1、 ANSI/AIAA S-142-2016 Standard/Handbook for Multipactor Breakdown Prevention in Spacecraft Components Sponsored by American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Approved 20 September 2016 American National Standards Institute Approved 21 October 2016 Abstract This document is intended to provid
2、e a standardized process for mitigation of multipactor breakdown within spacecraft components. It is directed toward component designers, satellite system engineers, as well as the customer community to provide worst-case conditions, margin requirements, and verification of those requirements using
3、state-of-the-art methodologies. In addition, recommended methods are provided, with examples, to ensure proper requirement verification for all satellite RF components susceptible to RF breakdown. ANSI/AIAA S-142-2016 ii Published by American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics 12700 Sunrise V
4、alley Drive, Reston, VA 20191 Copyright 2016 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics All rights reserved No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, in an electronic retrieval system or otherwise, without prior written permission of the publisher. Printed in the United Stat
5、es of America ANSI/AIAA S-142-2016 iii Contents FOREWORD IX INTRODUCTION X 1 SCOPE 1 1.1 Purpose 1 1.2 Document Applicability and Features 1 1.3 Document Tailoring 2 1.4 General Document Structure and Process Overview 2 2 MINIMUM MULTIPACTOR CRITERIA AND DEVICE CLASSIFICATION 4 2.1 Minimum Multipact
6、or Criteria 5 2.1.1 Multipactor Susceptible Frequency Selection 5 2.1.2 Multipactor Gap 6 2.1.3 Multipactor Frequency-Gap (fd) Product 6 2.1.4 Minimum Frequency*Gap (fdmin) Product Criteria 6 2.2 Device Type 7 2.2.1 Type 1 Component 7 2.2.2 Type 2 Component 7 2.2.3 Type 3 Component 7 2.3 Device Anal
7、ysis Level 8 2.3.1 Analysis Level 1 9 2.3.2 Analysis Level 2 9 2.3.3 Analysis Level 3 9 2.3.4 Analysis Level Considerations 10 2.3.5 Special Cases and Examples 10 2.4 Process Flow Chart for Multipactor Qualification/Acceptance and Verification 11 3 SYSTEM ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS 11 3.1 Definition of F
8、ailure Modes 12 3.2 Worst-case Amplifier Power 12 3.2.1 Single Amplifier (Single Carrier, Modulated or Multicarrier) 12 3.2.2 Non-resonant Combining of Amplifiers (Example: Multiport Amplifier) 13 3.2.3 Resonant Combining of Amplifiers (Example: Output Multiplexers) 1 3.3 Component Loss 13 3.4 VSWR/
9、Reflected Power Enhancement 13 ANSI/AIAA S-142-2016 iv 3.5 Effective Component Power for Analysis and Test 14 3.6 Other Requirements and Considerations 14 3.6.1 Test VSWR Environment 14 3.6.2 Other Ground Test Considerations 14 3.7 Venting Requirements 14 4 MULTIPACTOR MARGIN REQUIREMENTS 15 4.1 Mar
10、gin Requirements 15 4.2 Factors Influencing Margin Requirements 15 4.3 Margin Verification Methods 16 4.3.1 Component Qualification 16 4.3.1.1 Lot Acceptance by Qualification 16 4.3.1.2 Qualification by Similarity 16 4.3.2 Component Proto-qualification Testing 17 4.3.3 Flight Component Acceptance Te
11、sting 17 4.4 Risk Management Process 17 5 VERIFICATION BY ANALYSIS 18 5.1 Geometric Evaluation 18 5.2 Frequency Selection 18 5.3 Implementing System Parameters into Analysis 18 5.4 Local Electric Field/Voltage Analysis 18 5.4.1 Analysis Level 1 18 5.4.2 Analysis Level 2 19 5.4.3 Analysis Level 3 19
12、5.4.4 Analysis Level Considerations 19 5.5 Analytical Margin Determination 19 5.5.1 Analysis Level 1 and 2 Components 19 5.5.2 Analysis Level 3 Components 20 5.6 Material/SEY Evaluation 21 5.7 Components Not Eligible for Qualification by Analysis 22 5.8 Analysis Process 22 6 VERIFICATION BY TEST 25
13、6.1 Documentation 25 6.2 Breakdown Detection Methods 25 ANSI/AIAA S-142-2016 v 6.3 Test Setup Verification 26 6.3.1 Setup Verification 26 6.3.2 Known Breakdown Device 26 6.4 Duty Cycle 26 6.5 Pulse Length 26 6.6 Electron Seeding 26 6.7 Vacuum 27 6.8 Thermal 27 6.9 Data Acquisition 28 6.10 Pass/Fail
14、Criteria 28 7 ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY 29 7.1 Analysis Level 1 and 2 29 7.2 Steps for Verification Analysis using Worst-case Power (Section 3) 29 7.2.1 Steps for Determining Expected Breakdown Power 30 7.2.2 Gap Selection for Field Integration 30 7.2.3 Limitations and Considerations 30 7.3 Analysis Leve
15、l 3 31 7.3.1 Recommended Steps for Analysis 31 7.3.2 Particle Simulation Guidelines 31 7.3.2.1 Considerations for Initial Electron Sourcing 31 7.3.2.2 Determining Power Levels for Analysis 31 7.3.2.3 SEY inputs 32 7.3.2.4 Multipactor Breakdown Criteria and Accuracy 32 7.4 Analysis for Risk Assessmen
16、t 32 7.4.1 Hybrid RF Circuit Model Approach 32 7.4.2 RF Hybrid Model Limitations 33 8 TEST METHODOLOGY 34 8.1 Test Equipment Considerations 34 8.2 Test Setup Validation 37 8.2.1 Multipactor-Free Verification 37 8.2.2 Ability To Detect Multipactor 37 8.3 Multipactor Diagnostic Methods 37 8.3.1 Local
17、Diagnostics 38 8.3.1.1 Current Probe 38 8.3.1.2 Photon Detector 38 8.3.2 Global Diagnostics 39 8.3.2.1 Phase Null 39 8.3.2.2 Near Carrier Noise 40 ANSI/AIAA S-142-2016 vi 8.3.2.3 Third Harmonic 41 8.3.2.4 Transmitted/Reflected Power 41 8.4 Multipactor Breakdown Observations 41 8.4.1 Chamber Pressure
18、 Increase 41 8.4.2 DUT Temperature Increase 42 8.4.3 Visual Indication 42 8.4.4 RF Performance Changes 42 8.5 Relative Diagnostic Sensitivity 42 8.6 RF Shut-down Protection System 43 8.7 Electron Seeding 43 8.8 RF Test Operation 43 8.9 Data Acquisition and Reporting 43 8.9.1 Data Recording 43 8.9.2
19、Sampling Rates 44 8.9.3 Minimum Data Items Required 44 8.9.4 Test Report Guidelines 44 9 REFERENCES 45 ANNEX A BACKGROUND A-1 A.1 Background A-1 ANNEX B COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT MULTIPACTOR RISK MITIGATION PROCESSES B-1 ANNEX C REFERENCE GEOMETRIES FOR ANALYSIS AND TEST SETUP VALIDATION C-1 ANSI/AIAA
20、 S-142-2016 vii Figures Figure 1.1 Simplified sc hematic of an RF system 2 Figure 1.2 Applicability and document implementation for a ty pical RF system. . 4 Figure 2.1 Illustration depict ing the “no multipactor region” below fdmin. Actual values of fdmin will depend on the first cross over energy
21、of the SEY, E1. 7 Figure 2.2 Flow chart for marg in determination and verification process. 11 Figure 3.1 Example of a singl e carrier RF system for which component N must be evaluated for multipactor breakdown. 12 Figure 5.1 Baseline multipacto r threshold curves for analysis. RF voltage shown is p
22、eak RF voltage. . 20 Figure 5.2 Worst-case sec ondary electron yield. . 22 Figure 5.3 Minimum analysis verification process. 24 Figure 8.1 Example of a multipactor test block diagram. . 35 Figure 8.2 Ring resonat or test block diagram. . 36 Figure 8.3 Example block diagram for a phase null diagnosti
23、c. . 40 Figure A.1 Cartoon r epresentation of simple, parallel plate multipactor breakdown. . A-1 Figure A.2 A general secondary electron yield (SEY) curve showing the theoretical multipactor region for electron density growth. A-2 Figure B.1 Comparison between AIAA and ECSS multipactor threshold. .
24、 B-3 Figure C.1 Annotated cross section of coaxial device. . . C-1 Figure C.2 Dimensional drawing of outer conductor piece. . C-2 Figure C.3 Dimensional drawing of inner conductor piece. . C-2 Figure C.4 Devi ce geometry. . C-3 Figure C.5 Calculated gap volt ages from electromagnetic analysis. . C-3
25、 Figure C.6 Breakdown power versus frequency in Regions 2 and 3. C-4 Figure C.7 Test schematic for multipactor testing on the coaxial KBD. . C-5 Figure C.8 S- parameters for coaxial KBD. C-6 Figure C.9 Breakdown power test data in coaxial KBD. C-7 Tables Table 2.1 Device types For M ultipactor Test
26、and Analysis 7 Table 2.2 Summary of Device An alysis Levels used for Analysis Verification . 8 Table 4.1 Multipactor Margin R equirements for Analysis and Test 15 Table 5.1 General List of Analys is Verification Requirements . 18 Table 5.2 Threshold Voltage Eq uations by Frequency-Gap Product. 20 Ta
27、ble 6.1 Summary of Minimum T est Requirements for Margin Verification . 25 Table 7.1 Summary of Analysis Verification by Analysis Level 29 Table 8.1 Local Diagnostic Methods 38 Table 8.2 Global Dia gnostic Methods 39 ANSI/AIAA S-142-2016 viii Table B.1 Comparison of Margin Requirements for Analysis
28、Between AIAA and ECSS . B-2 Table B.2 Comparis on Of Margin Requirements for Test Between AIAA and ECSS B-2 Table C.2 Breakdown Power T est Data in Coaxial KBD. C-7 ANSI/AIAA S-142-2016 ix Foreword This document was created by multiple authors throughout the government and the aerospace industry. At
29、 the time of approval, the members of the AIAA Materials CoS were: Kevin Campbell, Exelis Incorporated Will Caven, Space Systems/Loral James Farrell, The Boeing Company Robert Frankievich, Lockheed Martin Corporation Timothy Graves, The Aerospace Corporation Aimee Hubble, The Aerospace Corporation T
30、homas Musselman, The Boeing Company Preston Partridge, The Aerospace Corporation Mike Settember, Jet Propulsion Laboratory Jian Xu, Aeroflex Incorporated For their content contributions, we thank the fcontributing authors for making this collaborative effort possible. A special thank you for co-lead
31、ing this team and efforts to ensure completeness and quality of this document goes to Dr. Jeffrey Tate, Raytheon Space and Airborne Systems. The Topic Team would like to acknowledge the contributions and feedback from the subject matter experts who reviewed the document: Stefan Vincent, Orbital Doug
32、las Dawson, JPL Luigi Greco, Exelis Dennis Mlynarski, Lockheed Martin Corporation Larry Arnett, SSL Ghislain Turgeon, SSL Steve Holme, SSL Rick Bennett, Flight Microwave Corporation Joseph Roubal, Aeroflex Jerry Michaelson, The Aerospace Corporation Lee Olson, The Aerospace Corporation John Walchak,
33、 Harris Corporation The Materials CoS approved this document in August 2016. The AIAA Standards Executive Council (Allen Arrington, Chairman) accepted the document for publication in September 2016. The AIAA Standards Procedures dictates that all approved Standards, Recommended Practices, and Guides
34、 are advisory only. Their use by anyone engaged in industry or trade is entirely voluntary. There is no agreement to adhere to any AIAA standards publication and no commitment to conform to or be guided by standards reports. In formulating, revising, and approving standards publications, the committ
35、ees on standards will not consider patents that may apply to the subject matter. Prospective users of the publications are responsible for protecting themselves against liability for infringement of patents or copyright or both. ANSI/AIAA S-142-2016 x Introduction This document is intended to provid
36、e a standardized process for mitigation of multipactor breakdown within spacecraft components. It is directed toward component designers, satellite system engineers, as well as the customer community to provide worst-case conditions, margin requirements, and verification of those requirements using
37、state-of-the-art methodologies. In addition, recommended methods are provided, with examples, to ensure proper requirement verification for all satellite RF components susceptible to RF breakdown. The importance of applying the processes and risk mitigation strategies of this document continue to gr
38、ow with the increase in component power levels. Multipactor and ionization breakdown can lead to device damage and/or significant mission impact; as such, this document provides methodologies to minimize potential risks in applicable RF systems and components. Many of the recent RF breakdown-related
39、 issues can be traced back to a lack of standard processes for analysis and test. The processes described in this document are focused on predicting bounding, worst-case conditions for known system parameters and applying these conditions to a broad range of components and RF systems. This new and a
40、lternative approach removes excessive, hidden, or stacked margins by using bounding case calculations and measurable/available data for the particular system and component under investigation. Worst-case conditions are combined with standard analysis and test processes to minimize device susceptibil
41、ity to multipactor. The document is organized to follow this process in a typical component development flow, starting with high-level component definitions and determination of worst-case system parameters. Subsequent sections continue the process by providing margin requirements and then minimum r
42、equirement verifications. These minimum verification requirements utilize state-of-the-art tools for both analysis and test, and they are necessary to avoid many of the failures observed in recent history. Lastly, recommended analysis and test guidelines are provided to illustrate industry best prac
43、tices and considerations for different component types. A reference geometry for analysis and test validation is also provided as a standard to the industry for comparison purposes. This document provides new benefits to customer, contractor, and supplier groups by providing clear margin definitions
44、 and requirements, while removing excessive margin through the application of this bounding case process. Proper implementation of the latest analysis techniques can, in some cases, eliminate the need for expensive qualification/acceptance testing with more accurate and representative numerical anal
45、ysis. Adherence to test requirements will provide risk reduction and early issue identification and prevent expensive failures late into the integration cycle. By following the requirements and process outlined in this document, multipactor risk within spacecraft components should be minimized throu
46、ghout the component life cycle. In summary, multipactor risk mitigation is made possible via this document through proper and careful analysis processes, test methods, and application of the process detailed in this document. ANSI/AIAA S-142-2016 1 1 Scope 1.1 Purpose This document is intended to se
47、rve as a standard and handbook for the prevention of multipactor breakdown in spacecraft components and systems. The document provides minimum requirements for risk definition, system analysis, and component analysis and test. Supporting documentation describes proper design, analysis, and test guid
48、elines while also providing the requirements for defining the proper system engineering to identify RF breakdown risks within susceptible components. The document framework is based on defining worst-case parameters as general inputs to analysis or test criteria for all components within the RF syst
49、em. Using hardware-specific values, these worst-case parameters are defined separately from margin requirements. With properly defined worst-case conditions, the document addresses required margins for analysis and test for multiple devices categories. Subsequent sections provide minimum verification requirements to demonstrate the margin recommendations for both analysis and test. Applicability of different analysis and test methods to the device class categories is provided, with special cases and considerations. Multip
