Economic Value Proposition of Modular Assemblies

Modular assemblies now represent the edge of feasibility for nanosatellites. These bolder and innovative concept are enabled by the availability of relatively low-cost, standardized components derived from the CubeSat format. Modular assemblies are based on a fundamentally dierent system architecture which shows the premises of both unprecedented operational exibility and enhanced risk mitigation capabilities. These features are, however, hard to objectively quantify against more technical specication. Proving the benets of an architecture greater than those of another is highly dependent on the choice of metric (e.g. mass minimization, cost minimization or weight parameter based hybrid criteria). In this paper, we propose to seek maximization of estimated total value, dened as projected prots at the time of design. We hold this guiding metric as a reasonable compromise between the industry's drive towards economic success, the technical capabilities of the system and a reasonably simple mathematical formulation. The merits of this choice are showcased in the conceptual study of modular vs monolithic architectures, which aims to highlight the mission requirements which have a predominant role in the architectural choice. Such driving parameters have been identied as the level of uncertainties on revenues-per-performance models (e.g. dollars-per-bps-rates) and in the scalability of component technology. High levels of uncertainty in future revenues will favor more agile and re congurable solutions, which more eectively capitalize on short terms uctuations of real market demands. Components characterized by performance gures directly related to their size, such as optical arrays or radio antennas may penalize modular assemblies, which are inherently characterized by smaller platforms. To determine the cases in which modular architecture is preferable, worst case scenario is identied as ev- erything that advantages the monolithic option. To estimate revenues, it is therefore assumed that market demand is constant over the entire mission and known beforehand; under this assumption, even the mono- lithic/unchanging architecture can maximizes revenues. This dees the purpose of recongurability through modularity, which is indeed super uous. Revenues are however equal in both cases. If we prove that, for a specic mission, the cost of the modular architecture is not greater than that of the monolithic one, we have equal value. Then, by removing the hypothesis of perfect knowledge of constant demand, we show that a modular architecture provides comparable costs and greater projected revenues, therefore higher value. To better explain the proposed method, we examine a case study of historical commercial relevance, namely telecommunications.