50) are proposed as a conservative design criterion. On the other hand, combining a
small gravity gradient effect (Bo <10) with minimal surface-tension fluid-management hardware
may be more practical than either option by itself. Locating a propellant depot at the end of a
power tower structure might provide an adequate gravity-gradient contribution. If higher
gravity is desired, but without deploying the depot, another option is to deploy an "anchor"
mass on a tether, as shown at right.

Many nominally "zero-gee" operations such as electrophoresis may actually be compatible

with useful levels of gravity (i.e., useful for propellant settling, simplifying hygiene activities,
keeping objects in place at work stations, etc.). This needs to be studied in detail to see what
activities are truly compatible.

REFERENCES 1. D. Arnold, "General Equations of Motion," Appendix A of Investigation of Electrodynamic

Stabilization and Control of Long Orbiting Tethers, Interim Report for Sep 1979—Feb 1981,
Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory., March 1981.
2. K. R Kroll, "Tethered Propellant Resupply Technique for Space Stations," IAF-84-442,
presented at the 35th LAF Congress, Lausanne Switzerland, 1984.

166
Gravity Gradient Effects
5.4.2 Dumbbell Libration in Circular Orbit

KEY POINTS Libration periods are independent of length, but increase at large amplitude. Out-of-plane
libration can be driven by weak forces that have a 2n component. Tethers can go slack if
θmax>65° or φmax>60°.

The two figures at right show the forces on a dumbbell in circular orbit which has been
displaced from the vertical, and show the net torque on the dumbbell, returning it towards
the vertical. The main difference between the two cases is that the centrifugal force vectors
are radial in the in-plane case, and parallel in the out-of-plane case. This causes the net
force in the out-of-plane case to have a smaller axial component and a larger restoring
component, and is why φ-libration has a higher frequency than θ-libration.

Four aspects of this libration behavior deserve notice. First, the restoring forces grow with
the tether length, so libration frequencies are independent of the tether length. Thus tether
systems tend to librate “solidly”, like a dumbbell, rather than with the tether trying to swing
faster than the end-masses as can be seen in the chain of a child's swing. (This does not hold
for very long tethers, since the gravity gradient itself varies.) For low orbits around any of
the inner planets or the moon, libration periods are roughly an hour.

Second, tethered masses would be in free-fall except for the tether, so the sensed
acceleration is always along the tether (as shown by the stick-figures). Third, the axial force
can become negative, for φ>60° or near the ends of retrograde in-plane librations >65.9°.
This may cause problems unless the tether is released, or retrieved at an adequate rate to
prevent slackness.

NOTES And fourth, although θ-libration is not close to resonance with any significant driving
force, φ-libration is in resonance with several, such as out-of-plane components of
aerodynamic forces (in non-equatorial orbits that see different air density in northward and
southward passes) or electrodynamic forces (if tether currents varying at the orbital
frequency are used). The frequency droop at large amplitudes (shown at right) sets a finite
limit to the effects of weak but persistent forces, but this limit is quite high in most cases.

The equations given at right are for an essentially one-dimensional structure, with one
principal moment of inertia far smaller than the other two: A<<B<C. If A is comparable to
B & C, then the θ-restoring force shrinks with (B-A)/C, and the θ-libration frequency by
Sqrt((B-A)/C). Another limitation is that a coupling between φ & θ behavior (see ref. 1) has
been left out. This coupling is caused by the variation of end-mass altitudes twice in each φ-
libration. This induces Coriolis accelerations that affect θ. This coupling is often
unimportant, since 4n is far from resonance with 1.73n.

Libration is referenced to the local vertical, and when a dumbbell is in an eccentric orbit,
variations in the orbital rate cause librations which in turn exert periodic torques on an
initially uniformly-rotating object. In highly eccentric orbits this can soon induce tumbling.2

REFERENCES 1. D. Arnold, "General Equations of Motion," Appendix A of Investigation of

Electrodynamic Stabilization and Control of Long Orbiting Tethers, Interim Report for Sep
1979—Feb 1981, Smithsonian Astrophysical. Observatory., March 1981.
2. P.A. Swan, "Dynamics & Control of Tethers in Elliptical Orbits," IAF-84-361, presented
at the 35th IAF Congress, Lausanne, Switzerland, October 1984.

168
Dumbbell Libration in Circular Orbit

169
5.4.3 Tether Control Strategies

KEY POINTS Open-loop control is adequate for deployment; full retrieval requires feedback Tension laws
can control θ & φ-libration plus tether oscillations. Many other options exist for libration,
oscillation, & final retrieval control.

The table at right shows half a dozen distinct ways in which one or more aspects of tethered
system behavior can be controlled. In general, anything which can affect system behavior
(and possibly cause control problems) can be part of the solution, if it itself can be
controlled without introducing other problems.

Thus, for example, stiff tethers have sometimes been considered undesirable, because the
stiffness competes with the weak gravity-gradient forces near the end of retrieval. However,
if the final section of tether is stiff AND nearly straight when stress-free (rather than pig-
tail shaped), then "springy beam" control laws using a steerable boom tip might supplement
or replace other laws near the end of retrieval. A movable boom has much the same effect
as a stiff tether & steerable boom tip, since it allows the force vector to be adjusted.

NOTES The basic concepts behind tension-control laws are shown at right. Libration damping is
done by paying out tether when the tension is greater than usual and retrieving it at other
times. This absorbs energy from the libration. As shown on the previous page, in-plane
libration causes large variations in tension (due to the Coriolis effect), so “yoyo” maneuvers
can damp in-plane librations quickly. Such yoyo maneuvers can be superimposed on
deployment and retrieval, to allow large length changes (>4:1) plus large in-plane libration
damping (or initiation) in less than one orbit, as proposed by Swet.1

Retrieval laws developed for the TSS require more time than Ref. 1, because they also
include damping of out-of-plane libration built up during station keeping. Rupp developed
the first TSS control law in 1975;2 much of the work since then is reviewed in (3). Recent
TSS control concepts combine tension and thrust control laws, with pure tension control
serving as a backup in case of thruster failure.4 Axial thrusters raise tether tension when the
tether is short, while others control yaw & damp out-of-plane libration to allow faster
retrieval.

A novel concept which in essence eliminates the final low-tension phase of retrieval is to
have the end mass climb up the tether. 5 Since the tether itself remains deployed, its
contribution to gravity-gradient forces and stabilization remains. The practicality of this
will vary with the application.

REFERENCES 1. C. J. Swet, "Method for Deploying and Stabilizing Orbiting Structures",U.S. Patent
#3,532,298, October 6, 1970.
2. C. C. Rupp, A Tether Tension Control Law for Tether Subsatellites Deployed Along
Local Vertical, NASA TM X-64963, MSFC, September 1, 1975.
3. V. J. Modi, Geng Chang-Fu, A.R Misra, and Da Ming Xu, "On the Control of the Space
Shuttle Based Tethered Systems," Acta Astronautica, Vol. 9, No. 6-7, pp. 437-443, 1982.
4. A. K. Banerjee and T.R. Kane, "Tethered Satellite Retrieval with Thruster Augmented
Control," AIAA 82-1-21, presented at the AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Conference, San
Diego, Calif., 1982.
5. T. R. Kane, "A New Method for the Retrieval of the Shuttle-Based Tethered Satellite," J.
of the Astronaut. Sci., Vol 32, No. 3, July-Sept. 1984.

170
Tether Control Strategies

171
5.4.4 Momentum Transfer Without Release

KEY POINTS Tethers merely redistribute angular momentum; they do not create it. Changes in tether
length, libration, and spin all redistribute momentum. Momentum transfer out-of-plane or
in deep space is possible but awkward.

The two figures at right show two different tether deployment (and retrieval) techniques. In
both cases, the initial deployment (which is not shown) is done with RCS burns or a long
boom. In the case at left, the tether is paid out under tension slightly less than the
equilibrium tension level for that tether length. The tether is slightly tilted away from the
vertical during deployment, and librates slightly after deployment is complete.

In the other case, after the initial near-vertical separation (to about 2% of the full tether
length), the two end masses are allowed to drift apart in near-free-fall, with very low but
controlled tension on the tether. Just under one orbit later, the tether is almost all deployed
and the range rate decreases to a minimum (due to orbital mechanics). RCS burns or tether
braking are used to cushion the end of deployment and prevent end mass recoil. Then the
tether system begins a large-amplitude prograde swing towards the vertical.

NOTES In both cases, the angular momentum transferred from one mass to the other is simply, as
stated in the box, the integral over time of the radius times the horizontal component of
tether tension. In one case, transfer occurs mainly during deployment; in the other, mainly
during the libration after deployment. In each case, momentum transfer is greatest when the
tether is vertical, since the horizontal component of tether tension changes sign then.

An intermediate strategy—deployment under moderate tension—has also been investigated.

However, this technique results in very high deployment velocities and large rotating
masses. It also requires powerful brakes and a more massive tether than required with the
other two techniques.

As discussed under Tether Control Strategies, changing a tether's length in resonance with
variations in tether tension allows pumping or damping of libration or even spin. Due to
Coriolis forces, in-plane libration and spin cause far larger tension variations than out-of-
plane libration or spin, so in-plane behavior is far easier to adjust than out-of-plane
behavior. Neglecting any parasitic losses in tether hysteresis & the reel motor, the net
energy needed to induce a given libration or spin is simply the system's spin kinetic energy
relative to the local vertical, when the system passes through the vertical.

Two momentum transfer techniques which appear applicable for in-plane, out-of-plane, or
deep-space use are shown at right. The winching operation can use lighter tethers than
other tethered-momentum-transfer techniques, but requires a very powerful deployer motor.
The tangential ∆V simply prevents a collision.

The spin-up operation (proposed by Harris Mayer) is similar to the winching operation. It
uses a larger tangential ∆V, a tether with straight and tapered sections, and a small motor.
Retrieval speeds up the spin by a factor of 1/L 2 . Surprisingly, the long tapered section of
tether can be less than half as massive as the short straight section that remains deployed
after spin-up.

REFERENCES 1. J. Tschirgi, "Tether-Deployed SSUS-A, Report on NASA Contract NAS8-32842,

McDonnell Douglas, April 1984.

172
Momentum Transfer

173
5.4.5 Orbit Transfer by Release or Capture

KEY POINTS The achievable orbit change scales with the tether length (as long as ∆r<< r). Retrograde-
libration releases are inefficient, but allow concentric orbits. Apogee & perigee boosts have
different values in different applications. Tethered capture can be seen as a time-reversal of
a tether release operation.

The figures to the right show the size of the orbit changes caused by various tether
operations. When released from a vertical tether, the end masses are obviously one tether
length apart in altitude. The altitude difference 1/2 orbit later, ∆rπ , varies with the
operation but is usually far larger. The linear relationship shown becomes inaccurate when
∆r approaches r. Tethered plane changes are generally limited to a few degrees and are not
covered here.

Tether release leaves the center-of-mass radius at each phase angle roughly unchanged: if
the upper mass is heavier, then it will rise less than the lower mass falls, and vice-versa.
Note that the libration amplitude, θmax, is taken as positive during prograde libration and
negative during retrograde libration. Hence retrograde libration results in ∆r < 7L. In
particular, the pre-release & post-release orbits will all be concentric if θmax = -60°. But
since methods of causing -60° librations usually involve +60° librations (which allow much
larger boosts by the same tether), prograde releases may usually be preferable unless
concentric orbits are needed or other constraints enter in.

NOTES The relative tether length, mass, peak tension, and energy absorbed by the deployer brake
during deployment as a function of (prograde) libration angle are all shown in the plot at
right. Libration has a large effect on brake energy. This may be important when retrieval of
a long tether is required, after release of a payload or after tethered-capture of a free-flying
payload.

The double boost-to-escape operation at right was proposed by A. Cutler. It is shown simply
as an example that even though momentum transfer is strictly a "zero sum game", a
tethered release operation can be a “WIN-win game” (a large win & a small one). The small
win on the deboost-end of the tether is due to the reduced gravity losses 1/2 orbit after
release, which more than compensate for the deboost itself. Another example is that
deboosting the shuttle from a space station can reduce both STS-deboost & station-reboost
requirements.

Rendezvous of a spacecraft with the end of a tether may appear ambitious, but with precise
relative-navigation data from GPS (the Global Positioning System) it may not be difficulty
The relative trajectories required are simply a time-reversal of relative trajectories that
occur after tether release. Approach to a hanging-tether rendezvous is shown at right.
Prompt capture is needed with this technique: if capture is not achieved within a few
minutes, one should shift to normal free-fall techniques. Tethered capture has large benefits
in safety (remoteness) and operations (no plume impingement; large fuel savings). The
main hazard is collision, due to undetected navigation or tether failure.

REFERENCES 1. G. Colombo, "Orbital Transfer & Release of Tethered Payloads," SAO report on NASA
Contract NAS8-33691, March 1983.
2. W.D. Kelly, "Delivery and Disposal of a Space Shuttle External Tank to Low Earth
Orbit," J. of the Astronaut. Sci., Vol. 32, No. 3, July-Sept 1984.
3. J.A. Carroll, "Tether-Mediated Rendezvous," report to Martin Marietta on Task 3 of
contract RH3-393855, March 1984.
4. J.A. Carroll, "Tether Applications in Space Transportation, IAF 84-438, at the 35th IAF
Congress, Oct 1984. To be published in ACTA ASTRONAUTICA.

174
Orbit Transfer by Tethered Release or Capture

175
5.4.6 Energy and Angular Momentum Balance

KEY POINTS Tether operations cause higher-order repartitions of energy & angular momentum. First-
order approximations that neglect these effects may cause large errors. Extremely long
systems have strange properties such as positive orbital energy.

The question and answer at right are deceptively simple. The extent to which this is so, and
the bizarre effects which occur in extreme cases, can be seen in the 3 graphs at right. At
top, deploying & retrieving two masses on a very long massless tether changes not only the
top & bottom orbital radii but also that of the CM. In addition, the free-fall location drops
below the CM. Other key parameter changes under the same conditions are plotted
underneath.

Note that when the tether length exceeds about 30% of the original orbital radius, the entire
system lies below the original altitude. Also, at a radius ratio near 1.95:1, the maximum
tether length compatible with a circular orbit is reached. At greater lengths (and the initial
amount of angular momentum), no circular orbit is possible at any altitude.

Tether retrieval at the maximum-length point can cause the system to either rise or drop,
depending on the system state at that time. If it continues to drop, there is a rapid rise in
tether tension, and the total work done by the deployer quickly becomes positive. This
energy input eventually becomes large enough (at 2.89:1) to even make the total system
energy positive. The system is unstable beyond this point: any small disturbance will grow
and can cause the tether system to escape from the body it was orbiting. (See ref. 2.)
NOTES
The case shown is rather extreme: except for orbits around small bodies such as asteroids,
tethers either will be far shorter than the orbital radius, or will greatly outweigh the end
masses. Either change greatly reduces the size of the effects shown. The effects on arbitrary
structures can be calculated using the equations listed at right, which are based on a
generalization of the concept of "moments" of the vertical mass distribution. Changes in
tether length or mass distribution leave h unchanged, so other parameters (including rcm, n,
and E) must change. (For short tethers, the changes scale roughly with the square of the
system's radius of gyration.) In many cases different conditions are most easily compared by
first finding the orbital radius that the system would have if its length were reduced to 0, rLt
= 0.

The mechanism that repartitions energy and angular momentum is that length changes
cause temporary system displacements from the vertical. This causes both torques and net
tangential forces on the system, which can be seen by calculating the exact net forces and
couples for a non-vertical dumbbell. The same effect occurs on a periodic basis with
librating dumbbells, causing the orbital trajectory to depart slightly from an elliptical shape.

Other topics which are beyond the scope of this guidebook but whose existence should be
noted are: eccentricity changes due to deployment, orbit changes due to resonant spin/orbit
coupling, and effects of 2- & 3-dimensional structures.

REFERENCES 1. G. Colombo, M. Grossi, D. Arnold, & M. Martinez-Sanchez, "Orbital Transfer and

Release of Tethered Payloads," continuation of NAS8-33691, final report for the period
Sep 1979—Feb 1983, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, March 1983. (In particular,
see the table on page 21.)
2. D. Arnold, "Study of an Orbiting Tethered Dumbbell System Having Positive Orbital
Energy," addendum to final report on NAS8-35497, SAO, Feb 1985.

176
Energy & Momentum Balance

177
5.5 Tether Material Consideration
5.5.1 Tether Strength and Mass
KEY POINTS Tether strength/weight ratio constrains performance in ambitious operations. Required
tether mass is easily derivable from deltaV and payload mass.

Usable specific strength can be expressed in various ways. Three ways are shown at right. Vc,
Lc, and L 1g are here defined in terms of a typical design stress (new/m 2 ) rather than the
(higher) ultimate stress. Including the safety factor here streamlines the subsequent
performance calculationsv Higher safety factors are needed with non-metals than with
metals since non-metals are often more variable in their properties, brittle, abrasion-
sensitive, and/or creep-sensitive. A safety factor of 4 (based on short-term fiber strength) is
typical for Kevlar, but the most appropriate safety factor will vary with the applicatiol;

The "characteristic velocity," Vc, is the most useful parameter in tetherboost calculations,
because the tether mass can be calculated directly from ∆V/Vc, independently of the orbit,
and nearly independently of the operation. The table at the bottom, which lists
tether/rocket combinations that have the lowest lifesycle mass requirements, holds
whenever kVc=1 km/sec & Isp =350 sec.

The characteristic length L c is useful in hanging-tether calculations. It varies with the

orbital rate n. (The simple calculation given assumes L<<r; if this is not true, l/r effects
enter in, and calculations such as those used in refs 3-5 must be used.) The safe 1-gee length
L1g is mainly useful in terrestrial applications, but is included since specific strength is often
quoted this way. (Note that Vc and Lc vary with Sqrt(strength), and L1g directly with
strength).

NOTES The specific modulus is of interest because it determines the speed of sound in the tether
(C=the speed of longitudinal waves), the strain under design load (∆L/L={Vc2 /C}2 ), & the
recoil speed after failure under design load (= Vc2 /C).

Tether mass calculations are best done by considering each end of the tether separately. If
Mpl >>Mp2 , then M t1 can be neglected in preliminary calculations.

Du Pont's Kevlar is the highest-specifiestrength fiber commercially available. Current RND

efforts on high-performance polymers indicate that polyester can exhibit nearly twice the
strength of Kevlar.2 Two fiber producers have already announced plans to produce polymers
with twice the specific strength of Kevlar.

In the long run, the potential may be greater with inorganic fibers like SiC & graphite. Refs.
3-5 focus on the requirements of "space elevators." They discuss laboratory tests of single-
crystal fibers and suggest that 10-fold improvements in specific strength (or 3-fold in Vc &
Lc) are conceivable.

REFERENCES 1. “Characteristics and Uses of Kevlar 49 Aramid High Modulus Organic Fiber” available
from Du Pont's Textile Fibers Department, 1978.
2. G. Graff, “Superstrong Plastics Challenge Metals,” High Technology magazine, February
1985, pp. 62-63.
3 J. Isaacs, H. Bradner, G. Backus, and A.Vine, "Satellite Elongation into a True
"Skyhook"; a letter to Science, Vol. 151, pp. 682-683, Feb 11, 1966.
4. J. Pearson, "The Orbital Tower: a Spacecraft Launcher Using the Earth's Rotational
Energy," Acta Astronautica, Vol.2, pp. 785-799, Pergamon, 1975.
5. H. Moravec, "A Non-Synchronous Orbital Skyhook," J. of the Astronautical Sciences,
Vol. YXV, No. 4, pp. 307-322, Oct-Dec 1977.

178
Specific Strength and Required Tether Mass

179
5.5.2 Tether Impact Hazards
KEY POINTS Micrometeoroids can sever thin tethers & damage tether protection/insulation. Orbiting
debris (or other tethers) can sever tethers of any diameter. Debris could impact an Earth-
based "Space Elevator" over once per year.

Sporadic micrometeoroids are usually assumed to have an typical density of about .5 and a
typical impact velocity in LEO of approximately 20 km/sec. l At impact speeds above the
speed of sound, solids become compressible and the impact shock wave has effects like
those of an explosion. For this reason, the risk curve assumes that if the EDGE of an
adequately large meteoroid comes close enough to the center of the tether (within 45° or
.35 Dt), failure will result.

Experiments done by Martin Marietta on TSS candidate materials have used glass projectiles
fired at 6.5 km/sec, below the (axial) speed of sound in Kevlar. Two damaged tethers from
those tests are shown at right. The scaling law used (ρ0.5 V0.67 ) indicates that this is
representative of orbital conditions, but that law (used for impacts on sheet metal) may not
apply to braided fibers.

For tethers much thicker than 10 mm or so (depending on altitude), the risk does not go
down much as D t increases, because even though the micrometeoroid risk still decreases, the
debris risk (which INCREASES slightly with Dt) begins to dominate. As with
micrometeoroids, the tether is assumed to fail if any part of the debris passes within 0.35 Dt
of the center of the tether.

NOTES The debris risk at a given altitude varies with the total debris width at that altitude. This was
estimated from 1983 CLASSY radar cross-section (RCS) data, by simply assuming that W =
Sqrt(RCS) and summing Sqrt(RCS) over all tracked objects in LEO.6 This underestimates W
for objects with appendages, and over-estimates it for non-librating elongated objects
without appendages.

CLASSY RCS data are expected to be accurate for RCS > 7 m2 . The 700 objects with RCS >
7 m 2 account for 3 km of the total 5 km width, so errors with smaller objects are not
critical. Small untracked objects may not add greatly to the total risk: 40,000 objects
averaging 2 cm wide would increase the risk to a l-cm tether by only 20%. W was assumed
independent of altitude, so the distribution of risk with altitude could be estimated by simply
scaling Figure 1 from Ref. 4.

As shown at right, debris impact with a space elevator could be expected more than once
per year at current debris populations. The relative density at 0° latitude was estimated from
data on pp. 162-163 of ref. 6.

Similar calculations can be made for two tethers in different orbits at the same altitude. If at
least one is spinning or widely-librating, the mutual risks can exceed 0.1 cut/km .yr. This
makes "tether traffic control" essential.

REFERENCES 1. Meteoroid Environment Model—1969 [Near Earth to Lunar Surface], NASA SP-8013,
March 1969.
2. Meteoroid Environment Model—1970 [Interplanetary and Planetary], NASA SP-8038,
October 1970.
3. Meteoroid Damage Assessment, NASA SP-8042, May 1970. (Shows impact effects)
4. D. J. Kessler, "Sources of Orbital Debris and the Projected Environment for Future
Spacecraft", in J. of Spacecraft & Rockets, Vol 18 #4, Jul-Aug 1981.
5. D. J. Kessler, Orbital Debris Environment for Space Station, JSC-20001, 1984.
6. CLASSY Satellite Catalog Compilations as of 1 Jan 1983, NORAD/J5YS, 1983.

180
Impact Hazards for Tethers

181
5.6 Electrodynamic Tethers
5.6.1 Interactions with Earth's Magnetic Field and Plasma
KEY POINTS Tether (& other) resistance can limit the output of electrodynamic tethers. Electron
collection methods & effectiveness are important—and uncertain.

Since the publication of ref. l, 20 years ago, electrodynamic tether proposals and concepts
have been a frequent source of controversy, mainly in these areas:
1. What plasma instabilities can be excited by the current?
2. What is the current capacity of the plasma return loop?
3. What is the best way to collect electrons from the plasma?
The first Tethered Satellite mission may do much to answer these questions. The discussion
below and graphics at right merely seek to introduce them.

The current flowing through an electrodynamic tether is returned in the surrounding plasma.
This involves electron emission, conduction along geomagnetic field lines down to the
lower ionosphere, cross-field conduction by collision with neutral atoms, and return along
other field lines.

The tether current causes a force on the tether (and on the field) perpendicular to both the
field and the tether (horizontal, if the tether is vertical). Motion of the tether through the
geomagnetic field causes an EMF in the tether. This allows the tether to act as a generator,
motor, or self-powered ultra-low-frequency broadcast antenna.2 The motion also causes
each region of plasma to experience only a short pulse of current, much as in a commutated
motor.

NOTES Based on experience with charge neutralization of spacecraft in high orbit, it has been
proposed that electrons be collected by emitting a neutral plasma from the end of the
tether, to allow local cross-field conduction.3 In GEO, the geomagnetic field traps a plasma
in the vicinity of the spacecraft, and "escape" along field lines may not affect its utility.
This may also hold in high-inclination orbits in LEO. But in low inclinations in LEO, any
emitted plasma might be promptly wiped away by the rapid motion across field lines.

A passive collector such as a balloon has high aerodynamic drag, but a end-on sail can have
an order of magnitude less drag. The electron-collection sketch at bottom right is based on a
preliminary analysis by W. Thompson. 5 This analysis suggests that a current moderately
higher than the electron thermal current ( =Ne * ~200 km/sec) might be collected on a
surface normal to the field. This is because collecting electrons requires that most ions be
reflected away from the collection region as it moves forward. This pre-heats and densifies
the plasma ahead of the collector. The voltage required for collection is just the voltage
needed to repel most of the ions, about 12 V.

REFERENCES 1. S. D. Drell, H. M. Foley, & M. A. Ruderman, "Drag and Propulsion of Large Satellites in
the Ionosphere: An Alfven Propulsion Engine in Space," J. Of Geophys. Res., Vol. 70, No.
13, pp. 3131-3145, July 1965.
2. M. Grossi, "A ULF Dipole Antenna on a Spaceborne Platform of the PPEPL Class,"
Report on NASA Contract NAS8-28203, May 1973.
3. R. D. Moore, "The Geomagnetic Thruster—A High Performance "Alfven Wave"
Propulsion System Utilizing Plasma Contacts," ALGA Paper No. 66-257.
4. S. T. Wu, ed., University of Alabama at Huntsville/NASA Workshop on The Uses of a
Tethered Satellite System, Summary Papers, Huntsville AL, 1978. See papers by M. Grossi
et al, R. Williamson et al., and N. Stone.
5. W. Thompson, "Electrodynamic Properties of a Conducting Tether," Final Report to Martin
Marietta Corp. on Task 4 of Contract RH3-393855, Dec. 1983.

182
Electrodynamic Tether Principles

183
5.6.2 Electrodynamic Orbit Changes

KEY POINTS Electrodynamic tether use will affect the orbit—whether desired or not. Station keeping
and/or large orbit changes without propellant use are possible.

The offset dipole approximation shown at right is only a first approximation to the
geomagnetic field: harmonic analyses of the field give higher-order coefficients up to 20%
as large as the fundamental term. Ref. 1 contains computerized models suitable for use in
detailed electrodynamic studies.

The geomagnetic field weakens rapidly as one moves into higher orbits, and becomes
seriously distorted by solar wind pressure beyond GEO. However, ohmic losses in a tether
are already significant in LEO, so electrodynamic tethers are mainly useful in low orbits
where such distortions are not significant.

As the earth rotates, the geomagnetic field generated within it rotates also, and the
geomagnetic radius and latitude of a point in inertial space vary over the day. If a
maneuvering strategy which repeats itself each orbit is used (necessary unless the spacecraft
has large diurnal power storage capacity), then the average effect, as shown at right, will be
a due east thrust vector.

Variations in geomagnetic latitude (and thus in Bh ) cancel out variations in the component
of flight motion perpendicular to the field, so these variations do not cause large voltage
variations in high-inclination orbits. (Note that the relevant motion is motion relative to a
rotating earth.) Out-of-plane libration, variations in geomagnetic radius, and diurnal
variation of the "geomagnetic inclination" of an orbit can all cause voltage variations. Peak
EMFs (which drive hardware design) may approach 400 V/km.

NOTES However these variations need not affect the thrust much if a spacecraft has a variable-
voltage power supply: neglecting variations in parasitic power, constant power investment
in a circular orbit has to give constant in-plane thrust. The out-of-plane thrust is provided
"free" (whether desired or not). Average voltage & thrust equations for vertical tethers are
shown at right.

The table shows how to change all six orbital elements separately or together. Other
strategies are also possible. Their effects can be calculated from the integrals listed. For
orbits within 11° of polar or equatorial, diurnally-varying strategies become more desirable.
Computing their effects requires using the varying geomagnetic inclination instead of i (&
moving it inside the integral). Note that the “DC” orbit-boosting strategy also affects i.
This can be canceled out by superimposing a -2 Cos(2φ) current on the DC current.

As discussed under Electrodynamic Libration Control Issues, eccentricity and apside changes
can strongly stimulate φ-libration unless the spacecraft center of mass is near the center of
the tether. Other maneuvers should not do this, but this should be checked using high-
fidelity geomagnetic field models.

REFERENCES 1. E. G. Stassinopoulos & G. D. Mead, ALLMAG, GDALMG, LINMA:Computer Programs

for Geomagnetic Field & Field-Line Calculations, Feb. 1972, NASA Goddard.
2. R. D. Moore, "The Geomagnetic Thruster—A High Performance "Alfven Wave"
Propulsion System Utilizing Plasma Contacts," AIAA Paper No. 66-257.
3. H. Alfven, "Spacecraft Propulsion; New Methods," Science, Vol. 176, 14 Apr 1972, pp.
167-168.

184
Electrodynamic Orbit Changes

185
5.6.3 Tether Shape and Libration Control

KEY POINTS Properly controlled AC components can be used to control θ and φ-libration. Solar-energy
storage and e or ω changes strongly stimulate φ-libration. AC currents other than 1 &
3/orbit should not affect φ-libration much.

The maneuvering strategies on the previous page have assumed that electrodynamic tethers
will stay vertical. However, as shown at right, the distributed force on the tether causes
bowing, and that bowing is what allows net momentum transfer to the attached masses.
Note that net momentum can be transferred to the system even if the wire is bowed the
wrong way (as when the current is suddenly reversed); momentum transferred to the wire
gets to the masses later.

This figure also illustrates two other issues:

1. Bowing of the tether causes it to cross fewer field lines.
2. Unequal end masses and uniform forces cause overall torques & tilting.

The bowing causes the tether to provide less thrust while dissipating the same parasitic
power. The net force on the system is the same as if the tether were straight but in a
slightly weaker magnetic field.

The torque on the system causes it to tilt away from the vertical, until the torque is
balanced by gravity-gradient restoring torques. For a given system mass and power input,
disturbing torques vary with L and restoring torques with L2 , so longer systems can tolerate
higher power. The mass distribution also affects power-handling capability, as seen in the
sequence at top right.

NOTES Modulating the tether current modulates any electrodynamic torques. Current modulation at
1.73 n can be used to control in-plane libration. Out-of-plane torques can also be modulated,
but another control logic is required. This is because the once-per-orbit variation in out-of-
plane thrust direction makes a current with frequency F (in cycles per orbit) cause out-of-
plane forces and torques with frequencies of F-1 and F+1, as shown in the Fourier analysis at
bottom right. Hence φ libration control (F=2) requires properly phased F=1 or F=3 currents.
Higher frequencies can damp odd harmonics of any tether bowing oscillations. Control of
both in- & out-of-plane oscillations may be possible since they have the same frequencies
and thus require different currents.

Applications that require significant F=1 components for other reasons can cause problems.
Four such strategies are shown at right. Sin & Cos controls allow adjustment of e or ω. The
two "Sign of ..." laws allow constant power storage over 2/3 of each orbit and recovery the
rest of the orbit. These laws would be useful for storing photovoltaic output for use during
dark periods.

These strategies drive out-of-plane libration (unless the center of mass is at the center of
the tether). The libration frequency decreases at large amplitudes, so if the system is not
driven too strongly, it should settle into a finite-but-large-amplitude phase-locked loop.
This may be unacceptable in some applications, due to resulting variations in gravity or
tether EMF. In some cases, such as eccentricity changes, adding a F=3 component might
cancel the undesired effect of an F=1 current while keeping the desired effect.

REFERENCE 1. G. Colombo, M. Grossi, M. Dobrowolny, and D. Arnold, Investigation of Electrodynamic

Stabilization & Control of Long Orbiting Tethers, Interim Report on Contract NAS8-
33691, March 1981, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory.

186
Electrodynamic Libration Control Issues

187
This page intentionally left blank.
188
SECTION 6.0 SPACE SCIENCE AND TETHERS

187
6.1 Overview

Some scientific applications of tethers have been presented already in other sections
of this handbook (see section 3 and 4). In this section we will illustrate the role that tethers
can play in the future advancement of space science.We hope that this section will grow in
the next editions.

According to the Non-advocate Tether Systems Applications Review (1993), chaired

by Dr. M. Greenfield (see “contacts” Section), “...Space tether technology has the near-term
potential to meet a broad range of science and technological aspects. The unique capabilities
of tether technology enable the aquisition of science otherwise not achievable and can
provide concepts for space applications...”. Copies of report can be obtained either from the
chairman or from the editors.

Space research with tethers has emphasized two particular applications: 1) Reaching
otherwise unaccessible flight regions with downward deployed tethers; 2) Active
experimentation with the surrounding plasma.

A good example of the effort carried on by the scientific community is the the
workshop held in Ann Harbor, Michigan in July 1994. Copies of the Executive Summary can
be obtained by Prof. B. Gilchrist (see “contacts” Section). The focus of this workshop was on
how Ionospheric-Thermospheric-Mesospheric (ITM) Science can benefit from spaceborne
tethers. NASA’s sponsored TIMED mission promises to add substantially to the knowledge of
the global response of the ITM region.
A multi -mass tether system could add many “in-situ” data on the effects of small
scale spatial structures and its interactions (see “Applications” Section),. As the reports
quotes “... Just as the advancement of remote sensing technology enabled the TIMED
mission to be conceived, the ability of tethered payloads in space with spatial separations
ranging for 1 Km to 100 km will enable a program of in-situ multiprobe diagnostics of the
ITM region to be undertaken.”. The workshop identified the following areas that would
benefit from tethered spacecraft:

• Magnetospheric-Ionospheric coupling: Energy dissipation and configuration of three

dimensional high latitude current systems.

• Effects of plasma structureson large and small scale electrodynamics.

• Ion-neutral momentum and energyexchange at different spatial scales.

• Momentum and energy transport processes by gravity waves.

• Thermospheric cooling (energy loss) through radiative emissions.

• The role of electromagnetic and electrostatic waves in energy transfer processes.

• The generation and flow of electrical currents in the ITM region

188
 A task group chaired by prof. Heelis followed up the objectives laid out by the
Michigan Workshop. The key science questions to be answered from a series of “in-situ”
tether-aided observations in the lower thermosphere, highlighted significant advances as:

• Determination of the effective scales over which polarization electric fields are generated
and how they map along the magnetic field lines.

• Determination of the wind effectivness in producing polarization fields and driving field-
aligned currents.

• Identification of the type winds responsible for conductivity variations and those
responsible for electric field generation.

• Assessment of gravity wave generators and of possible seed mechanism for F-region
plasma instabilities.

• Assessment of the relecvance of thermospheric cooling to global change and impovment

of prediction of the future physical characteristics in the thermosphere, mesosphere and
stratosphere.

• Identification of the response of the lower ionosphere-thermosphere to large scale

weather systems and transient phenomena associated with lightning.

The measurements that could address the above questions are listed in the following table.

Parameter Dynamic Range Accuracy Resolution Sample Interval

Neutral <+ 10% and ∆M/M =1 at
Atmospheric 10 5 -10 11 cm -3 smaller for M=30 <4 Km
comp. major species 5%
Neutral Wind -500 to 500 m/s + 10% 1 m/s <4 Km
Vector
Ion 1 to 10 5 cm -3 + 10% ∆M/M =1 <4 Km Comp.
Composition at M=16 <500 m Total
1%
Ion Drift -2 to +2 Km/s + 10% 1 m/s <500 m
Velocity vector
Ion/Electron/ 300 to 3000 K + 10% 50 K <4 Km
Neutral Temp.
Electric field -200 to +200 + 10% 0.05 mV/m
Vector d.c. mV/m <4 Km
Current Density/ -65 to +65 KnT + 0.1% 0.01%
Magnetic field <1 Km
FUV Imaging 10 R to 50 KR 0.5% N/A
<1 Km
Energetic 10 eV to 30 KeV + 5% N/A <4 Km
Particles 10 7 to 10 10 30 deg pitch
cm -2 s-1 sr--1 eV-1 angle
IR Emissions 2x10 -9 to 5x10 -8 10% ∆R/R 3% 120 Km
13-17.5 µm W cm -2 sr--1

189
4.17-6.25 µm 2x10 -8 to 2x10 -7 5% ∆R/R 0.4% 120 Km

More information on the instrumentation and the engineering aspects of this mission
can be found in the section “Proposed Missions” (ATM Mission). A report entitled ”Tether-
based Investigation of the Ionosphere and Lower Thermosphere (TIILT)” has been prepared
to present the scientific rationale behind this type of mission as well as the measurements and
instrumentation. Copies of this report can be obtained by Prof. Heelis.

There are other missions, however, that would benefit from tethers . For example,
AKTIVE spacecraft, launched by the former USSR in 1989, aimed at investigating VLF
radiowave propagation and wave-particle interaction in the magnetosphere using a 10 KW
VLF transmitter with a large loop antenna (20 m diameter). Electromagnetic effects
occurring near the spacecraft were monitored by a coorbiting subsatellite, as shown in figure
6.1.

Figure 6.1 Aktive spacecraft and subsatellite

190
191
 The primary objectives of the AKTIVE program were as follows:

1) Radiation Properties of the loop antenna.

2) Spatial structure of the electromagnetic fields in the near zone (< 10 km).
3) Nonlinear effects in the near zone
4) Propagation of waves in the whistler mode, and their reflection from the
ionosphere
5) Non-linear effects in whistler wave propagation
6) Precipitation of charged particles form the radiation belts due to interaction with
VLF waves.
7) VLF emissions triggered from the orbiting AKTIVE transmitter.
8) Comparison with emissions triggered by ground based VLF transmitters.

Alas, AKTIVE encountered several technical problems and the program was
terminated. Nevertheless, when the em-radiating properties of spaceborne tethers will be
finally assessed, some of the above objectives , namely 4, 5 , 7 and 8 will greatly benefit. No
further work has been done, however, in this direction. Some TSS investigations are currently
addressing these questions.

6.2 Synergy

Some years ago, Lockheed-Martin, then Martin-Marietta, sponsored some studies to

look into the synergy of tethers with other space missions, namely AFE (Aeroassist Flight
Experiment), cancelled by NASA in 1991, and TIMED (Thermosphere-Ionosphere-
Mesosphere Energetic Dynamics). Prof. Hurlbut (see “Contacts” Section) performed the
study and the results are shown in tables 1 and 2, respectively.

AFE was a research “pathfinder” for a geosyncronous, lunar and planetary earth
return aerobraking spacecraft. Prof. Hurlbut indicated that a tethered system could
accomplish almost fifty percent of AFE objectives by exploring a much greater altitude
range for a longer duration than AFE was supposed to fly.

The study on TIMED aimed at determinating which of its instruments could

potentially fly on a pathfinder type tethered spacecraft. Note that the study of
Lockheed-Martin on TIMED focused on one of its earliest configurations.
The major finding of this study was that a tethered spacecraft could possibly validate
instruments which were operated in the 130-140 Km altitude range.

192
Table 1. AFE VS. Tethered System

AFE Flight Experiment Tethered System Applicability

1. Forebody-Aerothermal Heat-flux and skin temperature measurements
Characterization Experiment at all altitudes will provide thermal
(FACE) accommodation coefficients and validations of
models/codes.
2. Radiative Heating Experiment Possibly applicable - Needs further study.
(RHE)
3. Wall Catalysis Experiment An extension of (1) to provide valuable
(WCE) catalytic vs. low catalytic gas/surface
interaction data.
4. Base Flow Heating Experiment Spherical afterbody data will differ from
(BFHE) aerobrake geometry but will be very valuable
with added Aerostabilizer instrument data.
5. Afterbody Radiometry Possibly applicable - Needs further study.
Experiment (ARE)
6. Alternate Thermal Protection Possibly applicable - Needs further study.
Materials (ATPM)
7. Heat Shield Performance (HSP) Possibly applicable - Needs further study.
8. Pressure Distribution/Air Data Measurement of static/dynamic pressures at
System (PD/ADS) multiple satellite locations extremely valuable.
9. Aerodynamic Performance Satellite with Aerostabilizer will acquire
Experiment (APEX) extremely important aero characterization data
over a wide altitude range.
10. Rarefield-Flow Aerodynamics Measurements of momentum transfer
Measurement Experiment (RAME) characteristics and aero parameters (CD, CL,
(RAME) etc.) combined with (1) extremely valuable
for validation of existing predictive analytical
programs.
11. Plasma, Ion and Electron Possibly applicable - Needs further study.
Concentration Experiment (PIECE)
12. Microwave Reflectometer Probably N/A
Ionization Sensor (MRIS)
13. Aft Flow Ionization Sensor Probably N/A
(MRIS)

193
14. Ion Mass Spectrometer Measurements of species and total density
Experiment (IMSE) extremely important for atmospheric
modeling.

194
Table 2. TIMED - Tethered Pathfinder Synergy

Timed Flight Experiment Tethered System Pathfinder

1. Fabry-Perot Interferometer Probably N/A - Requires more study.
2. Neutral Mass Spectrometer Applicable for gas composition, temperatures
and transverse winds.
3. Ion Mass Spectrometer Applicability although ion composition and
drift velocities of secondary importance.
4. Langmuir Probe Applicable for measurement of electron
temperatures and ion/electron densities.
5. Ion Drift Meter and Retarding Applicable for measurement of ion
Potentiometer temperatures, velocities and densities.
6. UV Spectrometer Applicable for measurement of O3, NO
temperatures, Noctilucent clouds, aerosols,
and other minorconstituents.
7. Imaging Photometer Possibly N/A - Requires more study.
8. Triaxial Accelerometer Applicable as a high priority instrument.
9. Energetic Particle Analyzer Probably N/A - Requires more study.
10. Global UV Airglow Imager Probably N/A - Requires more study.
11. Solar EUV Spectrometer/UV Probably N/A - Requires more study.
Photometer
12. Vector Magnetometer Applicable for magnetic field measurements
13. Near Infrared Spectrometer Probably N/A - Requires more study.
14. Electric Field Detector/Plasma Probably N/A - Requires more study.
Wave Experiment
15. Infrared Limb Sounder Probably N/A - Requires more study.
16. Fast Electron Spectrometer Probably N/A - Requires more study.
17. Energetic Particle Spectrometer Probably N/A - Requires more study.

195
SECTION 7.0 REFERENCES
7.1 General

Due to the large production of tether-related papers we have limited our search
to works published in the scientific literature. We have also included the list of
papers presented at the last tether conference held in Washington.

The proceedings of papers presented at the four international conferences on

Tethers in Space as well as workshops can be found in:

• “Applications of Tethers in Space” Workshop held in Williamsburg, VA June

15-17, 1983. NASA Contract NAS8-35403.

• “Applications of Tethers in Space” Workshop held in Venice, Italy, October

15-17, 1985. NASA Conference Publication CP 2422.

• “International Conference of Tethers In Space”, held in Arlington, VA,

September 17-19, 1986. Proceedings published by the American Astronautical
Society in Advances in The Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 62, 1987

• ”Tether Dynamic Simulation Workshop”, held in Arlington, VA Sept 16 1986.

NASA Conference Publication CP 2458.

• “Space Tethers for Science in the Space Station Era”, Conference held in
Venice, October 4-8, 1987. Proceedings published by Societa’ Italiana di Fisica,
Bologna, Italy, 1988 (ISBN 88-7794-016-6).

• “Tethers In Space Toward Flight”, Conference held in San Francisco, CA, May
17-19, 1989. Proceedings published by the American Institute of Aeronautics
and Astronautics, 1989 (ISBN 0-930403-50-9).

• International Round Table on Tethers in Space”, held in Noordwijk, The

Netherlands, September 28-30, 1994. ESA WPP-081.

• “Fourth International Conference on Tethers in Space”, held in Washington,

DC, April 10-14, 1995. Published by Science and Technology Corporation,
Hampton, VA.
7.2 Table of Contents of the Fourth International Conference on Tethers in Space

VOLUME I

Manuscripts Unavailable at Time of Publication xix

General Information xxiii

FUTURE MISSIONS

Atmospheric Science with Tethers; Heating, Cooling and Chemistry in the

Lower Thermosphere 3
Kate P. Kirby, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory

Future of Tethers in Space 11

Mario D. Grossi, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory

DEMONSTRATED TECHNOLOGY

TSS-1 vs. TSS-1R 27

Bruno Strim, Mario Pasta and Ettore Allais, Alenia Spazio S.p.A.

The First and Second Flights of the Small Expendable Deployer System (SEDS) 43
H. Frayne Smith, NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center

Plasma Motor-Generator (PMG) Flight Experiment Results 57

James E. McCoy, C. O'Neill, J. Stanley and T. Settecerri, NASA, Johnson
Space Center; Mario D. Grossi and Robert D. Estes, Smithsonian Astrophysical
Observatory, M. Dobrowolny, G. Vannaroni, E. Melchioni, C. Bonifazi,
C. Cosmovici and L. Iess, IFSI-CNR; R. Jerry Jost, System Planning Corporation;
R.C. Olsen, Naval Postgraduate School, D.C. Ferguson, R. Tolbert, D. Rau,
Ira Katz (S-Cubed) and J. Lilley, NASA, Lewis Research Center, Joseph A. Carroll,
Tether Applications, Inc.; G. Taconi, L. Mina and W. Goree, University of Genoa

APPROVED FUTURE MISSIONS

SEDS/SEDSAT Project Overview 85

James K. Harrison, NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center

The OEDIPUS-C Sounding Rocket Experiment 95

H. Gordon James, Communications Research Centre; J. Glen Rumbold,
Canadian Space Agency

OVERVIEW

The NASA/ASI TSS-1 Mission: Summary of Results and Reflight Plans 107
W. John Raitt and D.C. Thompson, CASS, Center for Atmospheric and Space
Sciences, Utah State University; N. Stone, NASA, Marshall Space Flight
Center; M. Dobrowolny, Instituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario;
C. Bonifazi, Agenzia Spaziale Italiana; B. Gilchrist and P.M. Banks,
 Space Physics Research Lab, University of Michigan; D. Hardy and
M. Oberhardt, Phillips Laboratory, GPSP; S. Williams and P.R. Williamson,
STAR Laboratory, Stanford University

TSS Mission 1 Flight Dynamic Anomalies 119

Donald D. Tomlin and David K. Mowery, NASA, Marshall Space Flight
Center; Bruno Musetti and Bruna Cibrario, Alenia Spazio, S.p.A.

Flight Data from the First and Second Flights of the Small Expendable
Deployer System (SEDS) 133
Charles C. Rupp, NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center

Plasma Motor Generator Mission Report 149

R. Jerry Jost and Dean Chlouber, System Planning Corporation;
Thomas L. Wilson, Christine A. O'Neil and James E. McCoy,
NASA, Johnson Space Center

SEDSAT Tether Dynamics Research 165

Cheryl D. Bankston, NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center; Dennis Ray Wingo,
Center for Space Plasma and Aeronomic Research, University of Alabama
in Huntsville; Mark A. Stedham, Defense Intelligence Agency, Missile and
Space Intelligence Center

A Space Tether Experiment STEX 181

Larry L. Burgess, F.M. Kustas and F.J. Jarossy, Lockheed Martin Astronautics

Flight Results from the OEDIPUS-A Tethered Experiment 193

H. Gordon James, Communications Research Centre; George Tyc,
Bristol Aerospace Limited

Sub-Satellites for Aerothermodynamic Studies in the Lower Thermosphere 211

Frank C. Hurlbut, University of California at Berkeley

Space Tethers for Ionospheric-Thermospheric-Mesospheric Science-Report

on the 1994 International Summer Workshop, Ann Arbor, MI 221
Brian E. Gilchrist, L.M. Brace, and G.R. Carignan, Space Physics Research
Laboratory, University of Michigan; R. Heelis, University of Texas-Dallas,
Center for Space Science; W.J. Raitt, Utah State University, Center for
Atmospheric & Space Science; C. Rupp, NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center;
H.G. James, Communications Research Center; C. Bonifazi, Agenzia Spaziale
Italiana; K-I Oyama, ISAS; G. Wood, NASA, Langley Research Center

Summary and Conclusions from the International Round Table on Tethers

in Space–ESTEC, September 1994 227
Mauro Novara, ESA/ESTEC

TSS-1 ELECTRODYNAMICS

TSS-1 SETS and CORE Experiment Results and Plans for Reflight 239
Brian E. Gilchrist, Peter M. Banks, Sven G. Bilén and Nestor R. Voronka,
University of Michigan, Space Physics Research Laboratory; Carlo Bonifazi,
Agenzia Spaziale Italiana; Don C. Thompson and W. John Raitt, Utah State
University, Center for Atmospheric and Space Science; Victor M. Agüero,
Scott D. Williams and Anthony C. Fraser-Smith, Stanford University,
EERA/STARLAB
Transient Response of the TSS System in the Ionosphere 253
Sven G. Bilén and Brian E. Gilchrist, University of Michigan, Space Physics
Research Laboratory; Enrico Melchioni and Marino Dobrowolny, Consiglio
Nazionale delle Ricerche, Instituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario

Thruster Pickup Ions Detected by SPREE During TSS 1 267

Louise C. Gentile, Boston College Institute for Space Research; W.J. Burke,
J.S. Machuzak, David A. Hardy and D.E. Hunton, Phillips Laboratory

Electron Beam Propagation Observed Durign TSS 1 283

David A. Hardy, Marilyn R. Oberhardt and William J. Burke, Phillips
Laboratory/GPSG; Donald C. Thompson and W. John Raitt, Center for
Atmospheric and Space Sciences, Utah State University; Louise C. Gentile,
Boston College Institute for Space Research

Correlator Measurements of MHz Wave-Particle Interactions During TSS 1

Electron Beam Operations 299
M. Paul Gough, Space Science Centre, University of Sussex; David A. Hardy,
Marilyn R. Oberhardt and William J. Burke, Phillips Laboratory; Louise C. Gentile,
Boston College Institute for Space Research

Observations of Ionosphere Heating in the TSS-1 Subsatellite Presheath 315

Ira Katz and Myron Mandell, S-Cubed Division of Maxwell Laboratories;
Enrico Melchioni, Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario;
Marilyn Oberhardt, Phillips Laboratory, Space Sciences Laboratory;
Don Thompson, Utah State University; Torsten Neubert and Brian Gilchrist,
University of Michigan; Carlo Bonifazi, Agenzia Spaziale Italiana

Induced Ionospheric Double Probe Tether Potential Measurements and Models for
TSS-1 Electrodynamics 331
Scott D. Williams and V.M. Agüero, Stanford University; Donald C. Thompson
and W. John Raitt, Center for Atmospheric and Space Sciences, Utah State
University; Brian E. Gilchrist, Peter M. Banks and Nestor Voronka,
Space Physics Research Laboratory, University of Michigan

Current-Voltage Characteristics of the Tethered Satellite 347

U. Guidoni, and M. Dobrowolny, Agenzia Spaziale Italiana; E. Melchioni and
G. Vannaroni, Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario - CNR,
J.P. Lebreton, ESA/ESTEC

Identification of Charge Carriers in the Ionospheric Branch of the TSS-1

Tether_Generated Current System 359
N.H. Stone, NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center; K. Wright, The University
of Alabama in Huntsville; J.D. Winningham and C. Gurgiolo, Southwest Research
Institute; U. Samir, Tel Aviv University; C. Bonifazi, Italian Space Agency;
B. Gilchrist, The University of Michigan; M. Dobrowolny, Instituto Fisica
Spazio Interplanetario/CNR

TSS-1 DYNAMIC OPERATIONS

Deployer Performance Results for the TSS-1 Mission 375

Leland S. Marshall and Ronald V. Geiger, Martin Marietta Astronautics

Long Period Tension Variations in TSS-1 and SEDS-2 389

 Gordon E. Gullahorn, Mario Cosmo, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics;
Robert G. Hohlfeld, Metropolitan College, Boston University

TSS-1 Mission: Sub-Satellite Attitude Reconstruction 399

Bruno Musetti, Bruna Cibrario, Maria Stella Di Raimondo, and Paolo Martella,
Alenia Spazio S.p.A.

Simulation of TSS Passive Skiprope Damper 409

Jay N. Estes, NASA, Johnson Space Center, David D. Lang, Lang Associates

Active and Passive Damping of Tethered Systems 419

Francesco Angrilli, G. Bianchini and R. Da Forno, University of Padova;
G. Fanti, University of Parma

TSS-1 Tether Damping. Has Anything Been Learnd? 433

S. Bergamaschi, G. Carletti and P. Lion Stoppato, University of Padova

A Complex, Frequency Domain Skiprope Observer for Tethered Satellites 441

John R. Glaese, Control Dynamics

Transform Domain Based Observation and Prediction of Tether Skiprope

Oscillations for the TSS-1 Flight Experiment 455
Stephen M. Rodrigue, Abolfazl M. Amini, George E. Ioup and Juliette W. Ioup,
Department of Physics, University of New Orleans; Stan N. Carroll,
D. Keith Mowery and Don D. Tomlin, NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center

A Review of TSS Thermomechanical Properties in the Light of Preliminary

Experimental Results 469
F. Angrilli, G. Bianchini and S. Debei, Dipartimento di Ingegneria Meccanica,
Università di Padova; G. Fanti, Dipartimento di Ingegneria Industriale,
Università di Parma

Assessment of Shuttle Plume Effects on the Tethered Satellite System-1 489

Palmer B. Chiu, NASA, Johnson Space Center; Bill C. O'Donnell,
LinCom Corporation

SPONSORED PROJECTS

Reflight of the Tethered Satellite System Mission 507

Becky C. Soutullo, NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center

An Acquisition System to Reveal Ground E.M. Emissions from TSS1-R 515

Cinthya Ottonello, Dipartimento di Ingegneria Biofisica ed Elettronica -
University of Genoa; S. Pagnan, Istituto di Automazione Navale -
National Research Council of Italy

A Ground-Based Receiving System for the Detection of Signals from the

Tethered Satellite System 527
S.T. Noble and W.E. Gordon, Rice University; R.D. Estes and
M.D. Grossi, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics

Breadboard Test and Flight Preparation of the RAPUNZEL Mission 535

D. Sabath, Fachegebiet Raumfahrttechnik; C. Kessler and M. Krischke,
Kayser-Trede GmbH; V.L. Balakin and V. Shachmistov,
Samara State Aerospace University
SEDS/SEDSAT Mission Plans 543
Charles C. Rupp, NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center; William J. Webster, Jr.,
NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center

Dynamics and Control of SEDSAT Deployment 551

E.C. Lorenzini, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics;
D.K. Mowery and C.C. Rupp, NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center

Sensitivity Analysis of SEDSAT Orbital Injection 563

J. Peláez Alvarez, E.T.S.I. Aeronáuticos, Universidad Politécnica
de Madrid; Enrico C. Lorenzini, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics

Design Considerations for a Long-Lifetime Space Tether 577

F.M. Kustas, F.J. Jarossy and L.L. Burgess, Lockheed Martin Astronautics Company

VOLUME II

SMALL EXPENDABLE DEPLOYER SYSTEM (SEDS)

SEDS Deployer Design and Flight Performance 593

Joseph A. Carroll, Tether Applications

Development of the SEDS EMP Tensiometer and Tether Attachment Mechanism 601
Ray D. Rhew, NASA, Langley Research Center

SEDS End Mass Payload Magnetometer Engineering Performance and Rotational

Data Analysis Results 613
John H. Stadler, NASA, Langley Research Center

Design of the Signal and Power Conditioning Subsystems for the SEDS
End Mass Payloads 627
John K. Diamond, NASA, Langley Research Center; Wendy G. Nagurny,
Lockheed Engineering and Science Company

SEDS Tether Deployment Ground Tests 653

Bruce K. Wallace, NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center

SEDS-II Deployment Control Law and Mission Design669

Enrico C. Lorenzini, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics;
D.K. Mowery and C.C. Rupp, NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center

The Small Expendable Deployer System (SEDS) Missions 1 and 2 Thermal

Analysis and Flight Data Comparison 685
Sheryl L. Kittredge, NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center

Data Reduction and Validation in a Small Project Environment: The SEDS-1,

PMG and SEDS-2 Cases 697
Lee R. Huynh and P. Chewning Toulmin, Hughes-STX Corporation;
William J. Webster, Jr., NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center

The SEDS Data Server: Contents, Access Procedures, and Mechanisms 705
William J. Webster, Jr., NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center;
Brian H. Kirouac, Hughes-STX Corporation
A Comparison of SEDS-2 Flight and Dynamics Simulation Results 711
John R. Glaese, Control Dynamics, Division of bd Systems

Three-Dimensional Modal Development with Time and Tether Length as a

Dynamics Diagnostic Tool for SEDS 721
Juliette W. Ioup, George E. Ioup and Stephen M. Rodrigue, University of
New Orleans; George M. Wood, NASA, Langley Research Center

Restitution of Tethered Satellites Systems Motion 731

R. Clédassou and Sébastion Herbiniere, Centre National d'Études Spatiales

Acceleration Levels and Dynamic Noise on SEDS End-Mass 747

Mario L. Cosmo, E.C. Lorenzini, G.E. Gullahorn, Smithsonian
Astrophysical Observatory

The Final Dynamic State of SEDS-2: A Determination of the Torsional

Pendulum Period from the Subsatellite Magnetometer Data 761
Christopher D. Blunk and Brian D. Humphry, Eleanor Roosevelt High School;
Michael R. Douglass, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill;
William J. Webster, Jr., NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center;
George H. Strachan, Eleanor Roosevelt High School

Visualization of the Motion of the SEDS 1 and 2 Subsatellites 767

Michael Douglass, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill;
P. Chewning Toulmin and Lee R. Huynh, Hughes-STX Corporation;
William J. Webster, Jr., NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center

Analysis of Video Images of the Re-entry of the SEDS-I End Mass 773
David L. Talent, Lockheed Engineering and Sciences Company

The Visual Brightness of the SEDS-2 Tether 795

William J. Webster, Jr., James J. Butler, James T. McLean,
Locke M. Stuart, NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center;
G. Si, Swales and Associates

Ground Radar Data and Optical Measurements - SEDS, PMG, and SEDS-2 815
Thomas J. Settecerri, Lockheed Engineering and Sciences Company

Comparison of Predicted and Actual Orbital Lifetimes for the SEDS-2 Mission 837
Steven W. Evans, NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center

Micro-Meteoroid and Orbital Debris Damage Analyses on SEDS Tether 847

Kazuo Ben Hayashida, Jennifer H. Robinson and Scott A. Hill,
NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center

ELECTRODYNAMICS

Characteristics of Plasma Contactors for Spacecraft Charging Control861

Paul J. Wilbur and J. Steven Snyder, Colorado State University

Plasma Contactor Device Family for Space Use Working Up to 10 A:

Review of the Functional Testing Activity 873
M. Minucci, A. Severi and M. Capacci, Proel Tecnologie; C. Bonifazi
and F. Svelto, ASI
Current Collection Enhancement by Neutral Gas Emissions Into a Plasma 881
L. Conde and L. León, E.T.S.I. Aeronáuticos,
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid

Ionization in An Electron Collecting Contactor 889

Eduardo Ahedo, E.T.S.I. Aeronáuticos, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid;
M. Martínez-Sánchez, Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, M.I.T.

Stability Model for Plasma Contactors 897

V. Lapuerta and E. Ahedo, E.T.S.I. Aeronáuticos,
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid

Plasma Contactors for Electrodynamic Tether Sysetsm 903

Igor A. Beznos and Konstantin N. Kozubsky, "Fakel" Enterprise;
Alexei S. Isakov and Vladimir Kim, Research Institute of Applied Mechanics
and Electrodynamics of Moscow Aviation Institute

Central Problem of Space Electronics and Electrodynamic-TSS 909

N.A. Savich, Institute of Radio Engineering and Electronics of the
Russian Academy of Sciences

RMHD-Simulation of An Electrodynamic Tethered Satellite System

in the Ionosphere 921
Andreas Schröer, Ruhr-Universität Bochum

Current Closure for a Tethered Satellite System 935

Chia-Lie Chang and Adam Drobot, Science Applications
International Corporation; Konstantinos Papadopoulos,
University of Maryland

Campaigns of Ground Listening to the E.M. Emissions Expected 949

from Spaceborne Electrodynamic Tether Systems
G. Tacconi, S. Dellepiane and C. Ottonello, University of Genoa DIBE;
S. Pagnan and L. Minna, IAN/CNR National Research Council; M.D. Grossi,
SAO Harvard-Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory

A High Perveance Electron Generator with ON/OFF Modulation Capabilities for

Current Up to 1 A 965
M. Minucci, G. Noci and A. Severi, Proel Tecnologie; C. Bonifazi and
F. Svelto, ASI

Alfven Wave Signature from Constant-Current Tethers 973

Robert D. Estes, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics;
Jaun R. Sanmartín, ETSI Aeronáuticos, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid

Nonreciprocal Magnetoplasma Sheath Waves on Structures in Space 983

Andrea A.E. Lüttgen and Keith G. Balmain, University of Toronto

The Space-Charge Effect on Current Collected by a Spherical Probe in a

Magnetized Plasma 993
Weiwei Li and J.G. Laframboise, Department of Physics and Astronomy,
York University

PIC Simulation of Spherical-symmetric Active and Passive High

Voltage Discharges 1009
Hartmut Marschall and F.M. Neubauer, Universität zu Köln
On the Creation of Space Charges in the Flux Tubes of Electrodynamic
Tethers in Space 1019
R.L. Stenzel and J.M. Urrutia, Department of Physics,
University of California

The Magnetic Presheath of a Positively Charged Spacecraft:

Estimating Its Potential 1025
J.G. Laframboise, Physics and Astronomy Department, York University;
L.J. Sonmor, Institute for Space and Atmospheric Studies, University
of Saskatchewan; B.A. Whalen, Herzberg Institute of Astrophysics,
National Research Council

The Use of Electron Beam Experiments on Orbiting Tethered Platforms for

Remote Sensing of E_ in the Auroral Acceleration Region: The Active
Magnetospheric Particle Acceleration Satellite (AMPAS) 1035
Linda A. Habash, Torsten Neubert and Brian E. Gilchrist, University
of Michigan; W. John Raitt, Utah State University

An Extended Electron Beam for Auroral Studies 1045

Manuel Martinez-Sanchez, Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, MIT;
Jaun R. Sanmartin, ETSI Aeronauticos, Universidad Politecnica de Madrid

An Investigation of Forces in a Shielded Conductor 1067

C.H. Spenny, C. O'Dell and W.F. Bailey, Air Force Institute of Technology

TETHER TECHNOLOGY

SEDS Characteristics and Capabilities 1079

Joseph A. Carroll and John C. Oldson, Tether Applications

ESA Development on Expendable Tether Mechanism Technology 1091

Renato Licata, Alenia Spazio S.p.A.; J. Miguel Gavira, ESA-ESTEC

Tether System Applications in Support of Large Space Infrastructures1101

Luigi Bussolino, Pietro Merlina and Maria Antonietta Perino, Alenia Spazio S.p.A.

Tethered Re-Entry Application Deployment Control 1107

Renato Licata, Alenia Spazio S.p.A.

Rotating Space Station for Out-Of-Plane Orbital Transfer Using Tethers 1119
Bruce A. Mackenzie, Space Studies Institute

System Engineering and Integration (SE&I) Aspects for a Tether

Application at the ISSA 1133
Paul Tetzlaff, DASA/RST Rostock Raumfahrt und Umweltschutz

Adaptive Attitude Control for the Base Platform of a Tethered System

with Fuzzy Logic 1143
W. Hallmann, E. Plescher and W. Zahnow, Fachhochschule Aachen,
Space Department

Failsafe Multistrand Tether SEDS Technology 1151

Robert P. Hoyt and Robert L. Forward, Tethers Unlimited

Temperature Behavior of Tethers in Orbit 1161

W. Hallmann, B. Justen and E. Plescher, FH Aachen, Space Department
Effects of Debris Damage on New Long-Life Tethers 1171
F. Angrilli, G. Bianchini, R. Da Forno, S. Debei and B. Saggin,
Center Of Study and Space Activities "G. Columbo", CISAS, University
of Padova; G. Fanti, Department of Industrial Engineering,
University of Parma

Stress Distribution Measurements in Composite Space Ropes 1181

Giulio Fanti, Dipartimento di Ingegneria Industriale, Università di Parma

Termination Methods for Synthetic Fiber Tethers 1195

Douglas P. Bentley, Cortland Cable Company

The Progress-M Based Sample & Material Re-Entry Demonstration 1203

Pietro Merlina, Alenia Spazio S.p.A.; Peter Schwebke, DASA-RST;
Mauro Novara, ESA-ESTEC

An Analytic Characterization of the Optimal Mass Problem

for Aerobraking Tethers 1217
Steven G. Tragesser and James M. Longuski, Purdue University;
Jordi Puig-Suari, Arizona State University

Tether Survivability: SEDS-2 As A Diagnostic Tool 1233

Martin Beech, The University of Western Ontario; P. Chewning Toulmin,
Hughes-STX Corporation

TETHER SCIENCE

Expected Magnetic Field Results from a Tether Mission 1245

Patrick T. Taylor, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center; Joy A. Conrad,
Hughes STX Corporation; James J. Frawley, Herring Bay Geophysics

Tethered Systems in the Magnetospheric Studies 1259

Stanislav I. Klimov, Anatoly A. Petrukovich, Mikhail L. Pivovarov,
Andrey V. Prudkoglyad, Vjacheslav G. Rodin, Alexander A. Skalsky,
Space Research Institute (IKI) Russian Academy of Science;
Valery E. Korepanov, Special Design Division of
National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine

Spectroscopic Measurements from a Tethered Satellite Platform 1269

Kelly V. Chance, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics

Gravity Gradiometry from the Downward Tethered Satellite System 1273

Franco Fuligni, V. Iafolla and S. Nozzoli, Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio
Interplanetario; M. Cosmo, M.D. Grossi, G.E. Gullahorn and E. Lorenzini,
Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics

Analysis of a Dumbbell Sensor for Space Gradiometry 1281

Simone B. Bortolami, M.G.H. Biomotion Lab - Harvard Medical School;
F. Angrilli, University of Padova; C. Jekeli, Ohio State University;
M.D. Grossi, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics
 VOLUME III

DYNAMICS

A New Full Non-Linear Model of the Tethered Satellite Systems

Based on the Characteristics Method 1299
F. Angrilli, R. Da Forno and B. Saggin, University of Padova

Dynamics of Low-Tension Spinning Tethers 1309

A. Misra and M. Keshmiri, McGill University; V.J. Modi, University of B.C.;
G. Tyc and R. Han, University of Manitoba; F. Vigneron and A. Jablonski,
Canadian Space Agency

Resonant Conditions for a Stretched Spinning Tether 1325

Ray P.S. Han and Albert C.J. Luo, University of Manitoba

Analytical Solutions for a Model of a Spinning Tether 1341

Thomas G. Berry and Joseph J. Williams, University of Manitoba

Severed Tether Dynamics and Probability 1353

Kenneth J. Welzyn and Jennifer H. Robinson, NASA,
Marshall Space Flight Center

Dynamics of a Space Tethered Satellite System with Two Rigid Endbodies 1367
W. Steiner, A. Steindl and H. Troger, Technical University Vienna

Attachment Point Motion for Active Damping of Vibrations in Tethered

Artificial Gravity Spacecraft 1381
Shannon L. Thornburg and J. David Powell, Stanford University

Simultaneous Attitude and Vibration Control of Tethered Satellite Systems 1395

S. Pradhan and V.J. Modi, The University of British Columbia;
A.K. Misra, McGill University

Deployment and Retraction of a Continuous Tether: The Equations Revisited 1415

F.L. Janssens, D. Poelaert and E.B. Crellin, European Space Research and
Technology Center (WMM)

Attitude Maneuvers of a Flexible Space Station by Means of Deployable Tethers 1425

Franco Bernelli-Zazzera, Amalia Ercoli-Finzi and P. Mantegazza,
Dipartimento di Ingegneria Aerospaziale, Politecnico di Milano

Optimal Mass Flexible Tethers for Aerobraking Maneuvers 1441

Jordi Puig-Suari, Arizona State University

Atmospheric Research Using Tethered Satellite Systems in Elliptic Orbits 1451

Howard A. Flanders and Penny L. Niles, Martin Marietta Astronautics

Constrained Iterative Spectral Deconvolution for Analysis of Closely Spaced

Modal Peaks in the Fourier Transform of Tethered Satellite Dynamics Data 1461
Abolfazl M. Amini, Southern University, Baton Rouge and University of
New Orleans; George E. Ioup and Juliette W. Ioup,
University of New Orleans

An Extended Kalman Filter for Observing the Skiprope Phenomenon of the

Tethered Satellite System 1475
 Haik Biglari, Sverdrup Technology, Inc.; Zachary J. Galaboff, NASA,
Marshall Space Flight Center

Validation of Analytical Modeling of OEDIPUS Tethers Using Experimental

Results from TE-LAB 1483
F.R. Vigneron, A.M. Jablonski and R. Chandrashaker, Canadian
Space Agency; B. McClure, J. Bergmans and D. Staley, Carleton University;
G. Tyc, Bristol Aerospace Limited

NEAR FUTURE

An Update to Proposed Space Tether Applications for International

Space Station Alpha 1501
Donald S. Crouch, A. Colton Park and Gilbert M. Kyrias, Martin Marietta
Astronautics; Bruno Strim, Saverio Lioy, Gene Compton (NASA Rep), Alenia
Spazio S.p.A.; Andrea Lorenzoni, Agenzia Spaziale Italiana; Carolynn Conley,
Muniz Engineering

A Proposed Shuttle-Tethered Satellite System Atmospheric Verification Mission 1513

Donald S. Crouch, Howard A. Flanders and Gilbert M. Kyrias,
Martin Marietta Astronautics

AIRSEDS-I™: A Proof-of-Concept Tether Mission Into the Earth's

Upper Atmosphere 1527
Andrew D. Santangelo, The Michigan Technic Corporation; Terrance G. Onsager
and Craig A. Kletzing, University of New Hampshire

Dual Tethered Satellite Systems for Space Physics Research 1543

Penny L. Niles, Martin Marietta Astronautics; Brian E. Gilchrist, University
of Michigan; Jay N. Estes, NASA, Johnson Space Center

AIRSATT-Atmospheric/Ionospheric Research Satellite Using Advanced

Tether Technology 1559
B.E. Gilchrist, J. Dodds, B.C. Kennedy, University of Michigan; P.L. Niles,
Martin Marietta Astronautics; C.C. Rupp, NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center

Tethered Multi_Probe for Thermospheric Research 1567

E.C. Lorenzini, M.L. Cosmo, M.D. Grossi, K. Chance and J.L. Davis,
Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics

Alenia Spazio Long Term Commitment to Space Tethers: Past, Present and Future 1577
Paolo Piantella and Francesco Giani, Alenia Spazio S.p.A.

Space Research in the BICEPS Experiment 1585

H. Gordon James, Communications Research Centre; Andrew W. Yau,
NRCC Herzberg Institute of Astrophysics; George Tyc,
Bristol Aerospace Limited

A Shuttle Deployed Tether Technology Demonstration Mission to Serve

Canadian and United States Needs 1599
G. Tyc, Bristol Aerospace Limited; C.C. Rupp, NASA, Marshall Space
Flight Center; A.M. Jablonski and F.R. Vigneron, Canadian Space Agency

What Is Necessary to Get Your Ideas to NASA1611

Patricia M. Doty, NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center
FAR FUTURE

Synthetic Aperture Radar Interferometry by Means of Tethered Antennas 1631

Antonio Moccia and Marco D'Errico, Università degli Studi di Napoli;
Sergio Vetrella, Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli

The Electromagnetic Clean Subsatellite SPELIS for Studies on Plasma-Wave

Phenomena Caused by Operations of the Electrodynamical Tethered System
in Space Plasmas 1643
Stanislav I. Klimov, Yuri N. Agafonov, Alexander A. Skalsky and
Vyacheslav G. Rodin, Space Research Institute of the
Russian Academy of Science

Methods of Deployment of the Polymodule Tether System with Utilization

of the Conversed Ballistic Missile Separation Block 1653
Gennady V. Malyshev, L.M. Kalashnikov, V.M. Kulkov, N.N. Markin
and A.P. Svotin, Research Institute of Applied Mechanics and Electrodynamics
of Moscow Aviation Institute; V.M. Ivanov and V.I. Mironov, Central Research
Institute of Machine Building; N.A. Obukhov, Makeev Design Office of
Mechanical Engineering

Optimization of a Low Altitude Tethered Probe for Martian Atmosphere

Dust Collection 1663
Monica Pasca, Università di Roma "La Sapienza"; Enrico Lorenzini,
Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics

AIRSEDS-II™: A TSS-2 Precursor Mission to Test and Demonstrate

Tethered Systems in the Earth's Upper Atmosphere 1675
Andrew D. Santangelo, The Michigan Technic Corporation

Optimal De-spinning and Retrieval of a Tethered Artificial Gravity Spacecraft 1685

Salma I. Saeed and J. David Powell, Stanford University

Tethered Stabilized Platform Attitude Control by Moving the Attachment

Point Influence of Tether Transverse Vibration 1697
Francesco Angrilli, R. Da Forno, G. Bianchini, B. Saggin, University
of Padova; G. Fanti; University of Parma

Future Tether Missions in Space: A European Perspective 1705

Luigi Bussolino, Pietro Merlina and Maria A. Perino, Alenia Spazio S.p.A.

A Digital Robust Controller for a Tethered Reflector/Antenna System1721

Peter M. Bainum and Zhaozhi Tan, Howard University

A Skyhook from Phobos to Mars 1737

William B. Thompson, University of California at San Diego;
Martin O. Stern, California Space Institute, Scripps
Institution of Oceanography

SOUNDING ROCKETS

Design of the OEDIPUS-C Suborbital Tethered Payload 1749

W. Eliuk, R. Rob, G. Tyc and I. Walkty, Bristol Aerospace Limited;
G. Rumbold, Canadian Space Agency; H.G. James,
Communications Research Centre
Space Plasma Experiments with the Tethered OEDIPUS-C Payload 1765
H. Gordon James, Communications Research Centre; Keith G. Balmain,
University of Toronto

Tethered-Probe Measurements of ECHO 7 Charging-Discharging 1781

William J. Burke and George P. Murphy, Phillips Laboratory;
Perry R. Malcolm, USAF Academy

Design, Qualification and Calibration of the Tether Force Sensor (TFS)

for the OEDIPUS-C Mission 1793
G. Tyc, W.R. Whitehead and J.L. Phillips, Bristol Aerospace Limited;
J.G. Pierson, Pierson Associates Incorporated; A.M. Jablonski and
F.R. Vigneron, Canadian Space Agency

Tether Laboratory Demonstration System (TE-LAB) A Ground Test Facility

for the OEDIPUS Tether Missions 1809
Alexander M. Jablonski, Frank R. Vigneron and Rajagopalan Chandrashaker,
Canadian Space Agency; John L. Bergmans, Bruce A. McClure and
Douglas A. Staley, Carleton University; George Tyc, Bristol Aerospace Limited

Experimental Investigation of the Dynamics of Spinning Bodies 1823

V.J. Modi, S. Pradhan and M. Chu, University of British Columbia; G. Tyc,
Bristol Aerospace Limited; A.K. Misra, McGill University

Sounding Rocket Tethered Payload Experiments: The NASA Charge Program1837

W. John Raitt, CASS, Utah State University

PLASMA MOTOR GENERATOR (PMG)

Comparison of Theoretical Predictions with Plasma Motor Generator (PMG)

Experimental Data 1847
John R. Lilley, Jr., Agnes Greb, Ira Katz and Victoria A. Davis,
S-Cubed Division of Maxwell Laboratories; James E. McCoy, NASA,
Johnson Space Center; Joel Galofaro and Dale C. Ferguson, NASA,
Lewis Research Center

Correlation of Tether Current with Day/Night Cycles During PMG Mission 1857
Dean Chlouber and R. Jerry Jost, System Planning Corporation;
Thomas L. Wilson, NASA, Johnson Space Center;

Comparison of Remote-Sensor Determination of PMG Two-Body Dynamics

with Telemetry-Inferred Tether Dynamics 1873
Dean Chlouber and R. Jerry Jost, System Planning Corporation;
Thomas L. Wilson and James E. McCoy, NASA, Johnson Space Center

VHF Radar Measurements of PMG Ionospheric Interactions 1875

R. Jerry Jost and Dean Chlouber, System Planning Corporation

Ionosphere-Thermosphere Coupling with Large-Amplitude, Nonlinear

Ion-Acoustic Solutions Triggered by Electrified Spacecraft 1877
R. Jerry Jost and Dean Chlouber, System Planning Corporation;
Thomas L. Wilson, NASA, Johnson Space Center

Hawaii-Hilo Ground Observations on the Occasion of the PMG Flight of

June 23, 1993: Further Spectral Analysis 1879
Cinthya Ottonello and Giorgio Tacconi, Dipartimento di Ingegneria Biofisica
 ed Elettronica-University of Genoa; Sergio Pagnan, Istituto di Automazione
Navale - National Research Council of Italy; Luca Mina, Advanced
Engineering Technology - Torre A Corte dei Lambruschini

Electrodynamic Interactions Between the PMG Tether and the Magneto-Ionic

Medium of the Ionsphere 1891
Mario D. Grossi and Robert D. Estes, Harvard-Smithsonian Center
for Astrophysics; James E. McCoy, NASA, Johnson Space Center

Tether Current-Voltage Characteristics 1899

R.C. Olsen, Chung-Jen Chang and Chia-Hwa-Chi, Naval Postgraduate School

APPENDIX A

Author Index 1923

APPENDIX B

Attendee List 1929

7.3 Bibliography Austin, F., "Torsional Dynamics of an Axially Symmetric,
Two-Body Flexibly Connected Rotating Space Station,"
Alfven, H., "Spacecraft Propulsion: New Methods," Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 2, No. 6, p. 626-
Science, Vol. 176, p. 167-168, 14 Apr. 1972. 628, 1965.

Allais, E. and Bergamaschi, S., "Dynamics of Tethered Bainum, P. M., and Evans, K. S., "Gravity-Gradient Effects
Satellites: Two Alternative Concepts for Retrieval," on the Motion of Two Rotating Cable-Connected Bodies,"
Meccanica, Vol. 14, No. 2, p. 103-111, June 1979. AIAA Journal, Vol. 14, No. 1, p. 26-32, 1976.

Alpert, Ya. L., "On Some Electromagnetic Phenomena in Bainum, P. M., and Evans, K. S., "Three Dimensional
the Tether Magnetoplasma Cloud," Nuovo Cimento C, Motion and Stability of Two Rotating Cable-Connected
Serie 1, Vol. 14C, September-October 1991. Bodies," Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 12, No. 4,
p. 242-250, 1975.
Anderson, J., Wood, W., Siemers, P., Research at the
Earth's Edge," Aerospace America, Vol. 26, No. 4, pp. 30- Bainum, P. M., and Kumar, V. K., "Optimal Control of
32, April 1988. the Shuttle-Tethered System," Acta Astronautica, Vol. 7,
No. 12, p. 1333-1348, May 1980.
Anderson, K. S., Hagedon, Peter, "Control of Orbital Drift
of Geostationary Tethered Satellites," Journal of Guidance, Bainum, P. M., Diarra, C. M., and Kumar, V. K.,
Control and Dynamics, Vol. 17, No. 1, p. 10-14, February "Shuttle-Tethered Subsatellite System Stability with a
1994. Flexible Massive Tether," AIAA J. Guidance, Control and
Dynamics, Vol. 8, No. 2, p. 230-234, Mar.-Apr. 1985.
Anderson, L. A., "Tethered Elevator Design for Space
Station," Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 29, p. Bainum, P. M., Harkness, R. E. and Stuiver, W., "Attitude
233-238, March-April 1992. Stability and Damping of a Tethered Orbiting Interferometer
Satellite System," The Journal of Astronautical Sciences,
Anderson, W. W., "On Lateral Cable Oscillations of Cable- Vol. 19, No. 5, p. 364-389, Mar-Apr. 1972.
Connected Space Stations," NASA TN 5107, Langley
Research Center, Hampton, Virginia, Mar. 1969. Baker, W. P., Dunkin, J. A., Galaboff, Z. J., Johnson, K.
D., Kissel, R. R., Rheinfurth, M. H., and Siebel, M.P.L.,
Angrilli, F., Bianchini, G., Da Lio, M., Fanti, "Tethered Subsatellite Study," NASA TM X-73314,
G.,”Modelling the mechanical Properties and Dynamics of NASA/MSFC, Mar. 1976.
the Tethers for the TSS-1 and TSS-2 Missions”, ESA
Journal, Vol. 12, p. 353-368, 1988 Banerjee, A. K., and Kane, T. R., "Tether Deployment
Dynamics," The Journal of Astronautical Sciences, Vol.
Arnold, D. A., "The Behavior of Long Tethers in Space," 30, No. 4, p. 347-365, Oct-Dec 1982.
Journal of the Astronuatical Sciences, Vol. 35, No. 1, p. 3-
18, January-March, 1987. Banerjee, A. K., and Kane, T. R., "Tethered Satellite
Retrieval with Thruster Augmented Control" Journal of
Ashenberg, J. and Lorenzini, E.C., "Dynamcs of a Dual- Guidance, Control and Dynamics, Vol. 7, No. 1, p. 45-50,
Probe Tethered System," Journal of Guidance, Control and 1984.
Dynamics, Vol. 20, No. 6, p. 1265-1268, 1997.
Banerjee, A. K., "Dynamics of Tethered Payloads with
Austin, F., "Nonlinear Dynamics of a Free-Rotating Deployment Rate Control," Journal of Guidance, Control
Flexibly Connected Double-Mass Space Station," Journal and Dynamics, Vol. 13, p. 759-762, July-August 1990.
of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 2, No. 6, p. 901-906,
1965. Banks, P., et al, "The Tethered Satellite System; Final
Report from the Facility Requirements Definition Team,"
NAS8-33383, MSFC, May 1980.
Bekey, I. "Tethers Open New Space Options," Astronautics
and Aeronautics, Vol. 21, No. 4, p. 33-40, Apr. 1983. Bergamaschi, S., Zanetti, P. and Zottarel, C., "Nonlinear
Vibrations in the Tethered Satellite System-Mission 1,"
Bekey, I., and Penzo, P. A., "Tether Propulsion," Journal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics, Vol. 19, No.
Aerospace America, Vol. 24, No. 7, p. 40-43, July 1986. 2, p. 289-296, April 1996.

Beletskii, V. V. and Levin, E. M., "Dynamics of Space Birch, P., "Orbital Ring Systems and Jacob's Ladders,"
Tether Systems," Advances in the Astronautical Sciences, Journal of British Interplanetary Society, Vol. 35, No. 11,
Vol. 83. p. 474-497, Nov. 1982 (Part 1), Vol. 36, No. 3, p. 115-
128, Dec. 1983 (Part 2).
Beletskii, V. V., and Guivertz, M., "The Motion of an
Oscillating Rod Subjected to a Gravitational Field," Blinov, A. P., Dosybekov, K., "Perturbed Motions of a
Kosmitcheskie Issledovania, Vol. 5, No.6, 1967. Dumbbell in a Central Newtonian Force Field," ISSN
0010-9525, Cosmic Research, Jan. 1988.
Beletskii, V. V., and Levin, E. M., "Dynamics of the
Orbital Cable System," Acta Astronautica, Vol. 12, No. 5, Bolotina, N. E., and Vilke, V. G., "Stability of the
p. 285-291, 1985. Equilibrium Positions of a Flexible, Heavy Fiber Attached
to a Satellite in a Circular Orbit," Cosmic Research, Vol.
Beletskii, V. V., and Levin, E. M., "Stability of a Ring of 16, No. 4, p. 506-510, Jan. 1979.
Connected Satellites," Acta Astronautica, Vol. 12, No. 10,
p. 765-769, 1985. Breakwell, J. V., Gearhart, J. W., "Pumping a Tethered
Configuration to Boost its Orbit Around an Oblate Planet,"
Beletskii, V. V., and Navikova, E. T., "On the Relative Journal of the Astronuatical Sciences, Vol. 35, No. 1, p.
Motion of Two Cable-Connected Bodies in Orbit," Cosmic 19-40, January-March, 1987.
Research. Vol. 7, No. 3, p. 377-384, 1969.
Breakwell, J. V., "Stability of an Orbiting Ring," Journal
Beletskii, V. V., "On the Relative Motion of Two Cable- of Guidance and Control, Vol. 4, No. 2, p. 197-200, 1981.
Connected Bodies in Orbit-II," Cosmic Research, Vol. 7,
No. 6, p. 827-840, 1969. Brown, K. G., Melfi, L. T., Jr., Upchurch, B.T. and Wood,
G. M. Jr., "Downward-Deployed Tethered Satellite
Bergamaschi, S., "Tether Motion after Failure," Journal of Systems, Measurement Techniques, and Instrumentation - A
Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 30, No. 1, p. 49-59, Jan.-Mar. Review," Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 29, No.
1982. 5, p. 671-677, September-October 1992.

Bergamaschi, S. and Catinaccio, A., "Further Developments Bschorr, O., "Controlling Short-Tethered Satellites," Acta
in the Harmonic Analysis of TSS-1," Journal of the Astronautica, Vol. 7, p. 567-573, May 1980.
Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 40, No. 2, p. 189-201, April-
June 1992. Carroll, J. A., "Tether Applications in Space
Transportation," Acta Astronautica, Vol. 13, No. 4, p. 165-
Bergamaschi, S. and Bonon, F., "Coupling of Tether 174, 1986.
Lateral Vibration and Subsatellite Attitude Motion," J ournal
of Guidance, Control and Dynamics, Vol. 15, No. 5, p. Chang, C.L., Satya-Narayana, P., Drobot, A.T.,
1284-1286, September-October 1992. Papadopoulos, L. and Lipatov, A.S., "Hybrid Simulations
of Whistler Waves Generation and Current Closure by a
Bergamaschi, S. and Bonon, F., "Equilibrium Pulsed Tether in the Ionosphere," Geophysical Research
Configurations in a Tethered Atmospheric Mission," Acta Letters, Vol. 21, No. 11, p. 1015-1018, June 1, 1994.
Astronautica, Vol. 29, No. 5, p. 333-339, May 1993.
Childs, D. W., and Hardison, T. L., "A Movable-Mass
Bergamaschi, S., Bonon, F. and Legnami, M., "Spectral Attitude Stabilization System for Cable-Connected
Analysis of Tethered Satellite System-Mission 1 Artificial-g Space Stations," Journal of Spacecraft and
Vibrations," Journal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics, Rockets, Vol. 11 No. 3, p. 165-172, 1974.
Vol. 18, No. 3, p. 618-624, June 1995.
Chobotov, V. A., "A Synchronous Satellite at Less Than Control and Dynamics, Vol. 15, No. 3, p. 621-626, May-
Synchronous Altitude," Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, June 1992.
Vol. 13, No. 2, p. 126-128, 1976.
Denig, W.F., Maynard, N.C., Burke, W.J. and Maehlum,
Chobotov, V. A., "Gravity-gradient Excitation of a B.N., "Electric Field Measurements During Supercharging
Rotating Cable-Counterweight Space Station in Orbit," Events on the MAIMIK Rocket Experiment," Journal of
Journal of Applied Mechanics, Vol. 30, No. 4, p. 547-554, Geophysical Research, Vol. 96, p. 3601-3610, March 1,
Dec. 1963. 1991.

Chu, C., and Gross, R., "Alfven Waves and Induction Drag Dobrowolny, M., Arnold, D., Colombo, G., and Grossi,
on Long Cylindrical Satellites," AIAA Journal, Vol. 4, p. M., "Mechanisms of Electrodynamic Interactions with a
2209, 1966. Tethered Satellite System and the Ionosphere," Reports in
Radio and Geoastronomy, No. 6, Aug., 1979.
Collar, A., and Flower, J., "A (Relatively) Low Altitude
24-Hour Satellite," J. British Interplanetary Society, Vol. Dobrowolny, M., "Electrodynamics of Long Metallic
22, p. 442-457, 1969. Tethers in the Ionospheric Plasma," Radio Science, Vol.
13, p. 417, 1978.
Colombo, G., Gaposchkin, E. M., Grossi, M. D., and
Weiffenbach, G. C., "The 'Skyhook': A Shuttle-Borne Dobrowolny, M. and Melchioni, E., "Electrodynamic
Tool for Low Orbital Altitude Research," Meccanica, Vol. Aspects of the First Tethered Satellite Mission," Journal of
10, No. 1, Mar. 1975. Geophysical Research, Vol. 98, No. A8, p. 13,761-13,778,
August 1, 1993.
Corso, G. J., "A Proposal to Use an Upper Atmosphere
Satellite Tethered to the Space Shuttle for the Collection of Dobrowolny, M. (ed.), "Special TSS-1 Issue," Il Nuovo
Micro-Meteoric Material," J. of the British Interplanetary Cimento , Vol. 17c, January-February, 1994.
Society, Vol. 36, p. 403-408, 1983.
Donohue, D.J., Neubert, T. and Banks, P.M., "Estimating
Cotellessa, A. and DeMatteis, G., "Passive Stabilization of Radiated Power from a Conducting Tethered Satellite
a Tethered System in Low Earth Orbit," Acta Astronautica, System," Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 96, p.
Vol. 29, No. 3, p. 169-180, March 1993. 21,245-21,253, December 1, 1991.

Crist, S. A., and Eisley, J. G., "Cable Motion of a Drell, S. D., Foley, H. M., and Ruderman, M. A., "Drag
Spinning Spring-Mass System in Orbit," Journal of and Propulsion of Large Satellites in the Ionosphere: An
Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 7, No. 11, p. 1352-1357, Alfven Propulsion Engine in Space," Journal of
1970. Geophysical Research, Vol. 70, No. 13, p. 3131-3145, July
1965.
Davis, W.R. and Banerjee, A.K., "Libration Damping of a
Tethered Satellite by Yo-Yo Control with Angle Ebner, S. G., "Deployment Dynamics of Rotating Cable-
Measurement," Journal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics, Connected Space Stations," Journal of Spacecraft and
Vol. 13, p. 370-374, March-April 1990. Rockets, Vol. 7, No. 10, p. 1274-1275, 1970.

Decou, A.B., "Orbital Dynamics of the Hanging Tether Estes, R. D., "Alfvén Waves from an Electrodynamic
Interferometer," Journal of Guidance, Control and Tethered Satellite System," Journal of Geophysical
Dynamics, Vol. 14, p. 1309-1311, November-December Research, Vol. 93, A2, p. 945, 1988.
1991.
Fleurisson, E J., VonFlotow, Andreas H. and Pines, Darryll
DeMatteis, G. and DeSocio, Luciano M., "Stability of a J., "Trajectory Design, and Feedback Stabilization of
Tethered Satellite Subjected to Stochastic Forces," Acta Tethered Spacecraft Retrieval," Journal of Guidance, Control
Astronautica, Vol. 25, p. 61-66, February 1991. and Dynamics, Vol. 16, No. 1, p. 160-167, January-
February 1993.
DeMatteis, G., "Dynamics of a Tethered Satellite in
Elliptical, Non-Equatorial Orbits," Journal of Guidance,
Fujii, H., Uchiyama, K. and Kokubun, K., "Mission Greene, M. E. and Denney, T. S., Jr., "Real-Time
Function Control of Tethered Subsatellite Estimator for Control of an Orbiting Single Tether
Deployment/Retrieval - In-Plane and Out-of-Plane Motion," System," IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic
Journal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics, Vol. 14, p. Systems , Vol. 27, p. 880-883, November 1991.
471-473, March-April 1991.
Greene, M.E., Carter, J.T. and Walls, J.L., "Linear
Fujii, H., Kokubun, K., Uchiyama, K. and Suganuma, T., Adaptive Control of a Single-Tether System," International
"Deployment/Retrieval Control of a Tethered Subsatellite Journal of Adaptive Control and Signal Processing, Vol. 6,
Under Aerodynamic Effect of Atmosphere," Journal of the No. 1, p. 1-17, January 1992.
Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 40, No. 2, p. 171-188, April-
June 1992. Grossi, M. D., "A ULF Dipole Antenna on a Spaceborne
Platform of the PPEPL Class," Report for NASA contract
Fujii, H. A. and Anazawa, S., "Deployment/Retrieval NAS8-28203, May, 1973.
Control of Tethered Subsatellite Through an Optimal Path,"
Journal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics, Vol. 17, No. Grossi, M. D., "Spaceborne Long Vertical Wire as a Self-
6, p. 1292-1298, December 1994. Powered ULF/ELF Radiator," IEEE Journal of Oceanic
Engineering, Vol. OE-9, No. 3, p. 211-213, July 1984.
Furta, S.D., "On the Instability of 'Folded' Equilibria of a
Flexible Nonstretchable Thread Attached to the Satellite in a Gullahorn, G., Fuligni, F., Grossi, M. D., "Gravity
Circular Orbit," Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical Gradiometry from the Tethered Satellite System," IEEE
Astronomy, Vol. 53, No. 3, p. 255-266, 1992. Transportation Geoscience Remote Sensing, Vol. GE 23, p.
531-540, 1985.
Gioulekas, A. and Hastings, D.E., "Role of Current Driven
Instabilities in the Operation of Plasma Contactors Used Gwaltney, D. A. and Greene, M. E., "Ground-Based
with Electrodynamic Tethers," Journal of Propulsion and Implementation and Verification of Control Laws for
Power, Vol. 6, p. 559-566, September-October 1990. Tethered Satellites," Journal of Guidance, Control and
Dynamics, Vol. 15, p. 271-273, January-February 1992.
Glickman, R. E. and Rybak, S. C., "Gravity Gradient
Enhancement During Tethered Payload Retrieval," Journal He, X. and Powell, J. D., "Tether Damping in Space,"
of the Astronuatical Sciences, Vol. 35, No. 1, p. 57-74, Journal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics, Vol. 13, p.
January-March, 1987. 104-112, January-February 1990.

Grassi, M. and Cosmo, M. L., "Attitude Dynamics of the Humble, R. W., "Two Dimensional Tethered Satellite
Small Expendable-Tether Deployment System," Acta Attitude Dynamics," Journal of the Astronautical Sciences,
Astronautica, Vol. 36, No. 3, p. 141-148, August 1995. Vol. 38, p. 21-27, January-March 1990.

Grassi, M. and Cosmo, M. L., "Atmospheric Research with Hurlbut, F.C. and Potter, J.L., "Tethered
the Small Expendable Deployer System: Preliminary Aerothermodynamic Research Needs," Journal of Spacecraft
Analysis," Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 33, No. and Rockets, Vol. 28, p. 50-57, January-February 1991.
1, p. 70-78, January-February 1996.
Ionasescu, R., and Penzo, P. A., "Space Tethers," British
Greene, M., Rupp, C. C., Walls, J., Wheelock, D. and Interplanetary Society, Spaceflight, Vol. 30, No. 5, May
Lorenzoni, A., "Feasibility Assessment of the Get-Away 1988.
Tether Experiment," Journal of the Astronuatical Sciences,
Vol. 35, No. 1, p. 75-96, January-March, 1987. Isaacs, J. D., Vine, A. C., Bradner, H., and Bachus, G. E.,
"Satellite Elongation into a True 'Sky-Hook'," Science,
Greene, M. E. and Denney, T. S., "On State Estimation for Vol. 151, p. 682, 683 (Feb. 1966), Vol. 152, p. 800, Vol.
an Orbiting Single Tether System," IEEE Transactions on 158, p. 946, 947, Nov. 1967.
Aerospace and Electronic Systems , Vol. 27, p. 689-695,
July 1991. James, H.G., "Wave Results from OEDIPUS A (Rocket
Sounding of Plasma Dynamics in Auroral Ionosphere),"
Advances in Space Research, Vol. 13, No. 10, p. 5-13, Raising," Journal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics, Vol.
October 1993. 15, No. 5, p. 1230-1235, September-October 1992.

Kalaghan, P., Arnold, D. A. , Colombo, G., Grossi, M., Kumar, K., "Geosynchronous Satellites at Sub-
Kirschner, L. R., and Orringer, O., "Study of the Dynamics Synchronous Altitudes," Acta Astronautica, Vol. 29, No. 3,
of a Tethered Satellite System (Skyhook)," NASA Contract p. 149-151, March 1993.
NAS8-32199, SAO Final Report, Mar. 1978.
Kyroudis, G. A., and Conway, B. A., "Advantages of Using
Kane, T. R., "A New Method for the Retrieval of the an Elliptically-Orbiting Tethered-Dumbbell System for a
Shuttle-Based Tethered Satellite," Journal of the Satellite Transfer to Geosynchronous Orbit," submitted to
Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 32, No. 3, p. 351-354, July- Journal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics, 1987.
Sept. 1984.
Lemke, E. H., "On a Lunar Space Elevator," Acta
Kane, T. R., and Levinson, D. A., "Deployment of a Astronautica, Vol. 12, No. 6, 1985.
Cable-Supported Payload from an Orbiting Spacecraft,"
Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 14, No. 7, p. 409- Lemke, L. G., Powell, J. D., He, X., "Attitude Control of
413, 1977. Tethered Spacecraft," Journal of the Astronuatical Sciences,
Vol. 35, No. 1, p. 41-56, January-March, 1987.
Katz, I., Lilley, J.R. Jr., Greb, A., McCoy, J.E., Galofaro,
J. and Ferguson, D.C., "Plasma Turbulence Enhanced Levin, E. M., "Stability of the Stationary Motions of an
Current Collection - Results from the Plasma Motor Electromagnetic Tether System in Orbit," ISSN 0010-
Generator Electrodynamic Tether Flight," Journal of 9525, Cosmic Research, Jan. 1988.
Geophysical Research, Vol. 100, No. A2, February 1995.
Levin, E. M., "Stability of the Time-Independent Tethered
Kelly, W. D., "Delivery and Disposal of a Space Shuttle Motions of Two Bodies in Orbit Under the Action of
External Tank to Low-Earth Orbit," Journal of the Gravitational and Aerodynamic Forces," Translated from
Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 32, No. 3, p. 343-350, July- Komicheskie Issledovaniya, Vol. 22, No. 5, p. 675-682,
Sept. 1984. Sept.-Oct. 1984.

Kerr, W. C., and Abel, J. M., "Traverse Vibrations of a Levin, E.M., "Nonlinear Oscillations of Space Tethers,"
Rotational Counterweighted Cable of Small Flexural Acta Astronautica, Vol. 32, No. 5, p. 405-408, May 1994.
Rigidity," AIAA Journal, Vol. 9, No. 12, p. 2326-2332,
1971. Levin, E.M., "Nearly-Uniform Deployment Strategy for
Space Tether Systems," Acta Astronautica, Vol. 32, No. 5,
Keshmiri, M., Misra, A.K. and Modi, V.J., "General p. 399-403, May 1994.
Formulation for N-Body Tethered Satellite System
Dynamics," Journal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics, Li, Z. and Bainum, P. M., "On the Development of
Vol. 19, No. 1, p. 75-83, February 1996. Control Laws for an Orbiting Tethered Antenna/Reflector
System Test Scale Model," Journal of Intelligent Material
Kim, E. and Vadali, S. R., "Modeling Issues Related to Systems and Structures, Vol. 4, No. 3, p. 343-353, July
Retrieval of Flexible Tethered Satellite System," Journal of 1993.
Guidance, Control and Dynamics, Vol. 18, No. 5, p. 1169-
1176, October 1995. Liaw, D. and Abed, E., H., "Stabilization of Tethered
Satellites During Station Keeping," IEEE Transactions on
Kline-Schoder, R. J. and Powell, J.D., "Precision Attitude Automatic Control , Vol. 35, p. 1186-1196, November
Control for Tethered Satellites," Journal of Guidance, 1990.
Control and Dynamics, Vol. 16, No. 1, p. 168-174,
January-February 1993. Lips, K. W, and Modi, V. J., "General Dynamics of a
Large Class of Flexible Satellite Systems," Acta
Kumar, K., Kumar, R. and Misra, A.K., "Effects of Astronautica, Vol. 7, p. 1349-1360, 1980.
Deployment Rates and Librations on Tethered Payload
Lips, K. W., Modi, V. J., "Transient Attitude Dynamics of Maiorov, V. A., Popov, V. I., Yanov, I. O., "Analysis of
Satellites with Deploying Flexible Appendages," Acta the Dynamics of a System Using Gravitational-Gradient and
Astronautica, Vol. 5, p. 797-815, Oct. 1978. Gyroscopic Principles of Stabilization," Cosmic Research.,
Vol. 18, No. 4, p. 348-356, Jul.-Aug. 1980.

Longuski, J.M., Puig-Suari, J., and Mechalas, J., Manaziruddin, and Singh, R.B., "Effects of Small External
"Aerobraking Tethers for the Exploration of the Solar Forces on the Planar Oscillation of a Cable Connected
System," Acta Astronautica, Vol. 35, No. 2/3, pp. 205- Satellites System," Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical
214, 1995.
Astronomy, Vol. 53, No. 3, p. 219-226, 1992.
Longuski, J.M., Puig-Suari, J., Tsiotras, P., and
Tragesser, S., "Optimal Mass for Aerobraking Tethers," Martinez-Sanchez, M., Hastings, D. E., "A Systems Study
Acta Astronautica, Vol. 35, No. 8, pp. 489-500, 1995.
of a 100 KW Electrodynamic Tether," Journal of the
Astronuatical Sciences, Vol. 35, No. 1, p. 75-96, January-
Lorenzini, E. C., "A Three-Mass Tethered System for March, 1987.
Micro-g/Variable-g Applications," Journal of Guidance,
Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 10, No. 3, May-June 1987. Martinez-Sanchez, M., and Gavit, S. , “Orbit Modifications
Also in the Russian Journal of Aeronautics/Space Using Forced Tether Length Variations.” Journal of
Technology, No. 12, Dec. 1987. Guidance, Control and Dynamics, Vol. 10, No. 3, p. 233-
241, 1987.
Lorenzini, E. C., Cosmo, M., Vertrella, S., and Moccia,
A., "Dynamics and Control of the Tether Elevator/Crawler
System," to appear in the Journal of Guidance, Control and
Dynamics, 1988.

Lorenzini, E.C., MD, Grossi, and M. Cosmo, " Low

Altitude Tethered Mars Probe," Acta Astronautica, Vol 21,
No.1, 1990, pp. 1-12.

Lorenzini, E. C., Gullahorn, G. E., and Fuligni, F.,

"Recent Developments in Gravity Gradiometry from the
Space-Shuttle-Borne Tethered Satellite System," Journal of
Applied Physics, Vol. 63, No. 1, p. 216-223, Jan. 1988.

Lorenzini, E. C., "Novel Tether-Connected Two-

Dimensional Structures for Low Earth Orbits," Journal of
Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 36, No. 4, Oct.-Dec. 1988.

Lorenzini, E.C., Sullivan, J. D. and Post, R. S., "New

Techniques for Collecting Data Around the Space Station,"
Journal of the Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 38, p. 121-141,
April-June 1990.

Lorenzini, E.C., Bortolami, S.B., Rupp, C.C., Angrilli,

F., "Control and Flight Performance of Tethered Satellite
Small Expendable Deployment System-II," Journal of
Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 19, No.5, p. 1148-
1156, September-OCtober 1996.

Lüttgen, A. and Neubauer, F.M., "Generation of Plasma

Waves by a Tethered Satellite Elongated in the Direction of
Flight for Arbitrary Oblique Geometry," Journal of
Geophysical Research, Vol. 99, A12, p. 23,349, 1994.
McComas, D. J., Spence, H. E., Karl, R. R., Horak, H. Moravec, H., "A Non-Synchronous Orbital Skyhook,"
G., Wilkerson, T. D., "Bistatic LIDAR Experiment Journal of the Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 4, p.
Proposed for the Shuttle/Tethered Satellite System 307-322, Oct.-Dec. 1977.
Missions," Review of Scientific Instruments, Vol. 56, No.
5, p. 670-673, May 1985. Myers, N.B., Ernstmeyer, J., McGill, P., Fraser-Smith,
A.C., Raitt, W.J. and Thompson, D.C., "Ground-Based
Misra, A. K., and Modi, V. J., "Deployment and Retrieval VLF Measurements During Pulsed Electron Beam
of Shuttle Supported Tethered Satellites," Journal of Emissions in the Ionosphere," Advances in Space Research,
Guidance, Control and Dynamics, Vol. 5, No. 3, p. 278- Vol. 13, No. 10, p. 99-102, October 1993.
285, 1982.
Netzer, E. and Kane, T. R., "An Alternate Approach to
Misra, A. K., Modi, V. J., "The Influence of Satellite Space Missions Involving a Long Tether," Journal of the
Flexibility on Orbital Motion," Celestial Mechanics, Vol. Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 40, No. 3, p. 313-327, July-
17, p. 145-165, Feb. 1978. September 1992.

Moccia, A. and Vetrella, S., "A Tethered Interferometric Netzer, E. and Kane, T. R., "Deployment and Retrieval
Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) for a Topographic Optimization of a Tethered Satellite System," Journal of
Mission," IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Guidance, Control and Dynamics, Vol. 16, No. 6, p. 1085-
Sensing , Vol. 30, p. 103-109, January 1992. 1091, November-December 1993.

Moccia, A., Vetrella, S. and Grassi, M., "Attitude Netzer, E. and Kane, T., "Estimation and Control of
Dynamics and Control of a Vertical Interferometric Radar Tethered Satellite Systems," Journal of Guidance, Control
Tethered Altimeter," Journal of Guidance, Control and and Dynamics, Vol. 18, No. 4, p. 851-858, August 1995.
Dynamics, Vol. 16, No. 2, p. 264-269, March-April 1993.
Neubert T., Gilchrist, B. and Ungstrup, E., "AMPAS - A
Modi, V. J. , Chang-fu, G., and Misra, A. K., "Effects of New Active Experiment Mission (Active Magnetospheric
Damping on the Control Dynamics of the Space Shuttle Particle Acceleration Satellite," Advances in Space
Based Tether System," Journal of the Astronautical Research, Vol. 15, No. 12, p. 3-12, June 1995.
Sciences, Vol. 31, No. 1, p. 135-149, Jan.-Mar. 1983.
Nixon, D. D., "Dynamics of a Spinning Space Station with
Modi, V. J., and Misra, A. K., "On the Deployment a Counterweight Connected by Multiple Cables," Journal of
Dynamics of Tether Connected Two-Body Systems," Acta Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 9, No. 12, p. 896-902, 1972.
Astronautica, Vol. 6, No. 9, p. 1183-1197, 1979.
Oberhardt, M.R., Hardy, D.A., Thompson, D.C., Raitt,
Modi, V. J., and Misra, A. K., "Orbital Perturbations of W.J., Melchioni, E., Bonifazi, C. and Gough, M.P.,
Tethered Satellite Systems," Journal of the Astronautical "Positive Spacecraft Charging as Measured by the Shuttle
Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 3, p. 271-278, July-Sept. 1977. Potential and Return Electron Experiment," IEEE
Transactions on Nuclear Science, Vol. 40, No. 6, p. 1532-
Modi, V.J., Chang-Fu, G., Misra, A. K., and Xu, D. M., 1541, December 1993.
"On the Control of the Space Shuttle Based Tether
System," Acta Astronautica, Vol. 9. No. 6-7, p. 437-443, Pasca M. and E. C. Lorenzini, “Optimization of a Low
1982. Altitude Tethered Probe for Martian Atmospheric
Collection”, The Journal of the Astronautical Sciences,
Vol. 44, No.2, 1996, pp.191-205
Modi, V.J., Lakshmanan, P.K. and Misra, A.K., "On the
Control of Tethered Satellite Systems," Acta Astronautica,
Pasca, M. Pignataro, M. and Luongo, A., "Three-
Vol. 26, No. 6, p. 411-423, June 1992.
Dimensional Vibrations of Tethered Satellite System,"
Journal of Guidance, Cont rol and Dynamics, Vol. 14, p.
Modi, V.J., Bachmann, S. and Misra, A.K., "Dynamics and
312-320, March-April 1991.
Control of a Space Station Based Tethered Elevator
System," Acta Astronautica, Vol. 29, No. 6, p. 429-449,
June 1993.
Pearson, J., "Anchored Lunar Satellites for Cislunar Puig-Suari, J., Logunski, J. M. and Tragesser, S. G., "A
Transportation and Communication," Journal of the Tether Sling for Lunar and Interplanetary Exploration," Acta
Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 27, No. 1, Jan.-Mar. 1979. Astronautica, Vol. 36, No. 6, p. 291-295, September 1995.

Pearson, J., "The Orbital Tower: A Spacecraft Launcher Quadrelli, B.M. and Lorenzini, E.C., "Dynamics and
Using the Earth's Rotational Energy," Acta Astronautica, Stability of a Tethered Centrifuge in Low Earth Orbit,"
Vol. 2, No. 9/10, p. 785-799, Sept.-Oct . 1975. Journal of the Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 40, p. 3-25,
January-March 1992.
Pelaez, J., "On the Dynamics of the Deployment of a
Tether from an Orbiter. I - Basic Equations," Acta Raitt, W.J., Ernstmeyer, James, Myers, Neil B., White,
Astronautica, Vol. 36, No. 2, p. 113-122, 1995. A.B., Sasaki, Susumu, Oyama, Koh-ichiro, Kawashima,
Nobuki, Fraser-Smith, Anthony C., Gilchrist, Brian E. and
Pelaez, J., "On the Dynamics of the Deployment of a Hallinan, Thomas J., "VLF Wave Experiments in Space
Tether from an Orbiter. II - Exponential Deployment," Acta Using a Modulated Electron Beam," Journal of Spacecraft
Astronautica, Vol. 36, No. 6, p. 313-335, 1995. and Rockets, Vol. 32, No. 4, p. 670-679, August 1995.

Ross, J., "Super-strength Fiber Applications," Astronautics

Pengelley, C. D., "Preliminary Survey of Dynamic and Aeronautics, Dec. 1977.
Stability of Cable-Connected Spinning Space Station,"
Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 3, No. 10, p. 1456- Rupp, C. C., and Laue, J. H., "Shuttle/Tethered Satellite
1462, Oct. 1966. System," The Journal of the Astronautical Sciences, Vol.
26, No. 1, p. 1-17, Jan. 1978.
Penzo, P. A., and Mayer, H. L., "Tethers and Asteroids for
Artificial Gravity Assist in the Solar System," Journal of Rupp, C. C., et al, "Shuttle/Tethered Satellite System
Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 23, No. 1, Jan.-Feb. 1986. Conceptual Design Study," NASA TMX-73365, MSFC,
Alabama, Dec. 1976.
Pines, D.J., VonFlotow, A.H. and Redding, D.C., "Two
Nonlinear Control Approaches for Retrieval of a Thrusting Samanta R., R.I. and Hastings, D.E., "Theory of Plasma
Tethered Subsatellite," Journal of Guidance, Control and Contactor Neutral Gas Emissions for Electrodynamic
Dynamics, Vol. 13, p. 651-658, July-August 1990. Tethers," Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 29, No.
3, p. 405-414, May-June 1992.
Polites, M.E., "Reconstructing Tethered Satellite Skiprope
Motion by Bandpass Filtering Magnetometer Sanmartin, J.R. and Lam, S.H., "Far-Wake Structure in
Measurements," Journal of Dynamic Systems, Rarefield Plasma Flows Past Charged Bodies," Phys.
Measurement and Control , Vol. 114, No. 3, p. 481-485, Fluids, 14, p. 62, 1971.
September 1992.
Sanmartin, J.R., Martinez-Sanchez, M. and Ahedo, E.,
Pradhan, S., Modi, V. J. and Misra, A. K., "On the Inverse "Bare Wire Anodes for Electrodynamic Tethers," Journal of
Control of the Tethered Satellite System," Journal of the Propulsion and Power, Vol. 9, No. 3, p. 353-360, May-
Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 43, No. 2, p. 179-193, June June 1993.
1995.
Sanmartin, J.R. and Martinez-Sanchez, M., "The Radiation
Pringle, R., "Exploration of Nonlinear Resonance in Impedance of Orbiting Conductors," Journal of Geophysical
Damping an Elastic Dumb-Bell Satellite," AIAA Journal, Research, Vol. 100, No. A2, p. 1677-1686, February 1,
No. 7, p. 1217-1222, 1968. 1995.

Puig-Suari, J., Logunski, J. M. and Tragesser, S. G., Santangelo, A. D. and Johnson, G. E., "Optimal Wing
"Aerocapture with a Flexible Tether," Journal of Guidance, Configuration of a Tethered Satellite System in Free
Control and Dynamics, Vol. 18, No. 6, p. 1305-1312, Molecular Flow," Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol.
December 1995. 29, No. 5, p. 668-670, September-October 1992.
Singh, N. and Vashi, B. I., "Current Collection by a Long Tyc, G. and Han, R.P.S., "Attitude Dynamics Investigation
Conducting Cylinder in a Flowing Magnetized Plasma," of the OEDIPUS-A Tethered Rocket Payload," Journal of
Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 28, p. 592-598, Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 32, No. 1, p. 133-141,
September-October 1991. February 1995.

Singh, R. B., "Three Dimensional Motion of a System of Usui, H., Matsumoto, H. and Omura, Y., "Electron Beam
Two Cable-Connected Satellites in Orbit," Acta Injection and Associated LHR Wave Excitation - Computer
Astronautica, Vol. 18, No. 5, p. 301-308, 1973. Experiments of Electrodynamic Tether System,"
Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 18, p. 821-824, May
Stabekis, P., and Bainum, P. M., "Motion and Stability of 1991.
Rotating Space Station-Cable-Counterweight
Configuration," Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 7, Usui, H., Matsumoto, H. and Omura, Y., "Plasma
No. 8, p. 912-918, 1970. Response to High Potential Satellite in Electrodynamic
Tether System," Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 98,
Stenzel, R.L. and Urrutia, J.M., "Currents Between No. A2, p. 1531-1544, February 1, 1993.
Tethered Electrodes in a Magnetized Laboratory Plasma,"
Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 95, p. 6209-6226, Vadali, S. R., "Feedback Tether Deployment and Retrieval,"
May 1, 1990. Journal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics, Vol. 14, p.
469-470, March-April 1991.
Stuiver, W., and Bainum, P. M., "A Study of Planar
Deployment Control and Libration Damping of a Tethered Vadali, S.R. and Kim, E.-S., "Feedback Control of Tethered
Orbiting Interferometer Satellite," Journal of the Satellites Using Lyapunov Stability Theory," Journal of
Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 20, No. 6, p. 321-346, May- Guidance, Control and Dynamics, Vol. 14, p. 729-735,
June 1973. July-August 1991.

Stuiver, W., "Dynamics and Configuration Control of a Vadali, S. R. and Kim, E., "Nonlinear Feedback
Two-Body Satellite System," Journal of Spacecraft and Deployment and Retrieval of Tethered Satellite Systems,"
Rockets, Vol. 11, No. 8, p. 345-346, 1974. Journal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics, Vol. 15, p.
28-24, January-February 1992.
Sutton, G. W., and Diederich, F. W., "Synchronous
Rotation of a Satellite at Less Than Synchronous Altitude," Vannaroni, G., Giovi, R. and DeVenuto, F., "Laboratory
AIAA Journal, Vol. 5, No. 4, p. 813-815, 1967. Simulation of the Interaction Between A Tethered Satellite
System and the Ionosphere," Nuovo Cimento C, Serie 1,
Swet, C. J., and Whisnant, J. M., "Deployment of a Vol. 15C, No. 5, p. 685-701, September-October 1992.
Tethered Orbiting Interferometer," Journal of the
Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 17, No. 1, p. 44-59, July- Vom Stein, R. and Neubauer, F.M., "Plasma Wave Field
Aug. 1969. Generation by the Tethered Satellite System," Journal of
Geophysical Research, Vol. 97, No. A7, p. 10,849-10,856,
Tan, Z. and Bainum, P., M., "Optimal Linear Quadratic July 1, 1992.
Gaussian Digital Control of an Orbiting Tethered
Antenna/Reflector System," Journal of Guidance, Control von Flotow, A. H., and Williamson, P. R., "Deployment
and Dynamics, Vol. 17, No. 2, p. 234-241, April 1994. of a Tethered Satellite Pair into Low Earth Orbit for Plasma
Diagnostics," The Journal of the Astronautical Sciences,
Tiesenhausen, G. von, ed., "The Roles of Tethers on Space Vol. 21, No. 1, p. 135-149, 1983.
Station," NASA-TM-86519, NASA/MSFC, Oct. 1985.
Warnock, T. W. and Cochran, J. E., Jr., "Orbital Lifetime
Tyc, G., Vigneron, F.R. and Jablonski, A.M., "Two-Body of Tethered Satellites," Journal of the Astronautical
Space Dynamics Technology Demonstration for the Biceps Sciences, Vol. 41, No. 2, p. 165-188, April-June 1993.
Small Satellite Mission," Canadian Aeronautics and Space
Journal, Vol. 40, No. 1, p. 3-9, March 1994. Wood, G. M., Siemers, P.M., Squires, R. K., Wolf, H.
and Carlomagno, G. M., "Downward-Deployed Tethered
Platforms for High-Enthalpy Aerothermodynamic
Research," Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 27, p.
215-221, March-April 1990.

Wright, A. N. and Schwartz, S. J., "The Equilibrium of a

Conducting Body Embedded in a Flowing Plasma," Journal
of Geophysical Research, Vol. 95, p. 4027-4038, April 1,
1990.

Yu, S., "On the Dynamics and Control of the Relative

Motion Between Two Spacecraft," Acta Astronautica, Vol.
35, No. 6, p. 403-409, March 1995.

Zhu, R., Misra, A.K. and Modi, V.J., "Dynamics and

Control of Coupled Orbital Motion of Tethered Satellite
Systems," Journal of the Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 42,
No. 3, p. 319-342, September 1994.
SECTION 8.0 CONTACTS

218
 202/358-4665
A-
Prof. Francesco Angrilli
Dr. Eduardo Ahedo CISAS - University of Padova
E.T.S.I. Aeronauticos Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
Plaza Cardenal Cisneros 3 VIA Venezia, 1
28040 Madrid, SPAIN 35131, Padova, ITALY
3413366310 39498286790

Mr. A.J. Alfonzo Mr. David A. Arnold

Omitron, Inc. 75 Woodbine Road
6411 Ivy Lane Belmont, MA 02178
Suite 600 617/484-7741
Greenbelt, MD 20770
301/474-1700

Mr. Andrew M. Allen

NASA, Johnson Space Center (CB)
Houston, TX 77058
713/244-8719

Prof. Yakov Alpert

Harvard Smithsonian Center
for Astrophysics
60 Garden Street
Cambridge, MA 02138
617/495-7933

Dr. Jesus Pelaez Alvarez

E.T.S.I. Aeronauticos
Dpto. Fisica Aplicada
Pl. Cardenal Cisneros 3
28040, Madrid, SPAIN
3413366306

Mr. John Anderson

NASA Headquarters
Mail Code CC
Washington, DC 20546

219
 Dr. Thomas G. Berry
B- University of Manitoba
Dept. of Applied Mathematics
Prof. Peter M. Bainum Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3T 2N2 CANADA
Howard University 204/474-8345
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
2300 6th Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20059
202/806-6612

Prof. Keith G. Balmain

University of Toronto Mr. Franco Bevilacqua
Dept. of Electrical and Alenia Spazio S.p.A. - Turin Plant
Computer Engineering Advanced Studies Department
10 King's College Road Corso Marche, 41
Toronto, Ontario, M5S 1A4 CANADA 10146 Torino, ITALY
416/978-3127 39117180718

Mr. Ivan Bekey Prof. Gianandrea Bianchini

NASA Headquarters University of Padova
Advanced Concepts Office Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
Washington, DC 20546 VIA Venezia 1
35131, Padova, ITALY
Mr. Douglas Bentley 39498286808
Cortland Cable Company
177 Port Watson Street Dr. Haik Biglari
Cortland, NY 13045 Sverdrup Technology, Inc.
607/753-8303 620 Discovery Drive
Huntsville, AL 35806
Prof. Silvio Bergamaschi 205/544-6890
Padova University
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering Mr. Sven G. Bilen
VIA Venezia 1 University of Michigan
35131 Padova, ITALY Space Physics Research Laboratory
39498286809 2455 Hayward Street
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2143
Prof. Franco Bernelli-Zazzera 313/764-8461
Politecnico di Ingegneria Aerospaziale
Politecnico di Milano Mr. Christopher Blunk
Via Golgi 40 Eleanor Roosevelt High School
20133 Milano, ITALY C/0 W.J. Webster, Jr.
39223994000 NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center

220
Code 920.2 Dip. di Energetica, Termofluidodinamica
Greenbelt, MD 20771 Applicata e
301/286-4506 Condizionamento Ambientale
Universita' di Napoli
Dr. Carlo Bonifazi P.le Tecchio, 80
Agenzia Spaziale Italiana 80125 Napoli
Viale Regina Margherita 202 39-81-7682178
00198 Roma, ITALY
Prof. Robert L. Carovillano
Mr. Brian Briswell NASA Headquarters
Arizona State University Code SS
Dept. of Mechanical 300 E. Street, S.W.
and Aerospace Engineering Washington, DC 20546
Box 876106 202/358-0894
Tempe, AZ 85287-6106
602/965-4363 Mr. Joseph A. Carroll
Tether Applications
Mr. Richard Brooke 1813 Gotham Street
12009 Lake Newport Road Chula Vista, CA 91913-2624
Herndon, VA 22070 619/421-2100

Mr. Larry L. Burgess Dr. Kelly Chance

Lockheed Martin Astronautics Harvard-Smithsonian Center
#3 Red Fox Lane for Astrophysics
Littleton, CO 80127-5710 60 Garden Street
303/971-7521 MS 50
Cambridge, MA 02138
Dr. William J. Burke 617/495-7389
Phillips Laboratory/GPSG
29 Randolph Road Mr. Chia-Lie Chang
Hanscom AFB, MA 01731-3010 Science Applications International Corp.
617/377-3980 1710 Goodridge Drive, T-2-3
McLean, VA 22102
C- 703/734-5588

Mr. Michael A. Calabrese Dr. Franklin R. Chang-Diaz

NASA Headquarters NASA, Johnson Space Center
Code SS Houston, TX 77058
300 E Street, S.W. 713/244-8923
Washington, DC 20546
202/358-0899

Prof. Giovanni Carlomagno Mr. Maurizio Cheli

221
NASA, Johnson Space Center
Houston, TX 77058 Dr. David Cooke
713/244-8739 Phillips Laboratory
PL/WSCF
Mr. Aaron Chilbert Hanscom AFB, MA 01731-3010
Naval Research Laboratory 617/377-2931
Code 8210
4555 Overlook Avenue, S.W. Dr. Mario L. Cosmo
Washington, DC 20375-5000 Harvard-Smithsonian Center
for Astrophysics
Dr. Palmer B. Chiu 60 Garden Street, MS 80
NASA, Johnson Space Center Cambridge, MA 02138
Automation, Robotics, 617/495-7412
and Simulation Division
NASA Road One; Mail Code ER6
Houston, TX 77058
713/483-8139

Dr. Dean Chlouber

System Planning Corporation
18100 Upper Bay Road, Suite 208
Houston, TX 77058
713/333-2666

Dr. Paul J. Coleman, Jr.

UCLA - IGPP
Inst of Geophysics & Planetary Physics
405 Hilgard Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1776
310/825-1776

Dr. Luis Conde

E.T.S.I. Aeronauticos
Dept. Fisica Aplicada
Pl. Cardenal Cisneros, 3
28040 Madrid, SPAIN
3413366305

Ms. Carolynn Conley

Muniz Engineering
P.O. Box 591672
Houston, TX 77259-1672
713/244-8150

222
Mr. Donald S. Crouch Hampton, VA 23681-0001
Lockheed Martin 757/864-1668
Mail Stop S8071
P.O. Box 179 Prof. Luigi de Luca
Denver, CO 80201 Dip. di Energetica, Termofluidodinamica
303/977-3408 Applicata e
Condizionamento Ambientale
Mr. Kenneth H. Crumbly Universita' di Napoli
3418 News Road P.le Tecchio, 80
Williamsburg, VA 23188 80125 Napoli
757/258-5422 39-81-7682182

D-

Dr. Roberto Da Forno

CISAS - University of Padova Dr. Donald J. Dichmann
Via Venezia 1 University of Maryland
35131 Padova, ITALY Insitute for Physical Sciences
39498286801 and Technology (IPST)
College Park, MD 20742
Mr. Mark A. Davis 301/405-7887
7515 Mission Drive
Lanham, MD 20706 Mr. Marino Dobrowolny
301/805-3960 Instituto di Fisica dello Spazio
Interplanetario, CNR
Dr. Anthony DeCou 00044 Frascati, ITALY
Northern Arizona University 3969421017
College of Engineering
Box 5600 Dr. Denis J. Donohue
Flagstaff, AZ 86011 Applied Physics Laboratory
520/523-6114 Johns Hopkins University
Johns Hopkins Road
Dr. Adarsh Deepak Laurel, MD 20723-6099
Science and Technology Corporation 301/953-6258
101 Research Drive
Hampton, VA 23666-1340 Mr. Jean-Jacques Dordain
757/865-1894 European Space Agency
8- 10 Rue Mario Nikis
Mr. John K. Diamond 75738 Paris Cedex 15, FRANCE
NASA, Langley Research Center 33153697338
M/S 471
223
Mrs. Patricia M. Doty 2101 NASA Road One
NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center Houston, TX 77058
Mail Code FA64 713/483-8379
Marshall Space Flight Center, AL 35812
205/544-4136 Dr. Robert D. Estes
Harvard-Smithsonian Center
Mr. Michael Douglass for Astrophysics
University of N Carolina - Chapel Hill 60 Garden Street
c/o W. J. Webster, Jr. Cambridge, MA 02138
NASA/GSFC 617/495-7261
Code 920.2
Greenbelt, MD 20771 Dr. Steven W. Evans
301/286-4506 NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center
Building 4203, Mail Stop EL58
Dr. Adam T. Drobot Marshall Space Flight Center, AL 35812
Science Applications International Corp. 205/544-8072
1710 Goodridge Drive, T-2-3
McLean, VA 22102
703/734-5595 F-

Dr. Dale C. Ferguson

E- NASA, Lewis Research Center
Mail Stop 302-1
Mr. Walter Eliuk 21000 Brookpark Road
Bristol Aerospace Limited Cleveland, OH 44135
660 Berry Street 216/433-2298
P.O. Box 874
Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3C 2S4 CANADA Mr. Enectali Figueroa
204/775-8331 University of Puerto Rico
P.O. Box 5088 College Station
Mayaguez, 00681 PUERTO RICO
809/265-4846
Mr. Raymond A. Ernst
Lockheed Martin Astronautics Mr. Howard A. Flanders
1725 Jefferson Davis Highway Lockheed Martin Astronautics
Suite 300 Mail Stop S8071
Arlington, VA 22202 P.O. Box 179
703/413-5762 Denver, CO 80201
303/977-3669
Mr. Jay N. Estes
NASA, Johnson Space Center Dr. Robert L. Forward
Mail Code EG2 Tethers Unlimited
224
8114 Pebble Court G-
Clinton, WA 98236
360/579-1340 Mr. Stephen Gates
Naval Research Laboratory
4555 Overlook Avenue, S.W.,
Code 8231
Washington, DC 20375
202/767-7680

Ms. Louise C. Gentile

Phillips Laboratory / GPSG
29 Randolph Road
Hanscom AFB, MA 01731-3010
617/377-7002

Dr. Sig Gerstl

Los Alamos National Lab
NIS/LDRD, MS-F658
Los Alamos, NM 87545
505/667-0952

Dr. Francesco Giani

Alenia Spazio S.p.A.
c. Marche 41
10146 Torino, ITALY
39117180716

Prof. Brian E. Gilchrist

University of Michigan
Space Physics Research Laboratory
2455 Hayward
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2143
313/763-6230

Dr. John R. Glaese

Control Dynamics
Division of bd Systems
600 Boulevard South, Suite 304
Huntsville, AL 35803
205/882-2720

Mr. Howard Goldstein

225
NASA, Ames Research Center 2455 Hayward
Building 229-3 Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2141
Moffett Field, CA 94030 313/764-8461
415/604-6103
Prof. Dr. -Ing W. Hallmann
Dr. Michael A. Greenfield Fachhochschule Aachen
HASA Headquarters Space Department
Office of Safety and Mission Assurance Hohenstaufenallee 6
300 E Street, S.W. D-52064 Aachen, GERMANY
Washington, DC 20546 24160092362
202/358-1930
Prof. Ray P.S. Han
University of Manitoba
Dept. of Mechanical
and Industrial Engineering
Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3T 2N2 CANADA
Dr. Mario D. Grossi 204/474-9519
Harvard-Smithsonian Center
for Astrophysics Dr. David A. Hardy
60 Garden Street Phillips Laboratory/GPSG
MS 80 29 Randolph Road
Cambridge, MA 02138 Hanscom AFB, MA 01731-3010
617/495-7196
Mr. James Harrison
Dr. Umberto Guidoni NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center
Italian Space Agency (ASI) Mail Code FA34
C/O NASA Johnson Space Center Huntsville, AL 35812
Houston, TX 77058 205/544-0629
713/244-2230

Dr. Gordon Gullahorn

Harvard-Smithsonian Ctr for Astrophysics Mr. Steven L. Hast
M/S 80 The Aerospace Corporation
60 Garden Street P.O. Box 92957 M4/946
Cambridge, MA 02138 Los Angeles, CA 90009-2957
617/495-7419 310/336-8968

Prof. Daniel E. Hastings

H- Massachusetts Institute of Technology
33-207 Department of Aero/Astro
Ms. Linda Habash 77 Massachusetts Avenue
University of Michigan Cambridge, MA 02139
Space Physics Research Lab 617/253-0906

226
Mr. Kazuo Ben Hayashida
NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center
ED52 Dr. Jeffrey A. Hoffman
Marshall Space Flight Center, AL 35812 NASA, Johnson Space Center
205/544-4308 Mail Code CB
Houston, TX 77058
Prof. Roderick A. Heelis 713/244-8723
Center for Space Sciences
Mail Stop: FO22 Dr. John H. Hoffman
The University of Texas at Dallas University of Texas at Dallas
Box 830688 2601 North Floyd Road
2601 N. Floyd Road Richardson, TX 75080
Richardson, TX 75080 214/883-2840
214/883-2822
Dr. Toshihisa Honma
Mr. S. Herbiniere Massachusetts Institute of Technology
CNES Dept. of Aeronautics and Astronautics
18 aveneu Edouard Belin 77 Massachusetts Avenue
31055 Toulouse Cedex, FRANCE Room 9-349
3361273439 Cambridge, MA 02139-4307
617/258-7357
MAJ Richard Higgins, Jr.
SMC/IMO Mr. George D. Hopson
2420 Vela Way NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center
Suite 1467-A5 Marshall Space Flight Center, AL 35812
Los Angeles AFB, CA 90245-4659 205/544-1735
310/416-7651
Mr. Scott Horowitz
Dr. J.M. Hinds NASA, Johnson Space Center (CB)
Space Telescope Science Institute Houston, TX 77058
3700 San Martin Drive 713/244-8719
Baltimore, MD 21218
410/338-4489 Dr. Robert P. Hoyt
Tethers Unlimited
Dr. Noel W. Hinners 8011 16th Avenue, N.E.
Lockheed Martin Astronautics Seattle, WA 98115
Mail Stop S-8000 206/525-9067
P.O. Box 179
Denver, CO 80201 Mr. Brian Humphrey
303/971-1581 Eleanor Roosevelt High School
C/O Dr. W.J. Webster, Jr.
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

227
C/O 920.2
Greenbelt, MD 20771 Mr. J.M. Gavira Izquierdo
301/286-4506 ESTEC
YM Division
Prof. Franklin C. Hurlbut Keplerlaan 1
University of California at Berkley 2200 AG Noordwijk, THE NETHERLANDS
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering 31171984314
6173 Etcheverry Hall
Berkley, CA 94720
510/642-7230 J-

Dr. Alexander M. Jablonski

Canadian Space Agency
DSM
6767 route de l'Aeroport
Saint-Hubert, Quebec, J3Y 8Y9 CANADA
514/926-4686

I- Dr. H. Gordon James

Communications Research Centre
Dr. Valerio Iafolla P.O. Box 11490, Station "H"
C.N.R. I.F.S.I. Ottawa, Ontario, K2H 8S2 CANADA
Via G. Galiles C.P.87 613/998-2230
00044 Frascati RM, ITALY
39694186220 Mr. F.L. Janssens
ESTEC/ESA
Dr. Devrie Intriligator Keplerlaan 1
Carmel Research Center Postbus 299
P.O. Box 1723 2200 AG Noordwijk, THE NETHERLANDS
Santa Monica, CA 90406 31171983802
310/453-2983

Dr. George E. Ioup

University of New Orleans Mr. Les Johnson
Dept. of Physics NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center
New Orleans, LA 70148 Mial Code PS02
504/286-5591 Huntsville, AL 35812
205/544-0614
Dr. Juliette W. Ioup
University of New Orleans Dr. R. Jerry Jost
Dept. of Physics System Planning Corporation
New Orleans, LA 70148 Center for Space Physics
504/286-6715 18100 Upper Bay Road, Suite 208

228
Houston, TX 77058 NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center
713/333-2666 Mail Code ED63
Huntsville, AL 35812
205/544-9032
K-
Mr. Stanislav l. Klimov
Dr. Ira Katz Space Research Institute of the
S-Cubed Division of Maxwell Labs Russian Academy of Sciences
3398 Carmel Mountain Road 84/32 Profsoyuznaya
San Diego, CA 92121-1095 Moscow 117810, RUSSIA
619/453-0060 70953331100

Prof. Paul J. Kellogg Mr. Joseph C. Kolecki

University of Minnesota NASA, Lewis Research Center
School of Physics and Astronomy Mail Stop 302-1
116 Church Street, S.E. 21000 Brookpark Road
Minneapolis, MN 55455 Cleveland, OH 44135
612/624-1668 216/433-2296

Dr. Vladomir Kim Mr. Paul Kolodziej

Research Institute of Applied Mechanics NASA, Ames Research Center
and Electrodynamics of Moscow Mail Stop 234-1
Aviation Institute, Moffett Field, CA 94035
4. Volokolam Snosse, Moscow, 125871, 415/604-0356
RUSSIA
951580020 Mr. William Kosmann
Interstel, Inc.
Dr. Kate P. Kirby 8000 Virginia Manor Road
Harvard-Smithsonian Center Suite 180
for Astrophysics Beltsville, MD 20705
60 Garden Street 301/210-0012
MS 14
Cambridge, MA 02138 Mrs. Linda Habash Krause
617/495-7237 University of Michigan
Space Research Building
Mr. Brian Kirouac 2455 Hayward
C/O Dr. W.J. Webster, Jr. Ann Arobr, MI 48109-2143
NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center 313/764-8461
Code 920.2
Greenbelt, MD 20771 Dr. Manfred Krishke
301/286-4506 Kayser-Threde GmbH
80337 Munchen, GERMANY
Ms. Sheryl L. Kittredge 498972495127

229
 Mail Code 50
Mr. Frank M. Kustas Kepleriann 1, 2200 AG Noordwijk,
Lockheed Martin Astronautics THE NETHERLANDS
P.O. Box 179 31171983600
Mail Stop F3085
Denver, CO 80201 Mr. Enzo Letico
303/971-9107 ASI Washington Representative
Italian Space Agency
Mr. George Kyroudis 250 E. Street, S.W., Suite 300
Spectrum Astro, Inc. Washington, DC 20024
1440 N. Fiesta Boulevard 202/863-1298
Gilbert, AZ 85234
602/892-8200 Mr. George M. Levin
NASA Headqaurters
Mail Code MP
300 E Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20546-0001
202/358-4478

Dr. Yevgeniy M. Levin

L- University of Minnesota
Dept. of Aerospace Engineering
Dr. J.G. Laframboise and Mechanics
York University 107 Akerman Hall
4700 Keele Street Minneapolis, MN 55455
North York, Ontario, M3J 1P3 CANADA 612/933-3796
416/736-5621
Dr. Mark J. Lewis
Dr. James R. LaFrieda University of Maryland
The Aerospace Corporation Dept. of Aerospace Engineering
M6/210 College Park, MD 20742-3015
P.O. Box 92957 301/405-1133
Los Angeles, CA 90009
310/416-7177

Mr. David D. Lang Dr. Weiwei Li

Lang Associates York University
2222 70th Avenue, S.E. Dept. of Physics and Astronomy
Mercer Island, WA 98040 4700 Keele Street
206/236-2579 North York, Ontario, M3J 1P3 CANADA
416/736-2100
Dr. Jean-Pierre Lebreton
ESA/ESTEC Dr. Renato Licata

230
Alenia Spazio S.p.A. - Turin Plant University of Toronto
Control & Dynamics Department Dept. of Elec. & Comp. Engineering
Corso Marche, 41 10 King's College Road
10146 Torino, ITALY Toronto, Ontario, M5S 1A4 CANADA
39117180233 416/978-5831

Dr. Garry M. Lindberg

Canadian Space Agency M-
6767 Route de L'Aeroport
St-Hubert, Quebec, J3Y 8Y9 CANADA Mr. Bruce A. Mackenzie
514/926-4372 Draper Laboratory
M/S 22
Mr. C.R. Lippincott 555 Technology Square
University of Texas at Dallas Cambridge, MA 02139
William B. Hanson Center for 617/258-2828
Space Sciences
P.O. Box 830688 / M/SF022 Mr. Robert J. Mahoney
Richardson, TX 75083-0688 NASA, Johnson Space Center
214/883-2819 Mail Code DT23 / Rendezfous Training
Houston, TX 77058
Prof. James M. Longuski 713/244-7377
School of Aeronautics &Astronautics
Purdue University Mr. Franco Malerba
1282 Grissom Hall Via Contore 10/6
West Lafayette, IN 47907-1282 Genova 16149, ITALY
317/494-5139 39106450365

Dr. Enrico Lorenzini Dr. Gianfranco Manarini

Harvard-Smithsonian Centerrophysics Agenzia Spaziale Italiana
for Astrophysics Viale Regina Margherita 202
60 Garden Street 00198 Rome, ITALY
MS 80 3968567361
Cambridge, MA 02138
617/495-7211 Prof. Franco Mariani
Via Ricerca Scientifica 11
Dr. Charles A. Lundquist 00133 Roma, Italy
The University of Alabama 39678792319
in Huntsville
301 Sparkman Drive Dr. Hartmut Marschall
Huntsville, AL 35899 Universitat Koln
205/895-6620 Institut f. Geophysik und Meteorologie
Albertus-Magnus-Platz
Dr. Andrea A.E. Luttgen Koln 50923, GERMANY

231
492214703387 3251 Hanover St.
Palo Alto, CA 94024
Mr. Leland S. Marshall
Lockheed Martin Astronautics Dr. Pietro Merlina
P.O. Box 179 Alenia Spazio S.p.A. - Turin Plant
Mail Stop 58071 Advanced Studies Department
Denver, CO 80201 Corso Marche, 41
205/544-1927 10146 Torino, ITALY
39117180718
Mr. Patrick Martin
Vitro Corporation Dr. Luca Minna
400 Virginia Avenue Advanced Engineering Technology
Washington, DC Corte Lambruschini - Piazza Borgo Pila 40
202/646-6371 16129 Genova - ITALY
39105531425
Mr. Manuel Martinez-Sanchez
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Prof. Arun K. Misra
Dept. of Aeronautics and Astronautics McGill University
Cambridge, MA 02139 Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
617/253-5613 817 Sherbrooke Street West
Montreal, CQ, H3A 2K6 CANADA
415/398-6288
Mr. Robert O. McBrayer
NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center Prof. Antonio Moccia
Code JA71 Dip. di Scienza e Ingegneria dello Spazio,
Marsahll Space Flight Center, AL 35812 Univ. di Napoli, P.le Tecchio 80, 80125 Napoli,
205/544-1926 Italy,
39-81-7682158
Dr. James E. McCoy
NASA, Johnson Space Center Dr. Vinod J. Modi
Code 5N3 University of British Columbia
Houston, TX 77058 Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
713/483-5068 2324 Main Mall
Vancouver, B.C., V6T 1Z4 CANADA
Dr. Leonard T. Melfi 604/822-2914
Science and Technology Corporation
101 Research Drive
Hampton, VA 23666-1340
757/865-1894

Dr. S.B. Mende

Dept. 91-20, 252
Lockheed

232
Mr. Richard Moyer ESA/ESTEC
Advent Systems, Inc. Postbus 299
P.O. Box 222861 2200 AG Noordwijk, THE NETHERLANDS
Chantilly, VA 22021 31171984003
703/631-3498

Mr. Ronald M. Muller

NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center
Code 170
Mission to Planet Earth Office
Greenbelt, MD 20771
301/286-9695

Ing. Bruno Musetti

Alenia Spazio S.p.A. - Turin Plant
Control and Dynamics Department O-
Gruppo Sistemi Spaziali
Corso Marche, 41 Mr. Marvin L. Odefey
10146 Torino, ITALY Lockheed Martin Astronautics
39117180752 P.O. Box 179
Mail Stop S8110
Denver, CO 80201
303/977-7782
N-
Mrs. Cinthya Ottonello
Mr. Claude Nicollier University of Genoa
NASA, Johnson Space Center Dipartimento di Ingegneria Biofisica
Houston, TX 77058 ed Elettronica
Via all' Opera Pia 11 A
Ms. Penny L. Niles 16145, Genova, ITALY
Lockheed Martin Astronautics 39103532187
P.O. Box 179
M/S SB071 Dr. K.-I. Oyama
Denver, CO 30201 The Institute of Space and Astronautical Science
303/977-3679 3-1-1, Yoshinodai, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 229
Japan
Mr. Stephen T. Noble 0427513911
Rice University
P.O. Box 244
Tavernier, FL 33070 P-
305/852-8879
Mr. L. Marco Palenzona
Mr. Mauro Novara ESA/ESTEC

233
Postbus 299 Mr. Barry R. Payne
2200 AG Noordwijk (zH), Bristol Aerospace Limited
THE NETHERLANDS 600 Berry Street
31171983651 Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3C 2S4 CANADA
204/775-8331
Dr. Dennis Papadopoulos
University of Maryland Mrs. Amey R. Peltzer
Dept. of Physics Naval Research Laboratory
College Park, MD 20742 Code 8123, Building 58 R127
301/405-1526 4555 Overlook Avenue, S.W.
Washington, DC 20375
Dr. Monica Pasca 202/767-3982
Universita di Roma "La Sapeinza"
Dipartimento di Ingegneria Dr. Paul A. Penzo
Strutturale e Geotecnica Jet Propulsion Lab
Via Eusossiana, 18-00184 Roma, ITALY 1800 Oak Grove Drive
39644585156 Pasadena, CA 91109
818/354-6162

Mrs. Maria Antonietta Perino

Alenia Spazio S.p.A.
Corso Marche, 41
10146 Torino, ITALY
39117180712

Mr. Paolo Piantella

Alenia Spazio S.p.A.
Corso Marche, 41
10146 Torino, ITALY
3911712923

Mr. Engelbert Plescher

FH Aachen, Space Department
Hohenstaufenallee 6
D-52064, Aachen, GERMANY
24160092394

Prof. J. David Powell

Stanford University
Aero/Astro Department
MC 4035
Stanford, CA 94305
415/723-3425

234
Prof. Jordi Puig-Suari Mr. Jean Sabbagh
Arizona State University Agenzia Spaziale Italiana
Dept. of Mechanical V.le Regina Margherita, 202
and Aerospace Engineering 00198 Roma, ITALY
Box 876106
Tempe, AZ 85287-6106 Ms. Salma I. Saeed
602/965-4363 Stanford University
P.O. Box 14213
Stanford, CA 94309
415/725-3297

Prof. Juan R. Sanmartin

Escuela Tecnica Superior de
Ingenieros Aeronauticos
R- Universidad Politecnica de Madrid
Plaza Cardenal Cisneros, 3
Prof. W. John Raitt 28040 Madrid, SPAIN
Utah State University 3413366302
Dept. of Physics
CASS/UMC 4405 Mr. Andrew D. Santangelo
Logan, UT 84322 The Michigan Technic Corporation
801/797-2849 17133 Inavale
Holland, MI 49424
Mr. Ray D. Rhew 616/399-4045
NASA, Langley Research Center
M/S 238
Hampton, VA 23681
757/864-4705

Mr. Charles C. Rupp Dr. S. Sasaki

NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center The Institute of Space and Astronautical Science
Mail Code PS04 3-1-1, Yoshinodai, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 229
Huntsville, AL 35812 Japan
205/544-0627 0427513911

S- Mr. Chikatoshi Satoh

Nihon University
Mr. Dieter Sabath College of Science and Technology
Lehrstuhl fur Raumfahrtechnik, TU Dept. of Aerospace Engineering
Munchen, GERMANY 7-24-1, Narashinodai, Funabashi-City,
498921052176 274 JAPAN

235
Mr. Andreas Schroeer Mr. H. Frayne Smith
Ruhr-Universiteet Bochum NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center
Theoretische Physik IV Mail Code EJ23
D-44780 Bochum, GERMANY Huntsville, AL 35812
492347003729 205/544-3572

Mr. John D. Schumacher Dr. Roberto Somma

NASA Headquarters Alenia Spazio S.p.A.
Acting Assoicate Administrator via Saccomuro, 24
External Affairs 00131 - Rome, ITALY
Washington, DC 20546 39641513208

Mr. Thomas J. Settecerri Ms. Becky C. Soutullo

Lockheed Martin Astronautics NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center
2400 NASA Road 1 / C-104 TSS Project Office
Houston, TX 77058 MSFC/JA71
713/483-4160 Marshall Space Flight Center, AL 35812
205/544-1977
Prof. Irwin I. Shapiro
Harvard-Smithsonian Center Mr. David Spencer
for Astrophysics Naval Research Laboratory
60 Garden Street Code 8213
MS 45 4555 Overlook Avenue, S.W.
Cambridge, MA 02138 Washington, DC 20375-5000
202/767-6425
Dr. Carl L. Siefring
Naval Research Laboratory Dr. Curtis H. Spenny
Plasma Physics Division U.S. Air Force Institute of Technology
Code 6755 AFIT/ENY
Washington, DC 20375 2950 P Street
202/767-2467 Building 140
Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433-7765
Mr. Charles W. Shaw 513/753-6565
NASA, Johnson Space Center
Flight Director Office Mr. John H. Stadler
Mail Code DA8 NASA, Langley Research Center
Houston, TX 77058 Mail Stop 431
713/483-5416 Hampton, VA 23681-0001
757/864-7076

Dr. Wolfgang Steiner

Technical University of Vienna

236
Institute of Mechanics Ing. Bruno Strim
Wiedner Hauptstrasse 8-10/325 Alenia Spazio S.p.A. - Turin Plant
A-1040 Vienna, AUSTRIA Scientific Satellites Directorate
431588015516 Corso Marche, 41
10146 Torino, ITALY
Dr. Nobie H. Stone 39117180733
NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center
Space Physics Laboratory Mr. Locke M. Stuart
Huntsville, AL 25812 NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center
205/544-7642 Code 920
Greenbelt, MD 20771
301/286-6481

Mr. Thomas D. Stuart

NASA Headquarters
Mail Code MO
Washington, DC 20560
202/358-4422

Mr. Francesco Svelto

ASI
Viale Regina Margherita 202
V.Le Rue Margerita, 202
00198 Rome, ITALY

T-

Prof. Giorglo Tacconi

Universita' di Genova
Dipartimento Ingegneria Biofisica
ed Elettronicat
Via Opera Pia, 11 A
Genova, 16145, ITALY
39103532187

Dr. David L. Talent

Lockheed Martin Astronautics
2400 NASA Road 1
Mail Code C-104
Houston, TX 77058
713/483-5837

237
Mr. Zhaozhi Tan Purdue University
Howard University 1282 Grissom Hall
2300 6th Street, N.W. West Lafayette, IN 47707-1282
Washington, DC 20059 317/494-5813
202/806-4842
Prof. Hans Troger
Dr. Patrick T. Taylor Technical University of Vienna
NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center Institute of Mechanics
Geodynamics Wiedner Hauptstrasse 8-10/325
Code 921 A-1040 Vienna, AUSTRIA
Greenbelt, MD 20771 431588015510
301/286-5412
Mr. George Tyc
Bristol Aerospace Limited
660 Berry Street
Mr. Paul Tetzlaff P.O. Box 874
Daimler-Benz Aerospace / RST Rostock Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3C 2S4 CANADA
Am Strom 109 204/775-8331
D-18119 Warnemunde, GERMANY
4938156259
U-
Ms. Shannon Thornburg
Stanford University Dr. Maximilian Ullmann
419 E. Indiana Street Fiat
Rapid City, SD 57701 1776 Eye Street, N.W. #775
605/394-2452 Washington, DC 20006
202/862-1614
Mr. Donald D. Tomlin
NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center
Structures and Dynamics Lab
Mail Code ED13 V-
Marshall Space Flight Center, AL 35812
205/544-1465 Prof. Sergio Vetrella
Dip. di Ingegneria Aerospaziale
Mr. P. Chewning Toulmin Seconda Universita' di Napoli
Hughes - STX Via Roma, 29
C/O Dr. W.J. Webster, Jr. 81031 Aversa (CE)
NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center tel +39-81-5044035
Code 920.2
Greenbelt, MD 20771 Dr. Frank R. Vigneron
301/286-4506 Canadian Space Agency
P.O. Box 11490
Mr. Steven G. Tragesser Station H

238
Ottawa, Ontario, K2H 82S CANADA
613/998-2741
Mr. John Williams
Mr. Giuseppe Viriglio Hughes Research Laboratory
Alenia Spazio S.p.A. 3011 Malibu Canyon Road
Corso Marche 41 Malibu, CA 90265
10146 Torino, ITALY 310/317-5446

Mr. Scott Williams

W- Stanford University
STARIAB/ Durand 33 / 4055
Mr. Bruce K. Wallace Stanford, CA 94305
NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center 415/725-0482
EL64
Marshall Space Flight Center, AL 35812 Dr. Thomas L. Wilson
205/544-1306 NASA, Johnson Space Center
Houston, TX 77058
Dr. William J. Webster, Jr. 713/483-2147
NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center
Code 920.0 Mr. Dennis Ray Wingo
Greenbelt, MD 20771 University of Alabama in Huntsville
301/286-4506 Center for Space Plasama
and Aeronomic Research
Mr. Kenneth J. Welzyn Huntsville, AL 35899
NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center 205/895-6912
Flight Dynamics Branch
ED-13 Dr. George L. Withbroe
Marshall Space Flight Center, AL 35812 NASA Headquarters
205/544-1731 Code SS
Washington, DC 20546
Mr. Scott L. Wetzel 202/358-1544
Allied Signal Technical Services Corp.
NASA SLR Dr. George M. Wood
7515 Mission Drive 101 Research Drive
Lanham, MD 20706 Hampton, VA 23666-1340
301/805-3987 757/865-1894

Prof. Paul J. Wilbur Mr. Alfred C. Wright

Colorado State Univesity Lockheed Martin Astronautics
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering 2550 E. Pine Bluff Lane
60 Garden Street Highlands Ranch, CO 80210
Fort Collins, CO 80523 303/977-5952
303/491-8564

239
Mr. N. Convers Wyeth
Science Applications International Corp. Mr. Michael F. Zedd
1710 Goodridge Drive Naval Research Laboratory
M/S 2-3-1 4555 Overlook Avenue, S.W.
McLean, VA 22102 Code 8233
703/821-4411 Washington, DC 20375-5355
202/404-8337
Z-

240
Acknowledgments

This edition of the handbook is

dedicated to the memory of the people
involved in the advancement of tethers who
are no longer with us, among them
Stanley Shawan, Billy Nunley and Silvio
Bergamaschi.

241