Deployable Space Structures

Gökhan Kiper, Eres Söylemez

Mechanical Engineering Department
Middle East Technical University
Ankara, Turkey
kiper@metu.edu.tr, eres@metu.edu.tr

Abstract—Deployable structures are mobile assemblies which do

not aim motion but to attain different configurations depending Antennas
on the service requirements. These structures are widely used in
space applications due to storage limitations of the launch
vehicles. The large diversity of design alternatives should be
evaluated in design of deployable parts of spacecrafts. This study
aims to present design alternatives of antennas, masts and solar
panels of space devices. Also use of spatial linkages in deployable
structure designs is discussed.

Keywords- outer space technologies; deployable structures

I. INTRODUCTION
Deployable structures are mobile assemblies which do not
aim motion but to attain different configurations depending on
the service requirements. That is why these systems are termed
as structures, rather than mobile mechanisms. They are mainly
used either for transportation purposes or in applications where
adaptability of shape or function is necessary. The latter are a
subset of adaptive structures [1].
Deployable structures are widely used in space
technologies. Construction in low-gravity or no-gravity
environment is quite difficult so some space structures such as
shelters are designed as deployable assemblies (e.g. [2]). The
solar panels, antennas, radars and masts of the satellites are
generally deployable to keep the device compact during launch
(Fig. 1). Similarly, various types of appendages are preferred to
be deployable for the same reason (e.g. [3]). Some other parts
of the satellites, such as supports (e.g. [4]), joints (e.g. [5]),
mounts (e.g. [6]), thermal radiators (e.g. [7]), seats (e.g. [8]),
carriers (e.g. [9]), crew quarters (e.g. [10]) and transportation
tunnels (e.g. [11]) are deployable for compact stowage. These
latter parts require particular design strategies but design
patterns for the antenna, mast and solar panels, which are
relatively more critical parts, have been devised extensively in
the literature. This study deals with design alternatives of these
deployable structures, only. Still, even if the focus is narrowed
down to these specific parts of space crafts, even a book would
not suffice to summarize the entire literature on the subject, so
the aim in this study is to just give an idea of alternative
designs. There are several survey publications listing
deployable structure designs for space applications (e.g. [12,
13]. The approach in this study differs from previous ones in
that the main focus is on the deployment geometry.
Solar panels
Masts
Other deployable parts
Figure 1. Deployable parts of a satellite [14]
As noted by Salama, Lou and Fang in [15] space systems
experienced their highest failure rate during deployment, but
have typically performed well once deployed properly. Hence
the design of deployable space structures is very critical.
The content of the article is as follows: First a brief
classification and design criteria of deployable structures is
presented. Then some design details on specific parts of space
crafts in literature are given. Also, use of spatial linkages in
space structures, which is the specific interest of the authors, is
briefly introduced.
II. DESIGN CRITERIA AND CLASSIFICATION OF
DEPLOYABLE STRUCTURES
A. Design criteria
Usually, only the stowed and deployed configurations of
deployable structures are taken into consideration and mid-
configurations are not of interest. The main design criteria in
deployable structures are the compactness of the stored
configuration, dimensional tolerances, rigidity of the deployed
configuration, ease of deployment, durability and endurance of
the system and of course the cost. Light weight is also required
in space applications, not because of the gravitational effect in
the working environment, but because of the power
requirement during the launch of the carrier vehicle.

978-1-4244-3628-6/09/$25.00 ©2009 IEEE 131

Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - IZMIR YUKSEK TEKNOLOJI ENSTITUSU. Downloaded on March 06,2021 at 23:15:56 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 B. A Classification of Deployable Structures
In order to familiarize the reader with what kind of
elements are used for deployable structures, a classification is
presented here. Several aspects may be taken into consideration
for the choice of categories. For example, deployment
technology or structural-morphological properties may be used
as categories for deployable structures [16]. In this article, the
second approach is adapted, i.e. the deployable structures are
grouped according to their geometry. The system groups
mentioned here shall be apparent with the examples in the
following sections.
First of all, rigid and flexible assemblies shall be
distinguished. The rigid assemblies are the ones in which rigid
elements are assembled via rigid joints. These deployable
structures are either linkages or simply telescopic booms.
According to Hanaor and Levy [16], deployable structures with
rigid links are subgrouped as lattice bar structures and
continuous systems. Lattice bar structures may be formed by
single layer grids, double layer grids or spines. Areal
deployment can be achieved via a single layer of linkages or
double layers while spines are used for deployment of masts
and arches. For the continuous systems, the deployment area is
always closed [16]. The main advantage of the rigid systems is
good shape control. The disadvantages are the complexity of
the parts, friction in joints, weight and precision necessity. Also
the structures may be costly in parts and assembling.
Flexible assemblies may or may not include rigid parts or
subassemblies. Several types of flexible assemblies exist:
cable-strut assemblies, tensegrity structures, inflatable systems.
Cable-strut assemblies, as inferred by the name, employ
cables and struts as elements. The struts supply endurance and
the cables are used to strain or release the system. The struts
may constitute a linkage of multi degree-of-freedom. In that
case, the shape of the structure is determined by the
configuration space of the linkage and the tensioned cables are
used to keep the system in a statically determinate state.
Alternatively, the struts may constitute open chains or even be
isolated from each other and hence the cables also play role in
shape determination. For the cable strut systems in which all
struts are isolated from each other, the struts are necessarily all
in compression and in this case the system is a tensegrity
structure. However, not all tensegrity systems are cable-strut
assemblies.
Tensegrity is the short for the tensile integrity. Buckminster
Fuller, who gave the name to these structures, describes these
systems as islands of compression in an ocean of tension [R.
Motro, Tensegrity: Structural systems for the future, London:
Kogan Page Science, 2003]. Tensegrity systems usually
comprise of cables and struts, i.e. linear tension and
compression elements, but there are also systems involving
non-strut compression members (e.g. [17]) and tension surfaces
(e.g. [18]). The concept of tensegrity structures first appeared
as immovable assemblies, but later on mobile versions are
designed. Actuation of these systems is either by telescopic
[19] or foldable struts [20] or by cable-pulley systems [21, 22].
The main advantages of cable-strut and tensegrity systems are
the simplicity of elements, joints and assembly, light weight
and compactness of the stowed configuration. Also these
132
Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - IZMIR YUKSEK TEKNOLOJI ENSTITUSU. Downloaded on March 06,2021 at 23:15:56 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
structures are usually able to attain various shapes, rather than
just the stowed and deployed configurations. The significant
disadvantages are difficulty in design and shape control.
Some deployable structures involve tensioned membranes,
but are not tensegrity systems. The tensioned surfaces in such
systems are used in solar panels, radars and antennas as sensing
or communicating surfaces. These structures are simple but
problematic in shape accuracy.
Finally, inflatable systems are used for their low stowed
volume, mass, cost, good damping and good thermal
properties, but they are not very reliable [15]. Additionally, two
disadvantages noted by Barker and Guest [23] are that the
inflation may be uncontrolled resulting in undesired deployed
shape and that the structure may need to remain inflated to
retain stiffness, hence meteorite damage becomes a serious
problem.
Having informed about the types of deployable structures,
the following three sections get into the details of deployable
antennas, solar panels and masts.
III. DEPLOYABLE ANTENNAS
The satellite antennas usually have axial symmetry. All
kinds of systems are used in design of antennas, i.e. rigid
mechanisms, tensegrity systems, cable-strut assemblies,
inflatable surfaces and some other flexible assemblies. The size
of the antenna plays an important role in selection of
deployment mechanism. As size increases, the design becomes
involved and costly [24].
According to Tibert [13] there are three types of deployable
antennas: mesh antennas, solid surface antennas and inflatable
antennas. Mesh antennas and inflatable antennas fall into the
furlable reflector surfaces category, surfaces being foldable.
Furlable antennas have the disadvantage in surface accuracy.
The accuracy for a 10-15 diameter surface is about 2mm rms
[25].
In [13] Tibert notes that in each category several different
concepts have been proposed but only a limited number have
proven to be viable and even fewer have actually flown. Of
course, this classification is due to antenna surface types, but
here the deployment types is to be discussed within these
categories.
For the most common type, the mesh antennas, the mesh is
discontinuous, but they can reflect radio frequency waves up to
40 GHz [26]. These antennas usually look like an umbrella
(e.g. [27]). The ribs may simply be hinged at the hub (e.g.[28]
(Fig. 2a) (e.g. [29]) or some more links may be involved to
attain rigidity (Fig. 2b) or more compactness (e.g. [30] (Fig.
2c). The ribs are designed as deployable masts for some large
antennas (e.g. [31]) (Fig. 2d).
It is also common to support mesh antennas with trusses
(e.g. [32-35]). The trusses are of course deployable, hence are
either rigid mechanisms or cable-strut systems. Also there are
hybrid designs: a Russia-Georgian design makes use of
pantographs and tensioned ribs at the same time [36]
Tensegrity supports are used for especially small size mesh
antennas [19, 37] (Fig. 3).
 Ribs

Hub

Figure 3. A small satellte desned by Deployable Structures Laboratory at

Cambridge University [19]

Some mesh antennas do not have any rigid supports, hence

deploy only via elastic elements (e.g. [39]) (Fig. 4). For
example, the ribs of the Applications Technology Satellite 6
are rolled inside the hub for stowage [40]. Deployed/stowed
size ratio of these antennas are usually bad, however surface
accuracy is good [13]. It is also possible to design a mesh as an
a)
assembly of identical tensioned modules [41] (Fig. 5).
For higher surface accuracy, antennas with solid surfaces
are preferred. These antennas usually deploy like a flower and
the deployment is via spatial rigid linkages – a single degree-
of-freedom single loop spatial linkage mounted for each petal
in a radially symmetric manner – or the petals are simply
connected to the hub by hinges or spherical joints. The
b)
deployability is limited, hence these antennas have diameters of
less than 10 m [27] (Fig. 6). Many alternative rigid
mechanisms exist in literature for radial deployment [42, 43]

c)

d)

Figure 2. Umbrella like deployable antenna concept a) High-gain antenna for

the Galileo mission [38] – launch year: 1989, antenna deployment failed in
1991 [13], b) Conceptual example, c) Antenna with telescopic central column Figure 4. a) Spring back reflector [44], b) Collapsible rib-tensioned surface
(Hoop/Column Antenna designed in 1980) [13] The 8 m diameter papabolic [45]
antenna of the Very Long Baseline Interferometry satellite HALCA with
deployable ribs [32]

133

Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - IZMIR YUKSEK TEKNOLOJI ENSTITUSU. Downloaded on March 06,2021 at 23:15:56 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 d)

e)

f)
Figure 5. Large deployable modular antenna [46]

The surface of solid surface antennas may also be elastic. In

these designs, the surface/petals is/are shaped according to the
fully deployed configuration and is/are retracted forcibly
making use of the elasticity of the material (e.g. [47]) .
g)
For the inflatable antennas the material used is a key point
in design [48, 49]. Usually the antenna itself is inflated (Fig.
7a), however, there are designs which involve an inflated
boundary where the reflecting surface is a flexible membrane
[50, 51] (Fig 7b). Figure 6. a, b) The TRW Sunflower, c) dornier/ESA DAISY antenna [52], d)
concept of Dornier/ESA MEA reflector e) The Solid Surface Deployable
a) Antenna [25], f) Self-deployable antenna using centrifugal force [53], g)
Deployable membranes designed from folding tree leaves [54]

b)

a)

c)

b)

Figure 7. a) Inflatable antenna [55], b) Reflecting membrane tensioned with

an inflatable tube [56]

134

Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - IZMIR YUKSEK TEKNOLOJI ENSTITUSU. Downloaded on March 06,2021 at 23:15:56 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IV. DEPLOYABLE MASTS
Space deployable masts are widely used to deploy and
support flexible solar array, magnetometer, deployable
antenna, photometer, gravity gradient boom, interferometer and
other optical instrument. [57]. In [58] Jensen and Pellegrino
lists deployable mast types as follows: telescopic booms,
folding beam, active/passive cable systems, box bellows,
folding articulated trusses, coilable trusses, triangular wire
boom, tri-beam instarect, flexible tether, thin-walled tubular
boom, STACER, inflatables and chain systems. The ones used
in space applications shall be summarized here.
Telescopic booms deploy via a series concentric prismatic
joints (e.g. [59]). They can be deployed either synchronously or
sequentially via spindle-and-nut arrangements, cable-and-
pulley arrangements, chain drives, pneumatic systems or a a) b)
secondary deployable system [58] .
Figure 9. Articulated trusses a) [61], b) [62]
Active/passive cable systems, introduced by Kwan, You
and Pellegrino [21] employs the actuation of foldable Thin-walled tubular booms make use of the elasticity of
tensegrity structures via changing the length of certain thin walled shells. The first application of this type of structure
tensioned cables. When the struts are also foldable, these appears as the Storable Tubular Extendible Member (STEM)
tensegrity structures are very efficient in deployment (Fig. 8). used for Canada’s first satellite, Alouette [63] (Fig. 10c). The
Recently used to support the solar cells in a nanosatllite, Spiral Tube & Actuator for Controlled Extension/Retraction
masts with box bellows are constructed from flat rectangular (STACER) is similar to the STEM in that the spiraled elastic
panels joined by hinges [58]. thin shell is rolled on a drum and during deployment the shell
spring backs to its original spiral form [58] (Fig. 10d).
Use of articulated trusses is very common in mast designs
(e.g. [57, 60]). Various mechanisms are used for the The inflatable booms also vary very much in geometry.
articulation (Fig. 9). Rigidity of the deployed structure is attained either by pre-
folded surfaces (e.g. [23]) (Fig. 11) or by use of rigidizable
Coilable trusses have cable supports which are coiled in the materials (e.g.; [64]) or by supporting several inflatable parts
stowed state (Fig. 10a). The deployment may or may not with rigid links or joints (e.g. [65]).
require energy depending on whether the coil is pre-stressed.
In the triangular wire boom design the triangular sections
are welded to three support cables. One side of the triangular
sections is made to flex or is hinges, so that the other two sides
can be brought together. The collapsed mast is rolled up on a
drum [58] (Figure 10b).

a) b) c)

d)

Figure 10. a) Coilable truss example – the beads along the boundary are
guided during deployment [66], b) Triangular wire boom concept [58], c)
Figure 8. A tensegrity mast with foldable struts [20] STEM, bi-STAM and interlocking bi-STEM [13], d) The STACER [58]

135

Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - IZMIR YUKSEK TEKNOLOJI ENSTITUSU. Downloaded on March 06,2021 at 23:15:56 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

Figure 11. Folding of triangulated cylinders [67]
V. DEPLOYABLE SOLAR PANELS
Mostly, either spatial linkages or inflatable systems are
preferred for deployment of solar panels. Since the panels are
flat and surface accuracy is not so crucial, the geometric
tolerances in design of solar panels are not as critical as of
antennas.
Linkages used for rigid solar panels are rather simple
mechanisms. The honeycomb sandwich design is a common
one for communication satellites (e.g. [68]). In this design two
panels initially wrapped around the hexagonal body of the
satellite deploys via motors at several joints (Fig. 12a). For
larger panels deployment is achieved via foldable struts
deploying in one direction (e.g. [69-73]) or orthogonal
directions (Fig. 12b). For some other deployment sequences of
rigid panels please see [74-76]. Radially deployed solar panels
are also encountered (e.g. [77, 78]).
As for the use of inflatable systems, the boundaries of a
flexible solar panel may be inflated (Fig. 12c).
a)
b)
c)
Figure 12. a) Deployment of solar panels of Fleet Satellite Communications
System of US Navy [79], b) Deployment sequence of a 300 m2 array [80], c)
Inflatable Torus Solar Array Technology Phase II Design [81]
136
Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - IZMIR YUKSEK TEKNOLOJI ENSTITUSU. Downloaded on March 06,2021 at 23:15:56 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
VI. USE OF SPATIAL LINKAGES IN DEPLOYABLE
STRUCTURE DESIGN
The reader must have recognized the rivalry of
geometrically-accurate rigid mechanisms and low weight and
compact flexible systems used for deployable structures. As the
structures grow larger use of rigid mechanisms become a
problem as the stowage volume is not sufficient and the
structure is not rigid enough anymore. Also, the accuracy of
flexible systems is enhanced day by day. So, the use of spatial
linkages in deployable space structures seems to lose
popularity in recent designs. On the other hand, other than
rigidity and accuracy issues, flexible systems are usually hard
to design and advanced materials are required.
Usually the electronic devices of satellite systems are of
particular importance in design and designers are confined with
simple deployable structure designs. However, a thorough
knowledge of spatial linkage design may yield fairly compact
and efficient systems.
Spatial linkages are not studied and systemized as
extensively as planar linkages and there is still much to
discover in the area. However, recent studies are promising in
designs of especially symmetric systems, which is usually the
case in space applications.
Symmetric spatial linkages are generally overconstrained to
attain the required rigidity. In the past, use overconstrained of
linkages in structures was not so practical due to manufacturing
tolerances, but today’s technology allows construction of
highly overconstrained linkages in huge dimensions (e.g.
[872]). Also, there have been various publications in
deployable spatial linkage designs ([43, 83-89]).
In design of deployable structures making use of spatial
linkages it is customary to make use of single loop modules
comprising revolute joints only and construct an assembly [90].
Hinges are used, because sliding joints are problematic in
application [91]. In [89], a design methodology enabling
modular and adaptive design is proposed. Once a desired
motion is defined, it is possible to construct the most
overconstrained linkage using the known single loop spatial
linkages such as Bennett, Bricard, Myard and Goldberg loops
[92]. Then appropriate links may be discarded to obtain the
required design (as in [43]).
VII. CONCLUSIONS
Deployment means of deployable structures used in space
applications are explained in this study. Various design
alternatives are presented and compared. Some accessible
literature is presented to draw attention to the ocean of related
information. In addition to the survey, use of spatial linkages in
deployable structure design is discussed.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The financial support from the Scientific and Technological
Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK) is gratefully
acknowledged.
 REFERENCES
[1] Adaptive structures: engineering applications, D. Wag, I. Bond, P.
Weaver, and M. Friswell, Eds. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 2007.
[2] P. Gruber, et al., “Deployable structures for a human lunar base,” Acta
Astronaut., vol. 61, pp. 484–495, 2007.
[3] R. E. McVey, and S. F. Bassily, US Patent 5996940, 1999.
[4] L. E. Stillman, and T. G. Coughlin, US Patent 4373690, 1983.
[5] T. E. Pelischek, US Patent 4615637, 1986.
[6] C. J. Kellberg, US Patent 7059571, 2006.
[7] S. Sebata, and L. Low, US Patnet 7028953, 2006.
[8] T. O. Paine, D. L. Johansen, W. E. Cooper, and L. J. Ferrara, US Patent
3592505, 1971.
[9] M. Roth, F. Sperber, and W. Stich, European Patent 1184280A2, 2001.
[10] T. M. Gadd, M. R. Fraske, W. Ray, and M. Otto, US Patent 6290181,
2001.
[11] J. C. Fletcher, N. D. Brown, G. L. Jeppersen, and N. C. Costakos, US
Patent 3952976, 1976.
[12] M R. Hachkowski, and L. D. Peterson, A comparative study of the
precission of deployable spacecraft structures, Tech. Rep. CU-CAS-95-
22, Center for Aerospace Strucutres, University of Colorado, Boulder,
USA, 1995.
[13] G. Tibert., Deployable Tensegrity Structures for Space Applications, ,
PhD thesis, Department of Mechanics, ch. 2, Royal Institute of
Technology, Stockholm, Sweden, 2002.
[14] C. H. H. Merchan, Deployable structures, MSc thesis, Department of
Architecture, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, USA,
1987, p. 61.
[15] M. Salama, M. Lou, and H. Fang, “Deployment of Inflatable Space
Strucutures: A review of Recent Developments,” 41st AIAA Structures,
Structural Dynamics & Materials Conference Atlanta, USA, 2000.
[16] A. Hanaor, and R. Levy, “Evaluation of Deployable Structures for Space
Enclosures,” Int. J. Space Structures, vol. 16, pp. 211–229, 2001.
[17] K. Snelson, Triangulated tension networks,
http://www.kennethsnelson.net/new_structure/structure12.htm, last
accessed: 23.03.2009.
[18] S. M. L. Adriaenssens, and M. R. Barnes, “Tensegrity spline beam and
grid shell structures,” Eng. Struct., vol. 23, pp. 29–36, 2001.
[19] A. G. Tibert, and S. Pellegrino, “Deployable tensegrity reflectors for
small satellites,” J. Spacecraft Rockets, vol. 39, pp. 701–709, 2002.
[20] A. G. Tibert, and S. Pellegrino, “Deployable tensegrity masts,” Proc.
44th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics,
and Materials Conference, Norfolk, USA, 2003.
[21] A. S. K. Kwan, and S. Pellegrino, “Active and passive cable elements in
deployable/retractable masts,” Int. J. of Space Structures, vol. 9, pp.
163–173, 1992.
[22] C. Sultan, and R. E. Skelton, “Tendon control deployment of tensegrity
structures,” Proc. The SPIE 5th Symposium on Smart Structures and
Materials, San Diego, USA, 1998, pp. 455–466.
[23] R. J. P. Barker, and S. D. Guest, “Inflatable triangulated cylinders,”
Proc. IUTAM-IASS Symp. On Deployable Structures: Theory and
Applications, Cambridge, UK, 1998, pp.17-26.
[24] M. S. Lake, et al., “Structural concepts and mechanics Issues for ultra-
large optical systems,” Ultra Light Weight Space Optics Workshop,
Napa Valley, USA, 1999.
[25] S. D. Guest, and S. Pellegrino, “A new concept for solid surface
deployable antennas,” Acta Astronaut., vol. 38, 1996, pp. 308-314.
[26] M. M. Mikulas, and M. Thomson, “State of the art and technology needs
for large space structures, vol. 1: new and projected aeronautical and
space systems, design concepts, and loads of flight-vehicle materials,
structures, and dynamics – assessment and future directions, ch. 3,
ASME, New York, 1994.
[27] Enders, J., et al., “Design of a membrane aperture deployable structure,”
Proc. 44th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural
Dynamics, and Materials Conference, Norfolk, USA, 2003.
137
Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - IZMIR YUKSEK TEKNOLOJI ENSTITUSU. Downloaded on March 06,2021 at 23:15:56 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[28] J. Mitsugi, K. Ando, Y. Senbokuya, and A. Meguro, “Deployment
analysis of large space antenna using flexible multibody dynamics
simulation,” Acta Astronaut., vol. 47, 2000, pp. 19-26.
[29] M. R. Johnson, “The Galileo high gain antenna deployment anomaly,”
Proc. 28th Aerospace Mechanisms Symposium, NASA Conference
Publication CP-3260, 1994, pp. 359-77.
[30] T. G. Campbell, M. C. Bailey, and W. K. Belvin, “The development of
the 15 meter hoop column antenna system with structural and
electromagnetic performance results,” Proc. 11th Communication
Satellite Conference, San Diego, USA, 1986 pp. 444-452.
[31] H. Hirosawa, et al., “Space VLBI satellite HALCA and its engineering
accomplishments,” Acta Astronaut., vol. 50, 2002, pp. 301-309.
[32] J. Onoda, Two-dimensional deployable truss structures for space
applications,” J. Spacecraft Rockets, vol. 25, 1988, pp. 109-116.
[33] M. W. Thomson, “The AstroMesh deployable reflector,” Proc. Symp.
Deployable Structures: Theory and Applications, Cambridge, U.K.: Int.
Union Appl. Theoretical Mech., Int. Assoc. Shell Spatial Structures,
1998, pp.435-446.
[34] Z. You, “Deployable structure of curved profile for space antennas,” J.
Aerosp. Engrg., vol. 13, 2000, pp. 139-143.
[35] F. Guan, J. Shou, G. Hou, and J. Zhang, “Static analysis of synchronism
deployable antenna,” J. Zhejiang Univ. – Science A, vol. 7, 2006,
pp.1365-1371.
[36] H. Baier, V. Montuori, L. Datashvili, Z. Gogava, and E.
Medzmariashvili, “Building blocks of large deployable precision
membrane reflectors,” Proc. 42 nd
AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC
Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference and Exhibit,
Seattle, USA, 2001.
[37] B. F. Knight, Deployable antenna kinematics using tensegrity structure
design, PhD thesis, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA, 2000.
[38] NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Unfurling the HGA's Enigma,
http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/galileo/messenger/oldmess/HGA.html, last
accessed: 02.04.2009.
[39] L. T. Tan, Ö. Soykasap, and S. Pellegrino, “Design & manufacture of
stiffened spring-back reflector demonstrator,” Proc. 46th
AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and
Materials Conference, Austin, USA, 2005.
[40] R. B. Marsten, “ATS-6 Significance,” IEEE Trans. Aero. Elect. Sys.,
vol. 11, 1975, pp. 984-993.
[41] K. Ando, J. Mitsugi, and Y. Senbokuya., “Analyses of cable-membrane
structure combined with deployable truss” J. Comput. Struct., vol. 74,
2000, pp. 21-39.
[42] Z. You, “Motion structures extend their reach,” MaterialsToday, vol. 10,
2007, pp. 52-57.
[43] G. Kiper, E. Söylemez, and A. U. Ö. Kişisel, “A family of deployable
polygons and polyhedra,” Mech. Mach. Theory, vol. 43, 2008, pp. 627-
640.
[44] L. T. Tan, and S. Pellegrino, “Stiffness design of spring back
reflectors,”. Proc. 43rd AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures,
Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference, Denver, USA, 2002.
[45] Pellegrino, S., “CRTS reflectors,” Proc. 25th ESA Antenna Workshop on
Satellite Antenna Technology, ESTEC, Noordwijk, Netherlands, 2002.
[46] Meguro, A., Ishikawa, H., and Tsujihata, A., “Study on ground
verification for large deployable modular structures,” J. Spacecraft
Rockets, vol. 43, 2006, pp. 780-787.
[47] B. Tibbalds, S. D. Guest, and S. Pellegrino, “Inextensional Packaging of
Thin Shell Slit Reflectors,” Technische Mechanik, vol. 24, 2004, pp.
211-220.
[48] S. E. Scarborough, and D. P. Cadogan, Applications of Inflatable
Rigidizable Structures,
http://www.ilcdover.com/products/aerospace_defense/pdfs/SpaceInflate/
Applications%20of%20Inflatable%20Rigidizable%20Structures.pdf, last
accessed: 05.04.2009.
[49] Lin, J. K. H., Knoll, C. F., and Willey, C. E., “Shape memory rigidizable
inflatable (RI) structures for large space systems applications,” Proc. 47th
AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and
Materials Confererence, Newport, USA, 2006.
 [50] J. K. H. Lin, D. P. Cadogan, J. Huang, and V. A. Feria, “An Inflatable
Microstrip Reflectarray Concept for Ka-Band Applications,” 41st
AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and
Materials Conference and Exhibit, Atlanta, USA, 2000.
[51] A. Watanabe, H. Tsunoda, and Y. Senbokuya, US Patent 6791510 B2,
2004.
[52] J. M. Hedgepeth, Structures for remotely deployable precission
antennas, NASA CR-182065, 1989.
[53] T. Kanemitsu, et al., “Self-deployable antenna using centrifugal force,”
Proc. IUTAM-IASS Symp. On Deployable Structures: Theory and
Applications, Cambridge, UK, 1998, pp. 173-182.
[54] D. S. A. De Focatiis, and S. D. Guest, “Deployable membranes designed
from folding tree leaves,” Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A, vol. 360, 2002,
pp. 227-238.
[55] R. E. Freeland, G. D. Bilyau, and G. R. Veal, “Validation of a unique
concept for a low-cost lightweight space-deployable antenna strucutre,”
Acta Astronaut., vol. 35, 1995, pp. 565-572.
[56] A. Watanabe, H. Tsunoda, and Y. Senbokuya, US Patent 6791510 B2,
2004.
[57] H. Guo, R. Liu, and Z. Deng, “Preliminary design method study for the
space deployable articulated mast,” Proc. 1st Int. Conf. on Intelligent
Robotics and Applications, Vuhan, China, 2008, pp. 322-331.
[58] F. Jensen, and S. Pellegrino, Arm development – review of existing
technologies, Tech. Rep. CUED/D-STRUCT/TR198, Department of
Engineering, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK, 25 June 2001.
[59] D. S. H. Chae, D. J. Rohweller, M. W. Thomson, US Patent 5135795,
1994.
[60] L. R. Adams, “The X-beam as a deployable boom for the space station,”
Proc. 22nd Aerospace Mechanisms Sym., California, US, 1988, pp. 59-
66.
[61] J. G. Bodle, C. C. Lungerhausen, US Patent 4653951, 1987.
[62] ABLE Engineering, ABLE ADAM Articulated Boom System,
http://www.aec-able.com/Booms/adam.html, last accessed: 05.04.2009.
[63] F. P. J. Rimrott, and G. Fritsche, “Fundamentals of STEM mechanics,”
Proc. IUTAM-IASS Symp. On Deployable Structures: Theory and
Applications, Cambridge, UK, 1998, pp. 321-333.
[64] P. A. Taragaza, D. J. Inman, and W. K. Wilkie, “Control of a space
rigidizable inflatable boom using macro-fiber composite actuators,” J.
Vib. Control, vol. 13, 2007, pp. 935-950.
[65] K. Guidanean, and G. T. Williams, “An inflatable rigidizable truss
structure with complex joints,” Proc. 39th
AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and
Materials Conference & Exhibit and AIAA/ASME/AHS Adaptive
Structures Forum, Denver, USA, 2002.
[66] R. M. Warden, US Patent 5154027, 1992.
[67] S. D. Guest, and S. Pellegrino, “The folding of Triangulated Cylinders,
Part I: Geometric Considerations,” J. Appl. Mech., vol. 61, 1994, pp.
773-777.
[68] A. D. Couchman, and A. G. Russell, World Patent 2006/092625A1,
2006.
[69] T. G. Berry, US Patent 4666107, 1987.
[70] T. G. Stern, M. Cornwall, J. F. Lawrance, and D. M. Peterson, US Patent
5131955, 1992.
138
Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - IZMIR YUKSEK TEKNOLOJI ENSTITUSU. Downloaded on March 06,2021 at 23:15:56 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[71] G. W. Marks, Us Patent 5520747, 1996.
[72] D. R. Dailey, and L. E. Elliot, European Patent Application 1043228A2,
2000.
[73] D. Schultheiß, Gravity compensation of deployable solar arrays for
small spacecraft, Engineering Thesis, Institute of Statics and Dynamics,
University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany, 2003.
[74] J. Janson, O. H. Gruber, and R. cosaert, US Patent 4988060, 1991.
[75] A. Hakan, and F. Seifert, US Patent 6284967, 2001.
[76] J. G. McCandless, US Patent 6637702, 2003.
[77] P. A. Jones, T. J. Harvey, A. F. Fraser, and D. M. Murphy, World Patent
96/21250, 1996.
[78] ABLE Engineering, Ultraflex solar arrays, http://www.aec-able.com/
arrays/ableultraflex.html, last accessed: 06.04.2009.
[79] H. S. Rauschenbach, Solar Cell Array Design Handbook, vol. 1, NASA
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Cilfornia Inst. Tech., California, 1980, ch. 6,
Sec. 2, p. 6.
[80] M. Botke, D. Murphy, T. Murphey, and P. Sorensen, “Zero Deadband,
Multiple Strut Synchronized Hinge for Deployable Structures,” Proc.
36th Aerospace Mechanisms Symp., Cleveland, USA, 2002.
[81] P. K. Malone, L. Crawford, and G. T. Williams, “Developing an
inflatable solar array,” Proc. 7th AIAA/Utah State University Annual
Conf. on Small Satellites, Logan, USA, 1993.
[82] Hoberman Associates, Transformable dome in Abu Dhabi,
http://www.hoberman.com/portfolio/transformabledome.php?rev=0&on
EnterFrame=[type+Function]&myNum=17&category=architecture&pro
jectname=Transformable+Dome, last accessed: 06.04.2009.
[83] H.F. Verheyen, “The complete set of jitterbug transformers and the
analysis of their motion,” Int. J. Comput. Math. Appl., vol. 17 ,1989, pp.
203-250.
[84] C. Hoberman, US Patent 4942700, 1990.
[85] Z. You, and S. Pellegrino, “Foldable bar structures,” Int. J. Solids and
Struct., vol. 34, 1997, pp. 1825-1847.
[86] K. Wohlhart, “Double chain mechanisms,” Proc. IUTAM-IASS Symp.
On Deployable Structures: Theory and Applications, Cambridge, UK,
1998, pp. 457-466.
[87] W. W. Gan, and S. Pellegrino, “Closed-loop deployable
structures,” Proc. 44th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures,
Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference, Norfolk, USA, 2003.
[88] G. Kiper, E. Söylemez, and A. U. Ö. Kişisel, “Polyhedral linkages
synthesized using Cardan motion along radial axes,” Proc. 12th IFToMM
World Congress, Besançon, France, 2007, pp. 471-477.
[89] G. Kiper, and E. Söylemez, “Regular polygonal and regular spherical
polyhedral linkages comprising Bennett loops,” Proc. 5th Int. Workshop
on Computational Kinematics, Duisburg, Germany, in press.
[90] Y. Chen, Design of structural mechanisms, PhD Thesis, Department of
Engineering Science, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK, 2003.
[91] S. K. Agrawal, S. Kumar, and M. Yim, “Polyhedral single degree-of-
freedom expanding structures: design and prototypes, J. Mech. Des., vol.
124, 2002, pp. 473-478.
[92] J. Phillips, Freedom in machinery - volume 1&2, ch. 20, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 2007.