Search results for: G. Sisinni

Authors: B. Tiseo, V. Quaranta, G. Bruno, G. Sisinni

Abstract:

There is an increasing demand of nano-satellite development among universities, small companies, and emerging countries. Low-cost and fast-delivery are the main advantages of such class of satellites achieved by the extensive use of commercial-off-the-shelf components. On the other side, the loss of reliability and the poor success rate are limiting the use of nano-satellite to educational and technology demonstration and not to the commercial purpose. Standardization of nano-satellite environmental testing by tailoring the existing test standard for medium/large satellites is then a crucial step for their market growth. Thus, it is fundamental to find the right trade-off between the improvement of reliability and the need to keep their low-cost/fast-delivery advantages. This is particularly even more essential for satellites of CubeSat family. Such miniaturized and standardized satellites have 10 cm cubic form and mass no more than 1.33 kilograms per 1 unit (1U). For this class of nano-satellites, the qualification process is mandatory to reduce the risk of failure during a space mission. This paper reports the description and results of the space qualification test campaign performed on Endurosat’s CubeSat nano-satellite and modules. Mechanical and environmental tests have been carried out step by step: from the testing of the single subsystem up to the assembled CubeSat nano-satellite. Functional tests have been performed during all the test campaign to verify the functionalities of the systems. The test duration and levels have been selected by tailoring the European Space Agency standard ECSS-E-ST-10-03C and GEVS: GSFC-STD-7000A.

Keywords: CubeSat, nano-satellite, shock, testing, vibration

Procedia PDF Downloads 154

Authors: I. Sonia d’Apolito, Bianca Sisinni, Mirko Grimaldi, Barbara Gili Fivela

Abstract:

The American English contrast /ɑ-ʌ/ (cop-cup) is difficult to be produced by Italian learners since they realize L2-/ɑ-ʌ/ as L1-/ɔ-a/ respectively, due to differences in phonetic-phonological systems and also in grapheme-to-phoneme conversion rules. In this paper, we try to answer the following research questions: Can a short training improve the production of English /ɑ-ʌ/ by Italian learners? Is a perceptual training better than an articulatory (ultrasound - US) training? Thus, we compare a perceptual training with an US articulatory one to observe: 1) the effects of short trainings on L2-/ɑ-ʌ/ productions; 2) if the US articulatory training improves the pronunciation better than the perceptual training. In this pilot study, 9 Salento-Italian monolingual adults participated: 3 subjects performed a 1-hour perceptual training (ES-P); 3 subjects performed a 1-hour US training (ES-US); and 3 control subjects did not receive any training (CS). Verbal instructions about the phonetic properties of L2-/ɑ-ʌ/ and L1-/ɔ-a/ and their differences (representation on F1-F2 plane) were provided during both trainings. After these instructions, the ES-P group performed an identification training based on the High Variability Phonetic Training procedure, while the ES-US group performed the articulatory training, by means of US video of tongue gestures in L2-/ɑ-ʌ/ production and dynamic view of their own tongue movements and position using a probe under their chin. The acoustic data were analyzed and the first three formants were calculated. Independent t-tests were run to compare: 1) /ɑ-ʌ/ in pre- vs. post-test respectively; /ɑ-ʌ/ in pre- and post-test vs. L1-/a-ɔ/ respectively. Results show that in the pre-test all speakers realize L2-/ɑ-ʌ/ as L1-/ɔ-a/ respectively. Contrary to CS and ES-P groups, the ES-US group in the post-test differentiates the L2 vowels from those produced in the pre-test as well as from the L1 vowels, although only one ES-US subject produces both L2 vowels accurately. The articulatory training seems more effective than the perceptual one since it favors the production of vowels in the correct direction of L2 vowels and differently from the similar L1 vowels.

Keywords: L2 vowel production, perceptual training, articulatory training, ultrasound

Procedia PDF Downloads 222