Post by thread:[PIC]: Shuttle related question

Does anyone out there know what (if any) microcontrollers are deployed on the shuttle? (PICs or otherwise)... Douglas Wood Software Engineer spam_OUTdbwoodTakeThisOuTkc.rr.com ICQ#: 143841506 Home of the EPICIS Development System for the PIC http://epicis.piclist.com -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

Must be INTEL..... Tal -----Original Message----- From: pic microcontroller discussion list [.....PICLISTKILLspam@spam@MITVMA.MIT.EDU]On Behalf Of Douglas Wood Sent: Sunday, February 02, 2003 11:15 PM To: PICLISTKILLspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU Subject: [PIC]: Shuttle related question Does anyone out there know what (if any) microcontrollers are deployed on the shuttle? (PICs or otherwise)... Douglas Wood Software Engineer .....dbwoodKILLspam.....kc.rr.com ICQ#: 143841506 Home of the EPICIS Development System for the PIC http://epicis.piclist.com -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

On Sun, 2 Feb 2003, Tal wrote: *>Must be INTEL..... ?! At least one PIC went on a Shuttle mission. Ditto embedded Linux afaik (probably on Motorola but I am not sure). They probably choose commercially hardware after they drop it off cliff. If it works after that they take it up. I'd be wary of a laptop. The screen could shatter or something and hen you can't see a thing and the disks will crash hard if the cabin pressure is lost. I suspect that the flight related hardware is not of civilian design. Peter -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

Who cares right now ? Jan-Erik Söderholm. Douglas Wood wrote : > Does anyone out there know what (if any) microcontrollers are > deployed on the shuttle? (PICs or otherwise)... -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

>I suspect that the flight related hardware is not of civilian design. It is. My model boating buddy (and famous runner) Jimmy Gilbert did the testing in Indy (I think) to qualify commercial equipment for shuttle use. The LAN card in my laptop is a shuttle-approved variety. Andy -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

On Sun, 2 Feb 2003, Andy Kunz wrote: *>>I suspect that the flight related hardware is not of civilian design. *> *>It is. My model boating buddy (and famous runner) Jimmy Gilbert did the *>testing in Indy (I think) to qualify commercial equipment for shuttle use. *>The LAN card in my laptop is a shuttle-approved variety. I should have said flight control related. Peter -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

LAN-cards are hardly flight-related hardware. They are used for the local network once on orbit, to access documentation, instructions, email, ... But not for flying the shuttle. These things come lose way to easy. For starters Peter O On Sun, 2003-02-02 at 22:54, Andy Kunz wrote: {Quote hidden}> >I suspect that the flight related hardware is not of civilian design. > > It is. My model boating buddy (and famous runner) Jimmy Gilbert did the > testing in Indy (I think) to qualify commercial equipment for shuttle use. > The LAN card in my laptop is a shuttle-approved variety. > > Andy > > -- > http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics > (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics -- Met vriendelijke groeten, Peter O -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

I thought I heard a while back that TI was making stuff for NASA... On Sunday 02 February 2003 04:40 pm, you wrote: > Who cares right now ? > > Jan-Erik Söderholm. > > Douglas Wood wrote : > > Does anyone out there know what (if any) microcontrollers are > > deployed on the shuttle? (PICs or otherwise)... > > -- > http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics > (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

At 12:02 AM 2/3/03 +0200, you wrote: >On Sun, 2 Feb 2003, Andy Kunz wrote: > >*>>I suspect that the flight related hardware is not of civilian design. >*> >*>It is. My model boating buddy (and famous runner) Jimmy Gilbert did the >*>testing in Indy (I think) to qualify commercial equipment for shuttle use. >*>The LAN card in my laptop is a shuttle-approved variety. > >I should have said flight control related. Sorry, I misunderstood. You are probably right there. Andy -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

I can't speak of the shuttle, but I worked on the design of part of the electronics in the latest space telescope, AXAF-I, as a civilian. The process is extremely controlled and one needs to undergo critical design reviews first and then critical design audits and must defend the design before NASA scientists. There is no room for error. The design must conform to very tight standards. Rich {Original Message removed}

Peter L. Peres wrote: >At least one PIC went on a Shuttle mission. Ditto embedded Linux afaik >(probably on Motorola but I am not sure). They probably choose >commercially hardware after they drop it off cliff. > From what little I've read there are specifications down to the exact solders approved. I imagine there are very few pieces of commercial hardware that would pass at the board level, nevermind the product level. Cosmic rays penetrate everything up there at one point of another, so the size of the features of the die in a chip and its packaging are as important as many other considerations. The stuff that goes up 'on a shuttle mission' has less strict specs than the stuff that is part of flight control. An off the shelf embedded computer, if well made, would still have problems though. Not only are they concerned about whether the device will make the trip without damaging itself or anything else, but 'little' things like outgassing are of critical importance. Not only could the chip packages give off a terrible odor (which we wouldn't notice here, but in confined spaces with recycled air could lead to nausea) but the chemicals released can damaged air handlers and other safety critical equipment. >If it works after that >they take it up. I'd be wary of a laptop. The screen could shatter or >something and hen you can't see a thing and the disks will crash hard if >the cabin pressure is lost. > Hard drives meant for high altitude applications are completely sealed with air inside, as opposed to those we use on the ground which have filtered air vents. I'm certian everything with glass or any brittle material must have some layer of protection (plastic). I would speculate that even tempered glass wouldn't be accepted as-is. There are many student projects that are taken up, and many of them have described the specifications, processes, and procedures to getting their item up. Very interesting stuff... -Adam -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

>Hard drives meant for high altitude applications are completely >sealed with air inside, as opposed to those we use on the ground >which have filtered air vents. I'm certian everything with glass >or any brittle material must have some layer of protection >(plastic). I would speculate that even tempered glass wouldn't >be accepted as-is. I do not know how much experience you have with space hardware, but what you wrote in this email suggests you have very little, if any. Having worked on space instrumentation for over 5 years now, I do know a little. In terms of what plastics are allowable, there are very few, as most of them outgas fumes that will get everywhere you do not want them, and if there is any optics around, you definitely do not want them. I have no experience with using hard drives per se, but there is no reason why glass itself would need to be covered that I am aware of. Hard drives would probably need to be ruggedised to withstand the G forces experienced during launch, but this is probably not a problem for many laptop type drives. >The stuff that goes up 'on a shuttle mission' has less strict >specs than the stuff that is part of flight control. An off >the shelf embedded computer, if well made, would still have >problems though. Not only are they concerned about whether the device will make the trip without damaging itself or anything else, I would be surprised if an "off the shelf" computer would be used straight out of the box, but a suitably repackaged industrial computer should be OK, as it would need repackaging to get it past the necessary vibration testing, to ensure all screws stayed done up and wiring did not come adrift. >but 'little' things like outgassing are of critical importance. >Not only could the chip packages give off a terrible odor >(which we wouldn't notice here, but in confined spaces with >recycled air could lead to nausea) but the chemicals released can >damaged air handlers and other safety critical equipment. Well the "plastic" packages used on COTS chips are apparently OK. I am not aware of any that outgas, as they are not really plastic, but an epoxy. As a package they are apparently OK for radiation hardening of chips as well. >From what little I've read there are specifications down to >the exact solders approved. Well we use "ordinary" 60/30 solder. There is talk of not having the lead free imposition affect production for space instruments as well. However it may be that specific contracts require special solder to be used in certain instances. This may be more to do with other environmental requirements, such as needing to match thermal expansion characteristics of packages, and these can be using the full military temperature range of the chips, so thermal cycling can be a real problem. >Cosmic rays penetrate everything up there at one point of >another, so the size of the features of the die in a chip and its >packaging are as important as many other considerations. This is one problem, but usually only a problem for satellites in earth orbit, as the magnetic field seems to create more intense particle fields around the earth as the solar wind comes under the influence of the field. Satellites which get beyond the earths influence have lower requirements in radiation hardness, even when being put in a position closer to the sun than the earth is. For example the SOHO satellite that is at the L1 point between the earth and sun had a radiation requirement of 10k Rads for a 3 year mission life, and has been working for over twice that now, on the instrument that my colleagues produced. Compared to that an instrument that I was involved in making had a requirement of 100k Rad for a 5 year mission life in low earth orbit. I would expect that items taken on the shuttle for an experiment that was to run for the length of a particular shuttle mission would have almost no specification for radiation hardness, but anything that was to go on the space station would probably require a reasonable specification. However unless there was a requirement to mount it on the outside (such as some form of sensor or detector), the requirements would not be very stringent. Aluminium is a reasonable shield against such radiation, with tantalum being the best for radiation shielding against weight trade-offs. Thank you Alan B. Pearce R25 Rm 1-122 Rutherford Appleton Laboratory Chilton Didcot OXON OX11 OQX United Kingdom Tel +44 1235 44 6532 Fax +44 1235 44 5848 -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

Watching downlink video, even I can see that laptop computers are flown regularly as part of standard hardware. What *are* you talking about? Nate Duehr, EraseMEnatespam_OUTTakeThisOuTnatetech.com {Original Message removed}

Nate Duehr wrote: > Watching downlink video, even I can see that laptop computers are flown > regularly as part of standard hardware. What *are* you talking about? I have seen that, and I wondered about the hard drives. At low absolute pressure, the disks would crash. I don't know what the functional lower limit is for barometric pressure to maintain operation, but I would suspect it is at least a few PSI. Consequently, maybe they use sealed hard drives on those computers, just in case? Or perhaps they have more important things to worry about if they have to depressurize. -- Mike Poulton mpoultonspam_OUTmtptech.com MTP Technologies KC0LLX -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

Could this thread either be closed down or moved to [OT]: or [EE]:... Jan-Erik Söderholm. -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

Well, astronauts' lungs would explode at 0PSI too. That's why they are in a pressurized cabin. Andy At 10:08 AM 2/3/03 -0600, you wrote: {Quote hidden}>Nate Duehr wrote: >> Watching downlink video, even I can see that laptop computers are flown >> regularly as part of standard hardware. What *are* you talking about? > >I have seen that, and I wondered about the hard drives. At low >absolute pressure, the disks would crash. I don't know what the >functional lower limit is for barometric pressure to maintain >operation, but I would suspect it is at least a few PSI. Consequently, >maybe they use sealed hard drives on those computers, just in case? Or >perhaps they have more important things to worry about if they have to >depressurize. > >-- > >Mike Poulton >@spam@mpoultonKILLspammtptech.com >MTP Technologies >KC0LLX > >-- >http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different >ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details. -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

Another problem with low pressure or high altitude are heat dissipation. The thinner the air is, they more you need to relay on radiation and less on convection. Tal > {Original Message removed}

Your lungs would not explode, they would fill with a nice pink liquid. This is caused by a higher pressure inside the cells inside your lungs, This is actually a quite common ailment among high altitude climbers. Its fatal unless you can get the person to a lower altitude or inside a pressurized gamov bag. This is called Pulmonary Edema ther is also another version callled cereberal edema, which effects you brain. The astronauts would have pretty much vapourised due to heat before this would have effected them. No clue what the crashing hard drives is on about, There a sealed unit with a little bubble that expands and contracts to take into account barometric pressure changes. What would cause them to crash at 0 barometric pressure. I know a laptop can work fine at over 8000 meters (Everest) unpressurized at about 100 below zero if you keep the batteries next to your body to keep them warm. -- On Mon, 3 Feb 2003 14:40:53 Tal wrote: >Another problem with low pressure or high altitude are heat dissipation. >The thinner the air is, they more you need to relay on radiation and >less on convection. > >Tal > >> {Original Message removed}

----- Original Message ----- From: "m tanski" <KILLspammtanskiKILLspamLYCOS.COM> To: <RemoveMEPICLISTTakeThisOuTMITVMA.MIT.EDU> Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 11:00 PM Subject: Re: [PIC]: Shuttle related question > I know a laptop can work fine at over 8000 meters >(Everest) unpressurized at about 100 below zero if you >keep the batteries next to your body to keep them >warm. > -- OK I'm gunna bite...........and how do you know this? :-) JJ -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! email spamBeGonelistservspamBeGonemitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

Been a climber for almost 20 years, I have a few friends who have attempted everest,(Barry Blanchard(famous super climber dude), Grant Stetham) both of them got kicked off the mountain by bad snow conditions. And know a woman who has stood on the top. Used to date her Nanny when I lived out west. Also there have been a couple of webcasts from the top of the world. I wish I had first hand knowledge with my own eyes of a laptop on Everest, just reports from friends and from following the climbing comunity. -- On Wed, 5 Feb 2003 00:06:58 Jonathan Johnson wrote: >{Original Message removed}

On Tuesday 04 February 2003 07:00 am, you wrote: > No clue what the crashing hard drives is on about, There a sealed > unit with a little bubble that expands and contracts to take into > account barometric pressure changes. What would cause them to crash > at 0 barometric pressure. I know a laptop can work fine at over 8000 > meters (Everest) unpressurized at about 100 below zero if you keep > the batteries next to your body to keep them warm. I'm guessing that rapid depressurization of the drive could result in a head crash due the turbulence of the escaping air. Plus, how would the head "fly" with no air present? It seems reasonable that the drive heads depend upon standard atmospheric pressure to keep the heads at the proper distance from the platter. michael brown -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! email TakeThisOuTlistservEraseMEspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

Can this PLEASE PLEASE be moved to OT??? There's no PIC content here. Dale -- It's a thankless job, but I've got a lot of Karma to burn off. On Tue, 4 Feb 2003, m tanski wrote: > Your lungs would not explode, they would fill with a nice pink liquid. This is caused by a higher pressure inside the cells inside your lungs, This is actually a quite common ailment among high altitude climbers. Its fatal unless you can get the person to a lower altitude or inside a pressurized gamov bag. This is called Pulmonary Edema ther is also another version callled cereberal edema, which effects you brain. The astronauts would have pretty much vapourised due to heat before this would have effected them. -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! email RemoveMElistservTakeThisOuTmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body