Europa's habitability from surface mineralogy: what a lander "vibrational spectrometer" may find
No abstract provided
Johnson, Paul↗
Engineering topics
Johnson, Paul
Publications and source records attributed to Johnson, Paul.
Exploring the Science Trade Space with the JPL Innovation Foundry A-Team
The JPL Innovation Foundry has established a new approach for exploring, developing, and evaluating early concepts with a group called the Architecture Team (A-Team). The A-Team combines innovative collaborative methods and facilitated sessions with subject matter experts and analysis tools to help mature mission concepts. Science, implementation, and programmatic elements are all considered during an ATeam study. In these studies, Concept Maturity Levels (CML) are used to group methods. These levels include idea generation and capture (CML 1), initial feasibility assessment (CML 2), and trade space exploration (CML 3). Methods used for exploring the science objectives, feasibility, and scope will be described including use of a new technique for understanding the most compelling science, called a Science Return Diagram (SRD). In the process of developing the SRD, gradients in the science trade space are uncovered along with their implications for implementation and mission architecture. Special attention is paid towards developing complete investigations, establishing a series of logical claims that lead to the natural selection of a measurement approach. Over 20 science-focused A-Team studies have used these techniques to help science teams refine their mission objectives, make implementation decisions and reveal the mission concept’s most compelling science. This paper will describe the A-Team process for exploring the mission concept's science trade space and the Science Return Diagram technique.In June of 2011 a new collaborative engineering approach forearly concept formulation began in the JPL InnovationFoundry [1], six months later becoming the “A-Team” [2].Responding to a need for exploring mission architecturelevel trades [3], the A-Team precedes Team X [4,5] in asequence of concurrent engineering teams at JPL that can beused to mature a concept from a “cocktail napkin” level ideato a complete mission point design. The A-Team efficientlyexplores the science, implementation, and programmatictrade space in early concept formulation. Small, facilitatedgroups of experts generate innovative ideas, quantitativelyassess feasibility, and discover key sensitivities in the tradespace through collaborative analysis and use of advancedmethods and tools. The A-Team process builds off theexperience within JPL and other recent approaches to earlyconcept formulation [6] including best practices of the JPLInnovation Foundry, Project Systems Engineering &Formulation Section, Team Eureka and the Rapid MissionArchitecture Team[7].The A-Team is a focal point for innovative formulationapproaches and people within JPL. It relies on a largebackground of study resources, creative thinkers and “greybeard” scrutinizers, advanced tools, and subject matterexperts with both breadth and depth in experience andexpertise that are all available at JPL. The A-Team isdesigned to be a rapid and efficient process takingapproximately 6 weeks (the entire process can be as short asjust a few days or as long as up to three months) and costingthe equivalent of a work-month of a full-time employee orless. Studies begin with detailed planning and client reviewfollowed by study sessions, analysis work, and reporting.The staffing on each study is customized to the study goalsand objectives, and it is addressed early in the A-Teamprocess. Sessions are generally half-day or whole-day eventsand conducted over a series of days with focused agendas thatare moderated by a trained facilitator. Preliminary results andknowledge capture are available within hours of each session,and a final report is generally available two weeks later.One of the biggest challenges facing early conceptdevelopment is understanding the gradient in science returnversus various available mission scenarios and payload options. Often times, major areas of scientific inquiry havealready been prioritized by science groups, including throughthe National Research Council’s Decadal Studies inAstronomy, Planetary, and Earth Science. Yet science teamscontinue to struggle, especially in competitive missionsolicitations, to capture the right amount of scope that’sachievable within the cost constraints of the opportunity.Often the desire to completely and comprehensively study ascience area in just one mission (after all, true missionopportunities are rare) drives teams to take on too much,providing requirements that are unachievable within theresources of the opportunity without inducing unacceptableimplementation risk. Alternatively, science teams can seekto reduce risk by using an established instrument, but havenot thought through the traceability and key aspects of thescience question to justify its use. Both scenarios lead to badassumptions at the beginning of the concept development thatcan then ripple through implementation option choices,potentially preventing what would have been a good scienceinvestigation from being selected.The purpose of this paper is first to provide some additionalbackground and summary of the A-Team process, tools,people, and facilities. We then focus on the A-Teammethodology for overcoming the barriers of defining thescience scope well at the early concept development stage.This includes understanding the science story andtraceability, and then examining the gradient in science returnversus key characteristics of observables, developing theright payload and mission requirement specification throughexamining the science and implementation trade space.
Ziemer, John K.↗
Methods for Improving Long-Range Wireless Communication Between Extreme Terrain Vehicles
Axel is an extreme terrain, two-wheeled rover designed to traverse rocky surface and sub-surface landscapes in order to conduct remote science experiments in hard-to-reach locations. The rover's design meets many requirements for a mobile research platform capable of reaching water seeps on Martian cliff sides. Axel was developed by the Mobility and Robotic Systems section at the Caltech Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Unique design criteria associated with extreme terrain mobility led to a unique rover solution, consisting of a central module, which provides long-term energy storage and space for large-scale science payloads, and two detachable Axels that can detach and explore extreme terrain locations that are inaccessible to conventional rovers. The envisioned mission could involve a four-wheeled configuration of Axel called 'DuAxel' that is able to traverse the benign, flattened terrain of a landing site and approach the edge of the targeted crater or cave where it would deploy anchoring legs and detach one of the Axel rovers [1]. A tether provides a secure link between the Axel rover and the central module, acting as an anchor to allow Axel to descend along steep crater walls to collect data from the scientifically relevant sites along the water seeps or crater ledges. After completing its scientific mission Axel would hoist itself up to the central module and dock autonomously (using its on-board stereo cameras), allowing the once-again recombined DuAxel to travel to another location to repeat data collection.
wireless communication↗
Launching to the Moon and Beyond
This slide presentation reviews the Ares I and Ares V launch vehicles, and includes information about both vehicles. It includes a film that explains the details of the two vehicles, and explains the differences and similarities they have to each other and to other launch vehicles. The presentation also reviews the progress made on the Ares I, and the test of the Ares I-X.
Johnson, Paul↗
Comparison of Analytical Predictions and Experimental Results for a Dual Brayton Power System
NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) contracted Barber- Nichols, Arvada, CO to construct a dual Brayton power conversion system for use as a hardware proof of concept and to validate results from a computational code known as the Closed Cycle System Simulation (CCSS). Initial checkout tests were performed at Barber- Nichols to ready the system for delivery to GRC. This presentation describes the system hardware components and lists the types of checkout tests performed along with a couple issues encountered while conducting the tests. A description of the CCSS model is also presented. The checkout tests did not focus on generating data, therefore, no test data or model analyses are presented.
Johnson, Paul↗
Aerospace Workforce Development: The Nebraska Proposal; and Native Connections: A Multi-Consortium Workforce Development Proposal
This report contains two sections, each of which describes a proposal for a program at the University of Nebraska. The sections are entitled: 1) Aerospace Workforce Development Augmentation Competition; 2) Native Connections: A Multi-Consortium Workforce Development Proposal.
Bowen, Brent↗
MSFC MXER Tether Study
This viewgraph presentation provides an overview of the proposed Momentum-eXchange/Electrodynamic Reboost (MXER) space hardware system. The tether system would be position cart-wheeling cables above the Earth and then, rotating like a giant sling, would capture spacecraft or payloads from space shuttles in low Earth orbits and launch them into higher orbits. This study focuses on system validation and structural design issues for MXER. Topics examined include: tether facility design, ED tether system, payload capture/catch mechanism, payload accomodations assembly (PAA), PAA rendezvous capability, and PAA capability to correct tether misthrows.
Polsgrove, Tara↗
Preliminary test results for Li-SOCl2 high-rate D cells
The performance and abuse characteristics of 55 D-size lithium-thionyl chloride (Li-SOCl2) cells are evaluated at relatively high rates. Results from the following tests are presented: shock test, vibration test, capacity performance, uninsulated short circuit, high temperature exposure, and overdischarge.
Bragg, Bobby J.↗
Telerobotic field geologist - Preliminary results of a feasibility study
Results of three laboratory studies conducted to explore the feasibility of developing a telerobot to perform planetary field geology are presented. A total of 72 college students attempted to match each of 15 geologic rock samples viewed either directly or on a TV screen with its matched pair contained in a matrix of 24 rocks which they viewed directly. The first study showed that rocks viewed on TV could be matched at levels well above chance, but significantly less than by direct view. Performance under remote view was improved by adding color and by magnifying the TV image. The second study showed a large decrease in performance when viewing a miniature LCK monitor as compared to a 19-in. CRT monitor of higher resolution. In the third study performance using the 2.9-in. LCK monitor showed only insignificant increases when images were presented in 3D view or when the rock was moved. It is suggested that it is feasible to conduct geologic observations with telerobots, and the critical role that image quality plays in determining performance is demonstrated.
Cole, Robert E.↗