The Implementation of Maximum Likelihood Estimation in Space Launch System Vehicle Design
No abstract available
Thompson, S. B.↗
Engineering topics
Stein, W. B.
Publications and source records attributed to Stein, W. B..
Methods of Performing Large Scale, Multidimensional Parametric Studies for Space Launch System Mission Analysis
Optimizing a large number of trajectories over a wide range of parameters is a difficult and computationally intensive, particularly when the parametric space has a large number of dimensions. Solving parametric studies like these require good initial conditions for each optimization case, which results in a significant amount of manual interaction and human judgment and can be time consuming. The Space Launch System (SLS) uses POST2 (Program to Optimize Simulated Trajectories II) to simulate different ascent trajectories and perform mission analysis. SLS mission analysis currently uses two types of large scale, multidimensional parameter spaces. The qualifying factor between these spaces is the grid density, which determines the set of applicable solution methodologies. One type has a relatively low number of dimensions (2-3), but a large number of grid coordinates (2000- 4000), whereas the second type has a relatively low number of grid coordinates (150-350), but a higher number of dimensions (7-10).
Stein, W. B.↗
Space Launch System and Missions to Near Rectilinear Halo Orbits
The first major evolution of NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) will begin its flights starting in the mid-2020’s. This new configuration, called Block 1B, replaces the Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage with a larger Exploration Upper Stage (EUS). The additional capability provided by the new upper stage will allow SLS to send heavier payloads into deep space. One destination of interest to the SLS program is called a Near Rectilinear Halo Orbit (NRHO). This is a type of lunar orbit with multiple advantages for deep space exploration. These benefits include Earth/lunar access, low station-keeping requirements, and high communication potential with Earth. Therefore, it is a leading candidate for the proposed Lunar Orbital Platform-Gateway (LOP-G). This paper will provide a detailed assessment of the SLS Block 1B requirements and capabilities for sending payloads to an NRHO. Analysts at Marshall Space Flight Center are producing a multi-year mission availability scan for the SLS Block 1B configuration to a predefined NRHO orbit. The analysis produces an optimized trajectory for each day of the scan window. A maximized payload and minimized propellant requirement are determined for each day. All maneuvers from launch to the end of the Trans-Lunar-Injection (TLI) are being modeled as finite burns. Injections into an NRHO are being modeled as impulsive maneuvers. The payload element is arbitrary, but includes sufficient mass to represent a large habitat or propulsion module. The resulting parameters of payload capability, delta-v requirements, and launch windows length vary over the course of the scan. Many launch days in the scan are eliminated in post-processing as they violate mission constraints such as payload mass and propellant usage to insert into an NRHO. Based off previous one-year scan results for the SLS Block 1B Design Analysis Cycle 2 (DAC-2), it is expected that there will be one to three days per week where the payload is able to insert into an NRHO within SLS constraints objectives. This scan provides results for longer than one-year, allowing analysts to better understand the launch availability and energy requirements of SLS Block 1B over time. The in-space mission design and scans utilize Copernicus, an n-body trajectory optimization tool originally developed out of the University of Texas at Austin with further development at Johnson Space Center in Houston, TX. To seed the in-space trajectory, Copernicus uses a plugin to call a database of SLS ascent trajectories optimized in the Program to Simulate Optimized Trajectories II (POST2). The ascent trajectories are developed using a framework that parametrizes payload mass and LEO inclination, and targets a 100 nmi (nautical mile) altitude circular parking orbit. Though this analysis is specific to the SLS program, it will provide a summary of mission design benefits and constraints associated with generic NRHO access, and may be applied to other programs or concepts that will utilize this orbit.
Statham, T. L.↗
The Implementation of Maximum Likelihood Estimation in Space Launch System Vehicle Design
As NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) approaches first launch, the design has matured to a point where the manufacturing uncertainty has decreased now that many of the components of the launch vehicle have been manufactured and the flight engines have been successfully tested. Prior to this point, a method was required to qualify and capture the impact of the differences between simulation and reality, as well as any uncertainties in the SLS design. Two primary categories of uncertainty arise during the launch vehicle design process. The first represents flight-day uncertainties including dispersions due to winds and temperatures. These are typically examined by performing a Monte Carlo on 6 Degree of Freedom (6-DOF) simulations. The second category of uncertainties represents any manufacturing variations that are present at the individual component level of the launch vehicle design. These variations are constructed using statistical masses and tend to become better understood and refined as the design cycle matures, finally resulting in the launch vehicle as constructed and tested.
Stein, W. B.↗
The Implementation of Maximum Likelihood Estimation in Space Launch System Vehicle Design
The Space Launch System uses a Maximum Likelihood Estimation process in conjunction with Design of Experiments to develop statistically representative vehicles for the Block 1 configuration. These vehicles are then used to estimate maximum load conditions for simulating stressing cases in other simulations. This paper discusses the modeling process and how SLS captures manufacturing uncertainty in the launch vehicle design. It also provides an overview of the differences between Block 1 statistical representations. This paper also discusses proper grid choice as well as which uncertainties drive the vehicle design.
Stein, W. B.↗