Designing a Magnetic Torque Rod for a CubeSat

Christine Savala
Mathematics Department, Hartnell College, Salinas, CA 93901
Dr. Mark Karpenko, NSRC Research Fellow, Control and
Optimization Lab, Naval Postgraduate School
Introduction

3.3 Volt

CubeSats are miniature satellites that are being used

all over the world by many different colleges,
businesses, and researchers. CubeSats are
relatively inexpensive to produce and can serve
different purposes. Their life spans vary depending
on purpose as some may live up to 9 months.
Because CubeSats are small in size, the equipment
inside of the CubeSat is also small as it must fit in
the restricted dimensions.
In addition to size restraints, CubeSats also face
power restrictions. CubeSats initially begin as a free
floating device unless Attitude Control systems are
installed. These Attitude Control devices vary based
on size and mass. For this project, a CubeSat will be
moved using a DC motor actuator with the
assistance of a magnetic torque rod and reaction
wheels.
A magnetic torque rod is a common actuator that is
small in size and reduces the amount of power a
system uses. This is a great solution for the CubeSat
as it requires very little power to operate and it is
relatively inexpensive. A magnetic torque rod
receives a current and releases a magnetic moment;
the coil in the magnetic torque rod will react with the
earths magnetic field and produce a mechanical
torque which will move the CubeSat (Pietruszewski
2010). The actuators will use the earths magnetic
field to position the CubeSat to face the earth. To
make this work, coil winding techniques and cores
were tested to optimize the power used inside the
CubeSat. Different models and materials were tested
and simulated in the lab. The purpose of this project
is to design a precision coil to be used as a torquer
for attitude control of a CubeSat.

5 Volt

Resistance

10.89

25

144

Wire length

20,241mm

46,468mm

267,657mm

303mA

200mA

83mA

Number of
turns

805

1,848

10,649

B Magnetic
Field

.001T

.003T

.017T

Required
current

Conclusions

12 Volt

Next, epoxy was applied to the finished coil to create

a smooth surface by filling in the grooves. Pulling the
wire to the top of the coil works well, but beginning
from the end of the coil makes a clean rod. Starting a
new layer at the end of a coil forces an odd number of
layers.

Next,

The next step for the magnetic torque rod will test
the magnetic field generated with the different
voltages and compare the theoretical with the
applied values.

Materials
The torque rod (coil) requires over a thousand turns
of enameled magnet wire. Multiple layers are
required to optimize the number of turns on the rod.
Materials needed for the magnetic torque rod were
chosen based on calculations and research. The
width component of the CubeSat limits the radius of
the magnetic torque rod, so 2mm are dedicated to
wire layers, reducing the radius of the rod to 8mm.
After coiling by hand, it was decided that some kind
of coiling machine is necessary. In order to reduce
cost, objects in the lab were used to wind coil around
rods.
Each practice used a wooden dowel with a 7.8mm
diameter, 32 AWG wire, and a Milwaukee drill. Before
winding, a piece of a rod is sawed to at least 110mm.
The rod is then marked for 80mm at one end while
the opposite end is inserted into the drill. The
additional rod length is sawed out after coiling.

Literature cited
Results
Assuming that each theoretical layer holds 400 turns,
the maximum number of turns is just over two
thousand with five layers. Optimization at 12V cannot
be met within these dimensions.
Reducing the radius of the rod allows for more layers,
but with a minimum diameter of 2 mm, the maximum
number of layers is just over eight thousand with 20
layers.
This presented a challenge. The target current for the
system is 0.083A which is more than sufficient to power
the CubeSat.
The first method resulted in well coiled single layer but
a messy second layer.

Fig a.
The upper dowel is double layered and shows sags and does not
appear properly level. The pressure from the second layer caused
spacing errors in the first layer, creating sags and dips The lower rod
shows that the first layer appears to be tightly coiled with minor
imperfections due to surface of the wooden dowel and wire
inconsistencies..

Required calculations
The desired power consumption for this torquer is
less than a watt using 12, 5, and 3.3 power voltages.

(voltage)2
Resistance =
power

Resistance
Wire length =
wire resistance

power
Required current =
voltage
The given dimensional restrains for the torquer is 80
mm 5 mm on each end by 10 mm.
Resistance
Wire length
Number of turns =
=
2 r * wire resistance
2r

Magnetic Fields:
0Ni
B=
l

M=
.

r2Ni

r - 1
* (1 +
)
1 + (r - 1)Nd

After testing 6 iterations of a 80mm torquer rod, a

final design was chosen. Each of the coil designs
were tested by appearance and ease of layering. By
using an epoxy, the coils remain consistent and the
layering process became easier with each attempt.
The final techniques chosen resulted in fewer gaps
and spreading, ease of layering, and fewer number
of errors in winding.

Methods
The first test used tape and a lock nut to hold one end
of the wire in place. The rod was placed in the chuck of
the drill. Wire is pulled onto the rod by the drills
rotations. This method reduced the time it took to coil
the first layer.
The second layer was created by pulling the wire to the
beginning of the coil at a 180 angle and following the
grooves created by the first layer.
The second method used epoxy to hold the first layer in
place to avoid spreading. The bonding epoxy was
mixed before applying onto the wooden dowel. A
second layer was not attempted for this approach.

The second attempt created better layers and a better

approach for multiple layering. Applying epoxy to the
wooden dowel created gaps in the first layer where the
glue itself clumped together, making it more difficult to
create the first layer. The sticky surface created a
larger challenge as it did not allow for many
corrections.

Krauland R, Salerno A, Sams M, Wagner A. 2003.

LionSat: Magnetic torquer project [Internet]
Available from:mac6.ma.psu.edu/lionsat/
Mehrjardi, M. F. 2010. Design and manufacturing of
a research magnetic torque rod. Contemporary
engineering science. [Internet]; 3 (5). Available
from:http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009SPIE.75
22E..65F
Pietruszewski, A. N. 2010. Proxy 1 attitude
determination and control. [Internet]. Available
from:www.ssdl.gatech.edu/papers/mastersProject
s/PietruszewskiA-8900.pdf

Acknowledgments
I would like to thank Mark Karpenko for this
opportunity to work in his lab, and a special thanks
belongs to Bradley Watanabe, Robert Casey, and
David Mann for helping me with software and
materials issues. I would also like to thank everyone
that made this internship a possibility. Thank you
Alison Kerr and the entire Control and Optimization
Lab at NPS. This would not be possible with College
to University Success Program and the efforts the
amazing Hartnell staff Andy Newton, Joe Welch,
Pat McNeil. Without their dedication and hard work,
none of this would be possible. Thank you.

However, applying the epoxy onto the wires creates a

tightly wound coil and a smooth surface for a new layer
when applied evenly. It took a few attempts and much
waiting to master this approach, but this also allows for
two different layering techniques.
Fig b.
This is the second layer of a rod. The glossy finish is due to the
epoxy and each of the rods display this glossy finish. The wires
are secured in place and do not move after setting overnight.
The rod is initially smooth when the glue hardens, which creates
clean turns and little to no gaps when wound properly.

For further information

Please contact CMI@nps.edu or cssavala@nps.edu.
More information on this and related projects can be
obtained at http://www.nps.edu/Academics/GNCLab/
ResearchLabs/GNCLab.html