Engineering topics

Stephens, J. P.

Publications and source records attributed to Stephens, J. P..

2 records

NASA NTRS2011

Orion Handling Qualities During ISS Rendezvous and Docking

The Orion spacecraft was designed to rendezvous with multiple vehicles in low earth orbit (LEO) and beyond. To perform the required rendezvous and docking task, Orion must provide enough control authority to perform coarse translational maneuvers while maintaining precision to perform the delicate docking corrections. While Orion has autonomous docking capabilities, it is expected that final approach and docking operations with the International Space Station (ISS) will initially be performed in a manual mode. A series of evaluations was conducted by NASA and Lockheed Martin at the Johnson Space Center to determine the handling qualities (HQ) of the Orion spacecraft during different docking and rendezvous conditions using the Cooper-Harper scale. This paper will address the specifics of the handling qualities methodology, vehicle configuration, scenarios flown, data collection tools, and subject ratings and comments. The initial Orion HQ assessment examined Orion docking to the ISS. This scenario demonstrates the Translational Hand Controller (THC) handling qualities of Orion. During this initial assessment, two different scenarios were evaluated. The first was a nominal docking approach to a stable ISS, with Orion initializing with relative position dispersions and a closing rate of approximately 0.1 ft/sec. The second docking scenario was identical to the first, except the attitude motion of the ISS was modeled to simulate a stress case ( 1 degree deadband per axis and 0.01 deg/sec rate deadband per axis). For both scenarios, subjects started each run on final approach at a docking port-to-port range of 20 ft. Subjects used the THC in pulse mode with cues from the docking camera image, window views, and range and range rate data displayed on the Orion display units. As in the actual design, the attitude of the Orion vehicle was held by the automated flight control system at 0.5 degree deadband per axis. Several error sources were modeled including Reaction Control System (RCS) jet angular and position misalignment, RCS thrust magnitude uncertainty, RCS jet force direction uncertainty due to self plume impingement, and Orion center of mass uncertainty.

Hart, Jeremy J.↗

NASA NTRS2011

Orion Entry Handling Qualities Assessments

The Orion Command Module (CM) is a capsule designed to bring crew back from the International Space Station (ISS), the moon and beyond. The atmospheric entry portion of the flight is deigned to be flown in autopilot mode for nominal situations. However, there exists the possibility for the crew to take over manual control in off-nominal situations. In these instances, the spacecraft must meet specific handling qualities criteria. To address these criteria two separate assessments of the Orion CM s entry Handling Qualities (HQ) were conducted at NASA s Johnson Space Center (JSC) using the Cooper-Harper scale (Cooper & Harper, 1969). These assessments were conducted in the summers of 2008 and 2010 using the Advanced NASA Technology Architecture for Exploration Studies (ANTARES) six degree of freedom, high fidelity Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C) simulation. This paper will address the specifics of the handling qualities criteria, the vehicle configuration, the scenarios flown, the simulation background and setup, crew interfaces and displays, piloting techniques, ratings and crew comments, pre- and post-fight briefings, lessons learned and changes made to improve the overall system performance. The data collection tools, methods, data reduction and output reports will also be discussed. The objective of the 2008 entry HQ assessment was to evaluate the handling qualities of the CM during a lunar skip return. A lunar skip entry case was selected because it was considered the most demanding of all bank control scenarios. Even though skip entry is not planned to be flown manually, it was hypothesized that if a pilot could fly the harder skip entry case, then they could also fly a simpler loads managed or ballistic (constant bank rate command) entry scenario. In addition, with the evaluation set-up of multiple tasks within the entry case, handling qualities ratings collected in the evaluation could be used to assess other scenarios such as the constant bank angle maintenance case. The 2008 entry assessment was divided into two sections (see Figure 1). Entry I was the first, high speed portion of a lunar return and Entry II was the second, lower speed portion of a lunar return, which is similar (but not identical) to a typical ISS return.

Bihari, B.↗