Materials and processes

Also known as Materials, M&P, Materials engineering, Hard anodizing, Outgassing

Which alloys, coatings, solders and polymers a small satellite can use, and why the answers change at PocketQube scale: the sliding backplate is interface-critical, eclipse cycling fatigues solder joints, and outgassing rules differ between standards.

Document
SQ-EN-001
Updated
20 Oct 2026
Reading time
12 min
In this tab

Why scale changes the materials questions#

Most PocketQube teams build with commercial terrestrial parts and inherit their materials rules from three sources: the CubeSat Design Specification for rails, coatings and , the standards that the cites, and passive-magnetic design rules developed for 1U–3U CubeSats[1]. Each was written for a different size. Area, volume, inertia, heat capacity and magnetic near fields scale with different powers of length, so a rule that is conservative for a CubeSat can be inadequate, irrelevant or needlessly strict for a PocketQube.

Between a 1P and a 1U, geometric similarity divides mass and volume by 8, area and body-mounted power by 4 and the moment of inertia by 32. The standards do not keep similarity: at their mass limits a 1P has 4.7% of the inertia of a 1.33 kg 1U, its areal density is 0.75 times as large, and the field of a magnet of given moment is eight times stronger at its inner walls[1].

The clauses that matter#

The PocketQube Standard, Issue 1, contains a short list of requirements with direct materials consequences[2]:

ClauseContent (abridged)Consequence
PQ-Gen-02No pyrotechnicsReleases by thermal knives or shape-memory devices; the cutting filaments must meet outgassing limits
PQ-Gen-03No toxic, flammable or hazardous materials; Li-ion cells exempt if thermal runaway is preventedMagnesium, beryllium and some polymers need launch-provider consultation; battery protection and test evidence
PQ-Gen-04Outgassing TML ≤ 1.0%, CVCM ≤ 0.1% "per ECSS-Q-70-02C"ECSS actually screens on recovered mass loss, not TML
PQ-Mech-01–07Body 50.0 ± 0.1 mm; backplate 58.0 × 64.0 × 1.6 mm; 2 mm clamped edgesCoating growth and flatness consume the tolerance; edges are fretting contacts
PQ-Mass-01–04250/500/750 g; centre of mass within 1 cmDensity drives the mass budget; the offset sets the aerodynamic torque
PQ-Mat-02Recommended: FR-4 and Al 7075, 6061, 6065, 6082 per ECSS-Q-ST-70-36CNo temper is specified, and 7075-T6 has low stress-corrosion resistance
PQ-Mat-03Hard anodizing of metal parts touching the deployerFilm thickness, alloy response, fatigue debit and electrical isolation
PQ-Mat-04Other materials need launch-provider consultationMagnesium, titanium, steels, AM metals and most polymers

The CubeSat Design Specification lists 7075, 6061, 6082, 5005 and 5052 for CubeSat structures and asks for rails[3].

References

  1. [1]nadir lab. (2026). Materials engineering for PocketQube picosatellites: A scaling-based review and design guide [Preprint]. nadir lab.Read on nadir lab.
  2. [2]Alba Orbital, TU Delft, & GAUSS Srl. (2018). The PocketQube Standard, Issue 1.albaorbital.com
  3. [3]The CubeSat Program, Cal Poly SLO. (2022). CubeSat Design Specification, Rev. 14.1 (CP-CDS-R14.1). California Polytechnic State University.nasa.gov
  4. [4]European Cooperation for Space Standardization. (2009). ECSS-Q-ST-70-36C: Space product assurance — Material selection for controlling stress-corrosion cracking. ESA-ESTEC.
  5. [5]Speidel, M. O. (1975). Stress corrosion cracking of aluminum alloys. Metallurgical Transactions A, 6, 631–651.
  6. [6]Ashby, M. F. (2017). Materials Selection in Mechanical Design (5th ed.). Butterworth-Heinemann.
  7. [7]Valencia, S., Acevedo Nisperuza, C., Orduy, J. E., & Lozano, C. (2026). Additive manufacturing of structural components for PocketQube-class satellites: a systematic review of materials, processes, qualification pathways, and ECSS compliance. Aerospace, 13, 698.doi:10.3390/aerospace13080698
  8. [8]Merstallinger, A., Sales, M., Semerad, E., & Dunn, B. D. (2009). Assessment of cold welding between separable contact surfaces due to impact and fretting under vacuum (ESA STM-279). ESA Communications.
  9. [9]Holzbauer, R., Merstallinger, A., Gaillard, L., & Bamsey, N. (2024). Cold welding under space and launch conditions. In: 47th Aerospace Mechanisms Symposium, NASA Langley Research Center (519–528).
  10. [10]Johnson, M. R. (1994). The Galileo high gain antenna deployment anomaly. In: 28th Aerospace Mechanisms Symposium (NASA CP-3260) (359–377).
  11. [11]U.S. Department of Defense. (1993). MIL-A-8625F: Anodic coatings for aluminum and aluminum alloys.
  12. [12]Dallari, E., Bononi, M., Pola, A., Tocci, M., Veronesi, P., & Giovanardi, R. (2023). Pulsed current effect on the hard anodizing of an AlSi10Mg aluminum alloy obtained via additive manufacturing. Surfaces, 6, 97–113.doi:10.3390/surfaces6010008
  13. [13]Winter, L., & Lampke, T. (2023). Fatigue resistance of an anodized and hardanodized 6082 aluminum alloy depending on the coating thickness in the high cycle regime. Advanced Engineering Materials, 25, 2300394.doi:10.1002/adem.202300394
  14. [14]Kovács, R., & Józsa, V. (2018). Thermal analysis of the SMOG-1 PocketQube satellite. Applied Thermal Engineering, 139, 506–513.doi:10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2018.05.020
  15. [15]Engelmaier, W. (1983). Fatigue life of leadless chip carrier solder joints during power cycling. IEEE Transactions on Components, Hybrids, and Manufacturing Technology, 6, 232–237.
  16. [16]Torabi, N. M., Lumpp, J. K., & Lumpp, J. E. (2011). Materials selection and processing techniques for small spacecraft solar cell arrays. In: International Symposium on Microelectronics (IMAPS 2011) (789–799).doi:10.4071/isom-2011-WP4-Paper3
  17. [17]European Cooperation for Space Standardization. (2017). ECSS-Q-ST-70-38C Rev.1: Space product assurance — High-reliability soldering for surface-mount and mixed technology. ESA-ESTEC.
  18. [18]Galyon, G. T. (2005). Annotated tin whisker bibliography and anthology. IEEE Transactions on Electronics Packaging Manufacturing, 28, 94–122.
  19. [19]European Cooperation for Space Standardization. (2008). ECSS-Q-ST-70-02C: Space product assurance — Thermal vacuum outgassing test for the screening of space materials. ESA-ESTEC.
  20. [20]ASTM International. (2021). ASTM E595-15(2021): Standard test method for total mass loss and collected volatile condensable materials from outgassing in a vacuum environment. ASTM International.
  21. [21]NASA Goddard Space Flight Center. (n.d.). Outgassing data for selecting spacecraft materials.outgassing.nasa.gov(accessed 20 October 2026)
  22. [22]de Groh, K. K., Banks, B. A., McCarthy, C. E., Rucker, R. N., Roberts, L. M., & Berger, L. A. (2008). MISSE 2 PEACE polymers atomic oxygen erosion experiment on the International Space Station. High Performance Polymers, 20, 388–409.

Cite this SatWiki entry

@misc{nadirlab2026materials,
  author       = {{nadir lab.}},
  title        = {{Materials and processes}},
  year         = {2026},
  month        = oct,
  howpublished = {nadir lab. SatWiki SQ-EN-001 (Rev. 1)},
  url          = {https://nadirlab.space/en/wiki/materials-processes/}
}