CubeSTEM Digital Twin · Track 5
Track 5 — ADCS / Attitude Control
Complete seven-session mini-course: why pointing matters → sensor angle estimation → reaction-wheel step response → contact-window pointing → PID tuning trade-offs → power-aware control → daylight vs eclipse evidence review.
Local-only mini-course: no account, no submissions, no gradebook. Teaching-grade one-axis models — not full 3-axis flight ADCS, not a reaction-wheel safety certification, not remote hardware control.
Track 5 — seven-session mini-course
7 sessions — 4 core (middle/high-school) + 3 extension (university)
- Why Pointing Matterscore15–20 min
- Attitude Hold Basicscore25–30 min
- Step Response to +10 Degreescore25–30 min
- Contact Window Pointingcore25–30 min
- Gentle vs Aggressive Controlextension30–35 min
- Power-Aware Attitude Controlextension30–35 min
- Daylight vs Eclipse Responseextension30–35 min
Mini-course flow
Seven sessions, one ADCS story: from why pointing matters to daylight vs eclipse evidence
Start with why spacecraft must point correctly, estimate attitude from noisy sensors, run a reaction-wheel step response, then track a ground station through a contact window. Extension sessions explore PID tuning trade-offs, power-aware control, and daylight vs eclipse evidence review. Evidence and self-checks are local-only — copy, export, or screenshot to share. No account required.
Recommended pacing: one session per class. Use the Next → link at the bottom of each activity page to move through the sequence automatically. After Session 7 the mini-course bridges toward Telemetry / Evidence (Track 6) or the Curriculum Map as a fallback.
Student can explain why attitude control is needed and what pointing error means.
- Live chart: target vs actual angle
- Student names mission harm from large pointing error (comms, power, science)
Student can describe the target angle, actual angle, and error trend from a real simulator run.
- Telemetry chart showing error → small
- Replay artifact with timestamped settle
Student can measure overshoot and settling time from a step response chart and relate them to controller tuning.
- Chart with overshoot peak marked
- Numeric or estimated settling time
Student can explain the pointing requirement for a contact window and observe it in the simulator.
- Telemetry during window showing tracking error
- Replay compare of good vs poor pointing during pass segment
Extension sessions (university-level)
Student can compare settling time, overshoot, and wheel effort for gentle and aggressive control settings.
Student can explain how a power-limited scenario changes controller behaviour and mission safety.
Student can explain why eclipse changes power availability for control and what the system must do differently.
Teacher plan
Track 5 — ADCS / Attitude Control mini-course
Complete seven-session mini-course: why spacecraft must point correctly → sensor estimation → reaction-wheel step response → contact-window pointing → PID tuning trade-offs → power-aware control → daylight vs eclipse evidence review. All activities are local browser labs — no accounts, no submissions, no gradebook.
Bridge — Mission Realism Lab
See pointing error reduce link margin in Mission Realism Lab.
45-min lesson
Sessions 1–2
Why Pointing Matters (15 min activity + 5 min debrief) → Attitude Hold Basics (20 min activity + 5 min debrief). Focus: orbit vs attitude distinction, sensor noise, and drift.
90-min workshop
Sessions 1–4
All four core sessions: Why Pointing Matters (15 min) → Attitude Hold Basics (20 min) → Step Response (20 min) → Contact Window Pointing (20 min) → full debrief (15 min).
Half-day lab
Sessions 1–7
All seven sessions: four core (75 min) + three extension (60 min): Gentle vs Aggressive (20 min) → Power-Aware (20 min) → Daylight vs Eclipse (20 min) + debrief (20 min). Recommended for university electives.
Common misconceptions
Misconception: Attitude is the same as altitude.
Correction: Attitude is orientation (pointing direction); altitude is orbital height. Entirely different.
Misconception: A higher gain is always better — it settles faster.
Correction: Higher gain increases overshoot and wheel effort; stability can degrade into oscillation.
Misconception: The digital twin simulates real ADCS hardware.
Correction: These are teaching-grade one-axis models. Real 3-axis flight ADCS is far more complex.
Misconception: Reaction wheels create thrust like a rocket.
Correction: Reaction wheels exchange angular momentum — equal and opposite — no thrust, no external torque.
Misconception: Pointing error is the same as position error.
Correction: Pointing error is an angular error in orientation; position error is spatial. A satellite can be in the right orbit but pointing the wrong way.
Misconception: This is a certified ADCS simulation tool.
Correction: It is a teaching-grade one-axis model. Real flight ADCS involves 3-axis control, sensor fusion, wheel momentum management, and certified software chains.
After Track 5
Students continue to Track 6 — Telemetry / Evidence (when available) or the Curriculum Map as fallback.
Open Track 6 hub →Boundary reminder: No full 3-axis flight ADCS claim. No reaction-wheel safety certification. No remote hardware. No submissions or gradebook. Local evidence only.
Student path
Your Track 5 journey
Work through sessions in order. Each session has an interactive lab, a self-check, and an evidence capture. At the end of each session, copy or export your evidence locally — it is not submitted or stored anywhere. When you finish Session 7, the mini-course is complete.
Student can explain why attitude control is needed and what pointing error means.
- Live chart: target vs actual angle
- Student names mission harm from large pointing error (comms, power, science)
Student can describe the target angle, actual angle, and error trend from a real simulator run.
- Telemetry chart showing error → small
- Replay artifact with timestamped settle
Student can measure overshoot and settling time from a step response chart and relate them to controller tuning.
- Chart with overshoot peak marked
- Numeric or estimated settling time
Student can explain the pointing requirement for a contact window and observe it in the simulator.
- Telemetry during window showing tracking error
- Replay compare of good vs poor pointing during pass segment
Student can compare settling time, overshoot, and wheel effort for gentle and aggressive control settings.
- Two replays with overshoot and wheel effort contrasted
- Student-written ops recommendation for contact prep
Student can explain how a power-limited scenario changes controller behaviour and mission safety.
- Chart showing reduced wheel effort or longer settle under power-aware rules
- Mission narrative line in replay if present
Student can explain why eclipse changes power availability for control and what the system must do differently.
- Phase markers or battery trend differences daylight vs eclipse
- Control effort comparison across phases in replay
Bridge — Mission Realism Lab
See pointing error reduce link margin in Mission Realism Lab.
Track 5 complete — what’s next?
You’ve finished the ADCS / Attitude Control mini-course. Continue to Telemetry / Evidence (Track 6) to learn how operators review attitude telemetry and build evidence — or explore the full curriculum map.
Open Track 6 — Telemetry / Evidence →Evidence checklist
What to capture across all seven sessions
Each activity page has a local evidence panel — copy or export the JSON artifact at the end of each session. No account required. Evidence is never submitted to any server.
Why Pointing Matters
- Live chart: target vs actual angle
- Student names mission harm from large pointing error (comms, power, science)
Attitude Hold Basics
- Telemetry chart showing error → small
- Replay artifact with timestamped settle
- Optional 3D scene showing body vs target ghost
Step Response to +10 Degrees
- Chart with overshoot peak marked
- Numeric or estimated settling time
- Wheel effort trace if shown
Contact Window Pointing
- Telemetry during window showing tracking error
- Replay compare of good vs poor pointing during pass segment
Gentle vs Aggressive Control
- Two replays with overshoot and wheel effort contrasted
- Student-written ops recommendation for contact prep
Power-Aware Attitude Control
- Chart showing reduced wheel effort or longer settle under power-aware rules
- Mission narrative line in replay if present
Daylight vs Eclipse Response
- Phase markers or battery trend differences daylight vs eclipse
- Control effort comparison across phases in replay
Classroom tip: At the end of each session, have students copy their evidence JSON and paste it into a class shared doc or their own portfolio. Use the evidence as a discussion anchor in the debrief — compare pointing error values or overshoot percentages across the group. Evidence is never sent to any server.
Assessment map
Local self-check structure across Track 5
Each activity includes 2–3 multiple-choice quick checks, one short-answer reflection, and a completion checklist. All are local-only — not a grade, not submitted anywhere. Use the assessment prompt for each session as a discussion-starter or debrief anchor after students complete the lab.
Why Pointing Matters
Name two mission functions that fail or degrade if pointing error stays large for minutes.
Attitude Hold Basics
From your run, how do you know the spacecraft reached the target within acceptable error?
Step Response to +10 Degrees
If you increase proportional gain, what usually happens to overshoot and why might operators care?
Contact Window Pointing
Why might operators care about pointing error even if the radio is technically transmitting?
Gentle vs Aggressive Control
When would you accept slower settling to protect power and mechanical wear?
Power-Aware Attitude Control
What is one observable telemetry sign that the spacecraft is being gentler on actuators in power-aware mode?
Daylight vs Eclipse Response
Why might operators schedule non-critical maneuvers outside eclipse if power margin is thin?
Common misconceptions addressed: attitude vs altitude; pointing error vs position error; higher gain is always better; digital twin = real hardware; reaction wheels provide thrust; this is a certified ADCS simulation tool.