Power budget

Spacecraft Power Budget

Size the solar array, battery, and power-system mass for a typical satellite mission — then flip the toggle and see what swapping the array for a HawkLogic-style beamed-power link does to the budget.

// physics from SMAD 5th ed and ESA SPSEM; constants documented inline. beamed-instead? toggle swaps the array for a rectenna. real trade, no marketing math.

AI explainer Run the numbers, then let ENKI break down what they mean — diagrams and all.
About this model & its assumptions

This calculator sizes the photovoltaic array, the battery, and the resulting power-system mass for a circular Low Earth Orbit mission. It is intended for early-stage mission design — the level of detail you'd run before formal SMAD-style sizing, the level a PI or programme manager wants to ground a power-subsystem conversation in. The model is pure physics: orbit period from Kepler's third law, eclipse fraction from a spherical-Earth shadow geometry with a parametric beta-angle assumption, array power scaled by the sunlit fraction of the orbit, and battery capacity sized for the eclipse-period energy demand at a stated depth-of-discharge limit.

Constants follow the consensus values you'd find in SMAD 5th ed. (Wertz & Larson, ch. 21) and the ESA Space Power Subsystem Engineering Manual. The solar constant is 1367 W/m²; rigid panels are sized at 2.8 kg/m²; mission-rated Li-ion batteries at 150 Wh/kg pack-level. Cell efficiency defaults to 0.28 (BOL, GaAs triple-junction), packing 0.85, BOL/EOL degradation 0.85, and a design margin of 0.25 on top of computed values. The eclipse model defaults to a worst-case sun-in-orbit-plane assumption for low- to mid-inclination orbits, and to a dawn-dusk SSO assumption (beta near 67 deg) for polar/SSO orbits — the design-conservative choices in each case. Every constant is overridable. Every input is overridable.

The "what if beamed instead?" toggle swaps the solar array for a 35 GHz rectenna sized for a beamed-power link, with the battery resized for safe-mode coast-through (the beam is persistent and redundant in the HawkLogic architecture, so eclipse-sized batteries are overkill). The defaults model a sub-aperture rectenna at conservative received-power densities; tune them to your beam-design point. The model does not capture rectification efficiency drift with incidence angle, atmospheric loss for ground-to-space links, or stage-by-stage power conditioning. It is a first-order trade study, not a flight-design tool.

Share scenarios by URL — the share button packs every input into the page hash so you can paste the link into a design review without screenshots. The calculator runs entirely in your browser; no inputs leave your machine.

// try a preset, then tweak. one tap loads every input.

// swap the array for a rectenna and resize the battery for safe-mode coast-through.

Orbit

// circular; SMAD spherical-Earth eclipse model.

Payload + bus

// duty cycle is fraction of orbit at active power.

Power system

// GaAs triple-junction defaults; tune for your stack.

Battery + margin

// DoD limit drives cycle life; design margin is on top.

Solar-array sizing

// avg load 11 W · orbit 94.6 min · eclipse 10.8%

0.056 m²

Array area

18 W

Array power BOL

15 W

Array power EOL

0.16 kg

Array mass

7.8 Wh

Battery capacity

0.05 kg

Battery mass

0.26 kg

Power-system mass

0.01 U

Stowed volume

// mass breakdown

  • Array 0.16 kg
  • Battery 0.05 kg
  • Harness + deploy 0.05 kg

// shareable URL encodes every input. no backend.

// ai-generated breakdown of what these numbers mean — with diagrams.

References

  • // Wertz, J. R., Everett, D. F., & Puschell, J. J. (eds.) (2011). Space Mission Engineering: The New SMAD, ch. 21 (Power Subsystems).
  • // European Space Agency. Space Power Subsystem Engineering Manual (SPSEM), latest revision.
  • // NASA. Battery Handbook for Aerospace Applications, 2024.
  • // Vallado, D. A. (2013). Fundamentals of Astrodynamics and Applications, ch. 1 (orbit period, Kepler).
  • // For the spherical-Earth eclipse model and beta-angle treatment, see Wertz & Larson (1999) section 5.1, and the two-tier orbital-power architecture overview for the beamed-power context.