Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Mishkin, Andrew

Publications and source records attributed to Mishkin, Andrew.

15 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2021

Commanding Curiosity from the Couch: MSL Remote Operations, Challenges, and Path Ahead

This paper describes how the Mars ScienceLaboratory (MSL) project prepared for and successfully beganCuriosity rover Mars operations from their homes in responseto the COVID-19 work-from-home orders. In a very shortperiod, the team developed procedures and executed a remoteoperations readiness test in parallel with the team's support fornominal operations. Continuing regular rover operations withan entirely remote team had not previously been consideredfeasible due to a variety of factors. These included both thehuman factors, such as multiple concurrent person-to-personinteractions of the uplink planning team, as well as technicalfactors, such as reliance on powerful workstations dedicated tographically intensive software tools used for planning. The testwas conducted on March 12th, with both the downlink anduplink teams successfully simulating a near full planning day.The JPL administration announced the transition to mandatorytelework on Monday, March 16th. MSL stood down the uplinkplanning originally scheduled for the next day while downlinkcontinued monitoring the rover. Full operations then resumedper schedule with nearly the entire operations team teleworkingon Friday, March 20th, during which the team planned roveractivities for three Martian days (sols). These activities includedthe successful drilling of the "Edinburgh" rock target, a highlycomplex contact science activity.As of October 1st, 2020, the Mars Science Laboratory missionoperations team has conducted 88 remote tactical uplink shiftsfor a total of 190 sols of planned rover activity, which accountsfor more than 6% of the mission to date. In this period the roverhas completed four drilling campaigns and driven over 1150meters towards its next major science target – a sulfate bearinggeologic unit at the foot of Mount Sharp. Success has not beenwithout its challenges. Many of these have been addressed whileothers will remain in some form until the team can safely returnto JPL, which in turn is the largest challenge for the future.

Stroupe, Ashley↗
NASA NTRS2014

Automated Scheduling of Personnel to Staff Operations for the Mars Science Laboratory

Leveraging previous work on scheduling personnel for space mission operations, we have adapted ASPEN (Activity Scheduling and Planning Environment) [1] to the domain of scheduling personnel for operations of the Mars Science Laboratory. Automated scheduling of personnel is not new. We compare our representations to a sampling of employee scheduling systems available with respect to desired features. We described the constraints required by MSL personnel schedulers and how each is handled by the scheduling algorithm.

MSL↗
NASA NTRS2013

Automating Stowage Operations for the International Space Station

A challenge for any proposed mission is to demonstrate convincingly that the proposed systems will in fact deliver the science promised. Funding agencies and mission design personnel are becoming ever more skeptical of the abstractions that form the basis of the current state of the practice with respect to approximating science return. To address this, we have been using automated planning and scheduling technology to provide actual coverage campaigns that provide better predictive performance with respect to science return for a given mission design and set of mission objectives given implementation uncertainties. Specifically, we have applied an adaptation of ASPEN and SPICE to the Eagle-Eye domain that demonstrates the performance of the mission design with respect to coverage of science imaging targets that address climate change and disaster response. Eagle-Eye is an Earth-imaging telescope that has been proposed to fly aboard the International Space Station (ISS).

box packing↗
NASA NTRS2007

Integrated Human-Robotic Missions to the Moon and Mars: Mission Operations Design Implications

For most of the history of space exploration, human and robotic programs have been independent, and have responded to distinct requirements. The NASA Vision for Space Exploration calls for the return of humans to the Moon, and the eventual human exploration of Mars; the complexity of this range of missions will require an unprecedented use of automation and robotics in support of human crews. The challenges of human Mars missions, including roundtrip communications time delays of 6 to 40 minutes, interplanetary transit times of many months, and the need to manage lifecycle costs, will require the evolution of a new mission operations paradigm far less dependent on real-time monitoring and response by an Earthbound operations team. Robotic systems and automation will augment human capability, increase human safety by providing means to perform many tasks without requiring immediate human presence, and enable the transfer of traditional mission control tasks from the ground to crews. Developing and validating the new paradigm and its associated infrastructure may place requirements on operations design for nearer-term lunar missions. The authors, representing both the human and robotic mission operations communities, assess human lunar and Mars mission challenges, and consider how human-robot operations may be integrated to enable efficient joint operations, with the eventual emergence of a unified exploration operations culture.

human robotic missions↗
NASA NTRS2007

Mission Operations of the Mars Exploration Rovers

A document describes a system of processes involved in planning, commanding, and monitoring operations of the rovers Spirit and Opportunity of the Mars Exploration Rover mission. The system is designed to minimize command turnaround time, given that inherent uncertainties in terrain conditions and in successful completion of planned landed spacecraft motions preclude planning of some spacecraft activities until the results of prior activities are known by the ground-based operations team. The processes are partitioned into those (designated as tactical) that must be tied to the Martian clock and those (designated strategic) that can, without loss, be completed in a more leisurely fashion. The tactical processes include assessment of downlinked data, refinement and validation of activity plans, sequencing of commands, and integration and validation of sequences. Strategic processes include communications planning and generation of long-term activity plans. The primary benefit of this partition is to enable the tactical portion of the team to focus solely on tasks that contribute directly to meeting the deadlines for commanding the rover s each sol (1 sol = 1 Martian day) - achieving a turnaround time of 18 hours or less, while facilitating strategic team interactions with other organizations that do not work on a Mars time schedule.

Bass, Deborah↗
NASA NTRS2006

Integrated human-robotic missions to the Moon and Mars : mission operations design implications

For most of the history of space exploration, human and robotic programs have been independent, and have responded to distinct requirements. The NASA Vision for Space Exploration calls for the return of humans to the Moon, and the eventual human exploration of Mars; the complexity of this range of missions will require an unprecedented use of automation and robotics in support of human crews. The challenges of human Mars missions, including roundtrip communications time delays of 6 to 40 minutes, interplanetary transit times of many months, and the need to manage lifecycle costs, will require the evolution of a new mission operations paradigm far less dependent on real-time monitoring and response by an Earthbound operations team. Robotic systems and automation will augment human capability, increase human safety by providing means to perform many tasks without requiring immediate human presence, and enable the transfer of traditional mission control tasks from the ground to crews. Developing and validating the new paradigm and its associated infrastructure may place requirements on operations design for nearer-term lunar missions. The authors, representing both the human and robotic mission operations communities, assess human lunar and Mars mission challenges, and consider how human-robot operations may be integrated to enable efficient joint operations, with the eventual emergence of a unified exploration operations culture.

Lee, Young↗
NASA NTRS2006

Implementing Distributed Operations: A Comparison of Two Deep Space Missions

Two very different deep space exploration missions--Mars Exploration Rover and Cassini--have made use of distributed operations for their science teams. In the case of MER, the distributed operations capability was implemented only after the prime mission was completed, as the rovers continued to operate well in excess of their expected mission lifetimes; Cassini, designed for a mission of more than ten years, had planned for distributed operations from its inception. The rapid command turnaround timeline of MER, as well as many of the operations features implemented to support it, have proven to be conducive to distributed operations. These features include: a single science team leader during the tactical operations timeline, highly integrated science and engineering teams, processes and file structures designed to permit multiple team members to work in parallel to deliver sequencing products, web-based spacecraft status and planning reports for team-wide access, and near-elimination of paper products from the operations process. Additionally, MER has benefited from the initial co-location of its entire operations team, and from having a single Principal Investigator, while Cassini operations have had to reconcile multiple science teams distributed from before launch. Cassini has faced greater challenges in implementing effective distributed operations. Because extensive early planning is required to capture science opportunities on its tour and because sequence development takes significantly longer than sequence execution, multiple teams are contributing to multiple sequences concurrently. The complexity of integrating inputs from multiple teams is exacerbated by spacecraft operability issues and resource contention among the teams, each of which has their own Principal Investigator. Finally, much of the technology that MER has exploited to facilitate distributed operations was not available when the Cassini ground system was designed, although later adoption of web-based and telecommunication tools has been critical to the success of Cassini operations.

Cassini Mission↗
NASA NTRS2006

Integrated Human-Robotic Missions to the Moon and Mars: Mission Operations Design Implications

For most of the history of space exploration, human and robotic programs have been independent, and have responded to distinct requirements. The NASA Vision for Space Exploration calls for the return of humans to the Moon, and the eventual human exploration of Mars; the complexity of this range of missions will require an unprecedented use of automation and robotics in support of human crews. The challenges of human Mars missions, including roundtrip communications time delays of 6 to 40 minutes, interplanetary transit times of many months, and the need to manage lifecycle costs, will require the evolution of a new mission operations paradigm far less dependent on real-time monitoring and response by an Earthbound operations team. Robotic systems and automation will augment human capability, increase human safety by providing means to perform many tasks without requiring immediate human presence, and enable the transfer of traditional mission control tasks from the ground to crews. Developing and validating the new paradigm and its associated infrastructure may place requirements on operations design for nearer-term lunar missions. The authors, representing both the human and robotic mission operations communities, assess human lunar and Mars mission challenges, and consider how human-robot operations may be integrated to enable efficient joint operations, with the eventual emergence of a unified exploration operations culture.

Korth, David↗
NASA NTRS2001

Autonomously generating operations sequences for a Mars Rover using AI-based planning

This paper discusses a proof-of-concept prototype for ground-based automatic generation of validated rover command sequences from highlevel science and engineering activities. This prototype is based on ASPEN, the Automated Scheduling and Planning Environment. This Artificial Intelligence (AI) based planning and scheduling system will automatically generate a command sequence that will execute within resource constraints and satisfy flight rules.

Mars Rover↗
NASA NTRS1992

Robotic vehicles for planetary exploration

A program to develop planetary rover technology is underway at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) under sponsorship of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Developmental systems with the necessary sensing, computing, power, and mobility resources to demonstrate realistic forms of control for various missions have been developed, and initial testing has been completed. These testbed systems and the associated navigation techniques used are described. Particular emphasis is placed on three technologies: Computer-Aided Remote Driving (CARD), Semiautonomous Navigation (SAN), and behavior control. It is concluded that, through the development and evaluation of such technologies, research at JPL has expanded the set of viable planetary rover mission possibilities beyond the limits of remotely teleoperated systems such as Lunakhod. These are potentially applicable to exploration of all the solid planetary surfaces in the solar system, including Mars, Venus, and the moons of the gas giant planets.

Wilcox, Brian↗