NASA or Privatized Space Exploration?

Have you ever thought how NASA has impacted your life? If not, look around you. Your computer, cell phone, and many other technologies are results of advancements made possible by NASA.  In NASA's missions with space exploration, many technological advancements have resulted.  One specific example is the integrated circuit, a development that led to the microchip. This allowed for the future development of many technologies common to households, and businesses today. (To see more technologies resulting from NASA, check this out.)

Source http://www.thespacereview.com/archive/467a.jpg

Why does all of this matter you may ask.  Well, NASA is a government funded program, and in recent years there has been a drive to cut funding in certain areas to reduce our national debt.  One of the areas hit hard by these decisions was NASA, and this association continues to be at risk of losing more and more money. An alternate direction has already been taken.  Private companies are being contracted out by NASA to take over their space exploration operations.

This brings up an ethical issue having to do with funding a national space program.  There are many opponents of this funding. Many people feel that it is unethical to spend money on traveling to space and conducting experiments while we have so many problems here at home.  This attitude can negatively impact moral of our country and negatively impact the development of new technologies.

Neil Armstrong: the first man to walk on the moon

Currently NASA is hiring out private companies on contract basis. There are three major companies that are competing for future contracts: SpaceX, Boeing, and Sieera Nevada Company. This competition with already limited funds inhibits the actual advancements that could be made. If the companies were to work in cooperation with one another, progress could be much faster. However, they are not working together, and none of these companies have developed spacecraft that have carried astronauts to space yet. However in 1969, NASA was able to fly men to the moon.

In the long run, if NASA continues to lose funding, they will lose the ability to hire contractors, and space exploration by the United States could cease to exist. Space exploration is very expensive, and there isn't a current market in the private sector that would be able to support it in its current form. Private companies would exhaust funds with little immediate returns. This route would eliminate many jobs from our already highly unemployed economy.

Some may argue that the space program should go completely privatized. They would argue that these companies should act as any other capitalistic company would with competition and the need for profits to continue operation. However, this could cause the scenario mentioned earlier in which the companies would dwindle down to nothing, or it could result in a cooperate space industry. What I mean by this is that space could become a means for large companies to make money. The way in which they do this may not be in the best interest of the public.

Children of this country were often inspired by the achievements of NASA and its shuttle launches. Taking funding away from this association would take away a sense of nationalism from many Americans and would kill the dreams of many American children to work for this great association. Continual removal of funding will also inhibit the ability to continue to make technological advancements. As a country, we need to see the benefits that this program has already contributed and the benefits that are yet to come.

Satellite Danger

In our everyday lives, we rely on satellites more often than one would think.  Whether people use a GPS for directions, TV (Direct TV or DISH), or even Radio (Sirius or XM), they are relying on satellites for these technologies.  Our safety is also reliant on satellites as our military uses satellites in many ways to include communication, intelligence gathering, and navigation.  With so many people reliant on satellites, there are is a large number of satellites orbiting Earth.  This is why a recent development with the European Space Agency is critical.

Satellite

One of the ESA's sattelites, the Envisat,  has been deemed as a potential threat to other satellites orbiting Earth.  The Envisat has been ran until it didn't have enough fuel to move it to a lower orbit where it would not have the possibility of colliding with other satellites.  According to the article, international guidelines could hold the ESA responsible if any damages occur to other satellites. The ESA is exploring a way to remove the Envisat from orbit, but this option is risky and very expensive.

Image of the Envisat from a French satellite

This story impacts everyone that works for the ESA along with other space agencies.  The engineers that work for these companies are going to be pushed for a quick solution to the situation.  The article states, "ESA and other space agencies are studying future debris-removal technologies that today are viewed as overly risky and expensive."  This leads me to believe that if the satellite were to collide with others, they will still try to remove the debris that resulted from the collision.  Therefore, either way, engineers are going to be demanded for a way to retrieve these types of materials from space whether it be the satellite in tact or in pieces.

The fact that the ESA continued to run the satellite until it had depleted its fuel store without moving the satellite to a safe orbit, will cause stir within the agency.  I'm sure fingers will be pointed in many different directions, and the engineers working under the ESA better be prepared to defend themselves so they do not end up with the blame.  The agency will be questioned by multiple interested parties why they took the actions that they did, and it could be spun to show it as anyone's fault depending on who responds.  Therefore, it is critical that the engineers prepare their statements ahead of time to prepare for the potential blame.

This story could potentially impact the public and private sectors all over the world.  If the Envisat collides with another satellite, it could take down operations for any country's military or best case, remove capabilities of the private sector.  Any situation involving a military's satellite would pose an interesting scenario.  Depending on the country, it could cause stir and rebellion against Europe. Although this is probably unlikely to happen, it is still something to be prepared for.

Over the next few months, the people of the ESA will be under extreme scrutiny.  The engineers will need to prepare statements for the reason the satellite was allowed to enter this situation.  The engineers will also be under extreme pressure to come up with a solution.  If the engineers are not prepared for possible ridicule, a rude awakening could be awaiting them.

Catia V5 Review

Over Spring 2012 and Summer 2012, I worked at a company that utilized Catia V5 for Computer Aided Design software.  The main reason that the company used this software was to align with their main customer, Boeing.  Boeing commercial used the same software release, and it allowed any projects that dealt with them to be submitted directly to the them without converting files into different formats.

However, the project that I worked on had Boeing Army as a customer, and they used Catia V4 as CAD software.  Now, it should be safe to assume that one would be able to send the V5 files to them, and they should be able to read them.  This is not true however, and every file for the project had to be converted to different file formats and sent to the them.  This lack of "interchangeability" between the two releases of the same software caused a massive waste of resources.  Not only was it an initial burden, but each time a change was made, the files had to be converted again.

Now don't get me wrong, Catia V5 is a perfectly capable CAD package, and has many capabilities that should come with this type of software.  The program has the ability to build parts in the same conventional way as most CAD packages such as using extrusions, pockets, revolves, grooves, sweeps, holes, and much more.  The software also has the ability to create parts using generative surface design which is a major plus for complex parts.

However, the sketcher in Catia is not very user-friendly.  In my prior experience with CAD software, I find Pro Engineer's sketcher much more user-friendly.  Comparing the two, Catia doesn't have many automatic constraints that are generated during the process of creating a sketch.  Whereas, Pro Engineer has many automatic constraints.  I find it useful to have the automatic constraints as it helps create sketches in less time.  If a user needs to manually constrain every aspect of a sketch, it can greatly increase the time it takes to complete the creation of a part.

Catia Part Design

Noting flaws in the part design, Catia creates multiple surfaces in areas that it is not necessary. Instances include but are not limited to:  holes, new pockets that are flush with existing surfaces, and sketches that have flush lines.  This creates havoc during the tool programming phase for manufacturing.  The software used to program the machine tools recognizes these surfaces as separate entities and can prevent the programmers from being able to correctly create a program to machine the part.

The assembly design in Catia also has multiple issues.  Each time a detail part from an assembly has changes made to it, the constraints in the next higher assemblies are usually broken.  This is to be expected with major changes.  However, with Catia, minor changes such as an update to dimensions in a sketch or of a feature would break constraints.  This is very annoying as the assemblies need constant updating with the parts or the parts will not be fully constrained and could possibly move.

Catia Assembly

Also, creating symmetric assemblies in Catia can become a cumbersome   One specific case involves large assemblies using a high number of fasteners.  If the symmetric detail parts are created with links to the opposite side in order to keep updates made to the opposite part, the assembly becomes difficult to make.  The assembly creation usually allows a person to reuse patterns used in the detail parts to constrain multiple parts at once.  For example, if a part has multiple holes created as a pattern of an original hole, a person can constrain one rivet and use the reuse pattern option to constrain the rest of the rivets in the patterned holes.  This breaks down in the symmetric assembly though.  The symmetric detail part becomes a "dumb" solid with no patterns from the original part.  Therefore, the reuse patterns option is useless in this case, and a person could have to constrain hundreds of parts.

Although Catia V5 is a usable CAD system, it is a system that could be improved to gain better efficiency and be more user-friendly.  The inefficiency and problems of the program would cause me to choose a different CAD software if I were to start a new project.

Mechanical Engineers

Everyday people rely on engineers.  Engineers are responsible for almost any man-made object that people will encounter.  More specifically, any mechanical device that a person interacts with has had some sort of influence from mechanical engineers.  Whether people drive cars, ride in buses, ride on planes, or any other modes of transportation, they are relying on mechanical engineers.  The devices that mechanical engineers are involved in are very broad and are not limited to: transportation, climate control in buildings, plumbing in buildings, agricultural equipment, construction equipment, aerospace vehicles, and much more.

A mechanical engineer can take many different career paths as far as the main objectives of their job.  A few of these paths are:  design engineer, drafter, stress engineer, and test engineer.  The main thing that distinguishes the difference between each type is their main job duties.  Almost all types will be involved with some sort of team, and each member shares responsibilities.

Chevy Corvette

Design engineers are responsible for designing mechanical systems to specified requirements.  For example, if Chevy wanted to come out with a new Corvette that could go 0-60 mph in just over 3 seconds, multiple teams of design engineers would have to design the car with that requirement as a consideration along with many other requirements such as cost, weight, and safety.  Design engineers typically utilize some sort of Computer Aided Design software that enables them to use computers to model and visualize the actual parts and assemblies that will be built.

Every part and every assembly that a design engineer creates needs to have a drawing created in order for it to be producible.  Although some smaller companies assign this responsibility to the design engineers, most larger companies assign this task to a separate group called the drafters. Drafters typically use the same CAD software that the designers use in order to create 2-D or sometimes 3-D drawings.  They follow strict standards and drawing conventions so that misinterpretations of the drawing are minimized.  This job is very important as the drafters create the blueprints that allow a manufacturing group to create the parts and assemblies.

Now with every design project, safety is a huge concern.  If a product is developed with some sort of safety aspect overlooked, disastrous results could occur.  Even though the design engineers use safety as a factor in their design, there is still the possibility of something being overlooked. Stress engineers are typically responsible for identifying all safety concerns and examining them. As with the drafters, this responsibility may be the designers in smaller companies, but typically in larger companies there is a dedicated group of stress engineers.  Generally, a stress engineer will analyze a design by identifying key areas that need to handle high loads, run calculations on these areas based on geometry and material properties, and decide whether or not the design needs to be changed.  Stress engineers will typically use computer aided software to simulate loads on an object and to do complex calculations.

In some situations, computer analysis or analysis on paper of a design is not enough to justify it as being safe or functional to the requirements.  This is where the test engineers come into play. A test engineer will typically work closely with the stress engineers to develop test plans of components, carry out the tests, record results, and observe the results.  An extreme example of this could be related to the Corvette discussed earlier.  If one of the additional requirements was that the seat-belt restraint system must be able to prevent a 200 pound driver from hitting the dashboard during a head on crash with a concrete wall at 200 miles per hour, test engineers would be responsible for carrying out a test to so the design as good or bad.

As you can see, mechanical engineers have a large influence on day-to-day activities.  The field is a very broad field that pertains to almost any man-made object.  Although you may never see the engineers that were involved with the projects that brought you the objects you use in day-to-day life, remember they are the ones who have your interests and most of all your safety in mind.