Advertisement

MICROSCOPE Instrument Development, Lessons for GOCE

  • Pierre Touboul
Part of the Space Sciences Series of ISSI book series (SSSI, volume 17)

Abstract

Two space missions are presently under development with pay load based on ultra-sensitive electrostatic accelerometers. The GOCE mission takes advantage of a three axis gradiometer accommodated in a very stable thermal case on board a drag-free satellite orbiting at a very low altitude of 250 km. This ESA mission will perform the very highly accurate mapping of the Earth gravity field with a geographical resolution of 100 km. The MICROSCOPE mission is devoted to the test of the “Universality of free fall” in view of the verification of the Einstein Equivalence Principle (EP) and of the search of a new interaction. The MICROSCOPE instrument is composed of two pairs Of differential electrostatic accelerometers and the accelerometer proof-masses are the bodies of the EP test. The satellite is also a drag-free satellite exhibiting a tine attitude control and in a certain way. each differential accelerometer is a one axis gradiometer with an arm of quite null Icnglh. The development of this instrument much interests the definition and the evaluation of the sensor cores of the gradiometer. The in flight calibration process of both instruments is also very similar. Lessons form these parallel developments are presented.

Keywords

Gravity Gradient Inertial Sensor Star Sensor Gravity Gradient Tensor Grace Satellite 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Balmino. G. and Rerosanz, F.: 1997, ‘Comparison of geopotential recovery capabilities of some future satellite missions’, Proc. IAG symposium, Gravity and Geoi’d, p. 403–412Google Scholar
  2. Bernard. A,, Sacleux, B„ and Touboul, P.: 1983, ‘GRADIO: orbital gravity gradiometry through differential micro accelerometry’. 34’’’ 1AF Congress. Budapest (Hungary). October 1983, ONERA TP 83–18.Google Scholar
  3. CNES: 2002, ‘The French scientific space program’, CNES Report to 34th COS PAR 2002, CNES publication.Google Scholar
  4. Damour, T.. Piazza. F.. and Veneziano, G.: 2002. ‘Violations of the equivalence principle in a dilaion-runaway scenario’. IHES/P/02/09, Bicocca-FT-02–03, CERN-TH/2002–093. May 2002.Google Scholar
  5. ESA: 1999. ‘Gravity field and steady slate Ocean Circulaiion Explorer mission’. ESA SP-1233 (1).Google Scholar
  6. Fischbach, E. and Talmadge, C. L.: 1998, The Search for non Newtonian Gravity, Springer Verlag, 320 pp.Google Scholar
  7. JPL. GRACE: 1998, ‘Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment — Science and Mission Require-menis Document’, rev. A, JPLD-15928, NASA’s Earth System Science Pathfinder Program 1–84.Google Scholar
  8. Jossei in. V.. Touboul. P.. and Kielbasa. R.: 1999. ‘Capacitive detection scheme for space accelerometer s applications Sensors and Actuators A’, Physical. 78, 92–98.Google Scholar
  9. Lämmerzahl. C.. Everill, C.W.F.. and Hehl, F.W. (eds.): 2000, Gyros, Clocks, Interferometerschrwww(133): Testing Reiativistic Gravity in Space, Lecture Notes in Physics. Springer Verlag, 507 pp.Google Scholar
  10. McPherson. K, M., et ai.’. 1999, ‘A Summary of the Quasi-Steady Acceleration Environment OnBoard STS-94 (MSL-1)’, AIAA, Reno, USAGoogle Scholar
  11. Nati, M. el al.: 1994. “ASTRE, a highly performant accelerometer for the low frequency range of lhe microgravity environment’, 24’1’ Symposium on space environmental control systems. Friedrichshafen, Germany, AIAA Proceedings.Google Scholar
  12. Reigber. Ch.. et al.: 1996, CHAMP Phase B Executive Summary, G.F.2., STR96/13 1–37.Google Scholar
  13. Reigber. Ch.. Liihr. H.. Schwintzer, P.: 2002, “Champ mission status’. Advances in Space Research 30 (2), 192–134.Google Scholar
  14. Rummel. R. and Colombo. O, L.: 1985, ‘Gravity field determination from satellite gradiometry’, Bull. Geod. 59, p. 233–246.Google Scholar
  15. Tap ley. B. and Reigber, C.: 2002. ‘The GRACE mision, its status and early results’. 34lh COSPAR, Houston, October 2002.Google Scholar
  16. Touboul, P.: 2000, ‘Space accelero meters: present status’, in C. Lämmerzahl. C.W. F. Everill, F. W. Hehl (eds.), Gyrod, Clocks, interferometers chrwww(133) : Testing Reiativistic Gravity in Space, Lecture Note in Physics. Springer Verlag, p. 274.Google Scholar
  17. Touboul, P. et al.: 1991, ‘Drag effect on gradiometer measurements’, Manuscripta Geodaetica 16 (2), 73–91.Google Scholar
  18. Touboul, P.. Foulon, B.. and Le Clerc, G.: 1998, ‘STAR lhe accelerometer of the geodesic mission CHAMP’, IAF-98-B. 3. 07.Google Scholar
  19. Touboul, P., Foulon, B.. and La t’argue. L.: 2002. ‘The MICROSCOPE mission“. Acta Astronau’.ica 50 (7). 433–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Willemenot. E. and Touboul, P., ‘On-ground investigations of space accelero me le rs noise with an electrostatic torsion pendulum’, Re iew of Scient ific Instruments 71/1,302–309.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pierre Touboul
    • 1
  1. 1.Physical Instrumentation DepartmentONERAChatillon CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations