Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Space Mission Robotic Missions”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 181 records · Page 10
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2001

High Power MPD Thruster Development at the NASA Glenn Research Center

Propulsion requirements for large platform orbit raising, cargo and piloted planetary missions, and robotic deep space exploration have rekindled interest in the development and deployment of high power electromagnetic thrusters. Magnetoplasmadynamic (MPD) thrusters can effectively process megawatts of power over a broad range of specific impulse values to meet these diverse in-space propulsion requirements. As NASA's lead center for electric propulsion, the Glenn Research Center has established an MW-class pulsed thruster test facility and is refurbishing a high-power steady-state facility to design, build, and test efficient gas-fed MPD thrusters. A complimentary numerical modeling effort based on the robust MACH2 code provides a well-balanced program of numerical analysis and experimental validation leading to improved high power MPD thruster performance. This paper reviews the current and planned experimental facilities and numerical modeling capabilities at the Glenn Research Center and outlines program plans for the development of new, efficient high power MPD thrusters.

LaPointe, Michael R.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Compact Vapor Chamber Cools Critical Components

Advancements in the production of proton exchange membrane fuel cells have NASA considering their use as a power source for spacecraft and robots in future space missions. With SBIR funding from Glenn Research Center, Lancaster, Pennsylvania-based Thermacore Inc. developed strong, lightweight titanium vapor chambers to keep the fuel cells operating at optimum temperatures. The company is now selling the technology for cooling electronic components.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2014

An Analysis of the FY-1C, Iridium 33, and Cosmos 2251 Fragments

The beginning of the year 2013 marks the sixth anniversary of the destruction of the Fengyun-1C (FY-1C) weather satellite as the result of an anti-satellite test conducted by China in January 2007 and the fourth anniversary of the accidental collision between Cosmos 2251 and the operational Iridium 33 in February 2009. These two events represent the worst satellite breakups in history. A total of 5579 fragments have been cataloged by the U.S. Space Surveillance Network (SSN), and almost 5000 of them were still in orbit in January 2013. In addition to these cataloged objects, hundreds of thousands (or more) of fragments down to the millimeter size regime were also generated during the breakups. These fragments are too small to be tracked by the SSN, but are large enough to be a safety concern for human space activities and robotic missions in low Earth orbit (LEO, the region below 2000 km altitude). Like their cataloged siblings, many of them remain in orbit today. These two breakup events dramatically changed the landscape of the orbital debris environment in LEO. The spatial density of the cataloged population in January 2013 is shown as the top blue curve. The combined FY-1C, Iridium 33, and Cosmos 2251 fragments (black curve) account for about 50 percent of the cataloged population below an altitude of 1000 km. They are also responsible for the concentrations at 770 km and 850 km, altitudes at which the collisions occurred. The effects of the FY-1C, Iridium 33, and Cosmos 2251 fragments will continue to be felt for decades to come. For example, approximately half of the generated FY-1C fragments will remain in orbit 20 years from now. In general, the Iridium 33 and Cosmos 2251 fragments will decay faster than the FY-1C fragments because of their lower altitudes. Of the Iridium 33 and Cosmos 2251 fragments, the former have much shorter orbital lifetimes than the latter, because lightweight composite materials were heavily used in the construction of the Iridium vehicle, leading to the higher area-to-mass ratios of the fragments.

Liou, J.-C.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Overview of Stirling Technology Research at NASA Glenn Research Center

Stirling Radioisotope Power Systems (RPS) are under development to provide power on future space science missions where robotic spacecraft will orbit, flyby, land or rove using less than a quarter of the plutonium the currently available RPS uses to produce about the same power. Glenn Research Center's (GRC's) newly formulated Stirling Cycle Technology Development Project (SCTDP) continues development of Stirling-based systems and subsystems, which include a flight-like generator and related housing assembly, controller, and convertors. The project also develops less mature technologies under Stirling Technology Research, with a focus on demonstration in representative environments to increase the technology readiness level (TRL). Matured technologies are evaluated for selection in future generator designs. Stirling Technology Research tasks focus on a wide variety of objectives, including increasing temperature capability to enable new environments, reducing generator mass and/or size, improving reliability or system fault tolerance, and developing alternative designs. The task objectives and status are summarized.

robotics↗
NASA NTRS2016

Overview of Stirling Technology Research at NASA Glenn Research Center

Stirling Radioisotope Power Systems (RPSs) are under development to provide power on future space science missions where robotic spacecraft will orbit, fly by, land, or rove using less than a quarter of the plutonium the currently available RPS uses to produce about the same power. NASA Glenn Research Center's newly formulated Stirling Cycle Technology Development Project (SCTDP) continues development of Stirling-based systems and subsystems, which include a flight-like generator and related housing assembly, controller, and convertors. The project also develops less mature technologies under Stirling Technology Research, with a focus on demonstration in representative environments to increase the technology readiness level (TRL). Matured technologies are evaluated for selection in future generator designs. Stirling Technology Research tasks focus on a wide variety of objectives, including increasing temperature capability to enable new environments, reducing generator mass and/or size, improving reliability and system fault tolerance, and developing alternative designs. The task objectives and status are summarized.

robotics↗
NASA NTRS2016

Decision Analysis Methods Used to Make Appropriate Investments in Human Exploration Capabilities and Technologies

NASA is transforming human spaceflight. The Agency is shifting from an exploration-based program with human activities in low Earth orbit (LEO) and targeted robotic missions in deep space to a more sustainable and integrated pioneering approach. Through pioneering, NASA seeks to address national goals to develop the capacity for people to work, learn, operate, live, and thrive safely beyond Earth for extended periods of time. However, pioneering space involves daunting technical challenges of transportation, maintaining health, and enabling crew productivity for long durations in remote, hostile, and alien environments. Prudent investments in capability and technology developments, based on mission need, are critical for enabling a campaign of human exploration missions. There are a wide variety of capabilities and technologies that could enable these missions, so it is a major challenge for NASA's Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD) to make knowledgeable portfolio decisions. It is critical for this pioneering initiative that these investment decisions are informed with a prioritization process that is robust and defensible. It is NASA's role to invest in targeted technologies and capabilities that would enable exploration missions even though specific requirements have not been identified. To inform these investments decisions, NASA's HEOMD has supported a variety of analysis activities that prioritize capabilities and technologies. These activities are often based on input from subject matter experts within the NASA community who understand the technical challenges of enabling human exploration missions. This paper will review a variety of processes and methods that NASA has used to prioritize and rank capabilities and technologies applicable to human space exploration. The paper will show the similarities in the various processes and showcase instances were customer specified priorities force modifications to the process. Specifically, this paper will describe the processes that the NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) Technology Assessment and Integration Team (TAIT) has used for several years and how those processes have been customized to meet customer needs while staying robust and defensible. This paper will show how HEOMD uses these analyses results to assist with making informed portfolio investment decisions. The paper will also highlight which human exploration capabilities and technologies typically rank high regardless of the specific design reference mission. The paper will conclude by describing future capability and technology ranking activities that will continue o leverage subject matter experts (SME) input while also incorporating more model-based analysis.

Williams-Byrd, Julie↗
NASA NTRS2016

Habitation Concepts for Human Missions Beyond Low-Earth-Orbit

The Advanced Concepts Office at the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center has been engaged for several years in a variety of study activities to help define various options for deep space habitation. This work includes study activities supporting asteroid, lunar and Mars mission activities for the Human spaceflight Architecture Team (HAT), the Deep Space Habitat (DSH) project, and the Exploration Augmentation Module (EAM) project through the NASA Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) Program. The missions under consideration required human habitation beyond low-Earth-orbit (LEO) including deep space habitation in the lunar vicinity to support asteroid retrieval missions, human and robotic lunar surface missions, deep space research facilities, Mars vehicle servicing, and Mars transit missions. Additional considerations included international interest and near term capabilities through the International Space Station (ISS) and Space Launch System (SLS) programs. A variety of habitat layouts have been considered, including those derived from the existing ISS systems, those that could be fabricated from SLS components, and other approaches. This paper presents an overview of several leading designs explored in late fiscal year (FY) 2015 for asteroid, lunar, and Mars mission habitats and identifies some of the known advantages and disadvantages inherent in each. Key findings indicate that module diameters larger than those used for ISS can offer lighter structures per unit volume, and sufficient volume to accommodate consumables for long-duration missions in deep space. The information provided with the findings includes mass and volume data that should be helpful to future exploration mission planning and deep space habitat design efforts.

Smitherman, David V.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s Space Launch System: Progress Toward Launch

The Space Launch System (SLS), NASA’s cornerstone launch capability for a new generation of deep space exploration, has begun assembly at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in preparation for launch in 2021. SLS will provide an unparalleled launch capability for human and robotic deep space exploration missions. Its proven propulsion system, upgrade path to more powerful vehicles, and high-volume payload fairings make it the foundation for ambitious and demanding as part of the Artemis program. Artemis is NASA’s 21st-century plan to put boots on the Moon and to perform sustainable, long-term science in deep space, with eyes toward sending explorers to Mars. The initial SLS vehicle to fly, Block 1 in the crew configuration – with the new Orion spacecraft – is scheduled to lift off from revitalized launch facilities at KSC in 2021 for an uncrewed test flight known as Artemis I. Manufacturing is complete on the vehicle and all elements have been delivered to the Exploration Ground Systems (EGS) Program, except the core stage. The program’s all-new development, the core stage is currently in the midst of a “Green Run” test campaign at Stennis Space Center (SSC). Eight progressively more challenging tests in the Green Run series will culminate in a hot-fire of four flight-proven liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen (LH2/LOX) RS25 engines. Following the Green Run hotfiring, the core stage will ship to KSC. Already at KSC, aft sections of the fivesegment solid rocket boosters are being assembled. Previously delivered elements, including the upper stage, are undergoing final checkouts in preparation for stacking. An exciting 2021 will include such milestones as stacking SLS and Orion in KSC’s Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB), modal testing, roll out to Launch Pad 39B, Wet Dress Rehearsal (WDR), and launch. Teams across the country are preparing for launch by finalizing procedures, defining launch constraints and flight rules, training console operators, performing simulations, and more. With the SLS Block 1 vehicle for Artemis I nearing integration and launch, the second Block 1 vehicle in the crew configuration, which will carry astronauts on an Artemis II hybrid lunar flyby mission, has several elements manufactured. In fact, the solid rocket motor segments and RS-25 engines are complete. Those program elements are processing hardware for the third flight and working toward manufacturing the second SLS variant to fly, Block 1B, which will onramp a powerful new upper stage, the Exploration Upper Stage (EUS).

John Honeycutt↗
NASA NTRS2005

NASA's In-Space Propulsion Technology Program: A Step Toward Interstellar Exploration

NASA's In-Space Propulsion Technology Program is investing in technologies that have the potential to revolutionize the robotic exploration of deep space. For robotic exploration and science missions, increased efficiencies of future propulsion systems are critical to reduce overall life-cycle costs and, in some cases, enable missions previously considered impossible. Continued reliance on conventional chemical propulsion alone will not enable the robust exploration of deep space. The maximum theoretical efficiencies have almost been reached and are insufficient to meet needs for many ambitious science missions currently being considered. By developing the capability to support mid-term robotic mission needs, the program is laying the technological foundation for travel to nearby interstellar space. The In-Space Propulsion Technology Program s technology portfolio includes many advanced propulsion systems. From the next-generation ion propulsion systems operating in the 5-10 kW range, to solar sail propulsion, substantial advances in spacecraft propulsion performance are anticipated. Some of the most promising technologies for achieving these goals use the environment of space itself for energy and propulsion and are generically called "propellantless" because they do not require onboard fuel to achieve thrust. Propellantless propulsion technologies include scientific innovations, such as solar sails, electrodynamic and momentum transfer tethers, and aerocapture. This paper will provide an overview of those propellantless and propellant-based advanced propulsion technologies that will most significantly advance our exploration of deep space.

Johnson, Les↗
NASA NTRS2004

Applications of Intelligent Tutoring Systems to Human-Robotic Exploration of Mars

Space missions with small crews extending over several years with time-delay preventing normal conversations with people on earth will raise many challenges for training. Of special interest are possible three-year missions to Mars, requiring refresher instruction and learning new skills based on unexpected problems with machines and environmental conditions. For example, the crew will be required to monitor and repair more complex life support systems for air and water recycling than we even know how to build today. Highly educated astronauts, often with several doctorate degrees, require a very different mode of interaction than we have developed for school children or even typical college students. Explanation methods may need to differ-using analogies and techniques from different domains-depending on whether the astronaut is an astrophysicist, a pilot, or a geologist.Virtual reality (e.g., for Hubble repair missions) and "integrated" simulations (involving role-playing and emphasizing failure scenarios) are the most common advanced forms of instruction used in space flight today. The emphasis is on collaborative, embodied interaction with the same workstations and tools used in practice (e.g., a cockpit simulator). Otherwise, computerized instructional technology used by NASA is not model-based or tutorial in nature. This discussion will review some of the key instructional methods used at NASA over the past two decades and consider why ITS methods have not been exploited. Some of the problems and opportunities for training for Mars missions are examined, including how using robots in exploration activities will help but raise new training problems. These ideas will be illustrated with examples from the BrahmsVE system in which a browser- based virtual reality display with avatars allows interacting with a distributed multiagent system, in which agents can be people, robots, or software programs. Using BrahmsVE may provide a way for astronauts to interact with proxies of people who serve as instructional coaches on Mars.

Clancey, William J.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Roadmap for In-Space Propulsion Technology

NASA has created a roadmap for the development of advanced in-space propulsion technologies for the NASA Office of the Chief Technologist (OCT). This roadmap was drafted by a team of subject matter experts from within the Agency and then independently evaluated, integrated and prioritized by a National Research Council (NRC) panel. The roadmap describes a portfolio of in-space propulsion technologies that could meet future space science and exploration needs, and shows their traceability to potential future missions. Mission applications range from small satellites and robotic deep space exploration to space stations and human missions to Mars. Development of technologies within the area of in-space propulsion will result in technical solutions with improvements in thrust, specific impulse (Isp), power, specific mass (or specific power), volume, system mass, system complexity, operational complexity, commonality with other spacecraft systems, manufacturability, durability, and of course, cost. These types of improvements will yield decreased transit times, increased payload mass, safer spacecraft, and decreased costs. In some instances, development of technologies within this area will result in mission-enabling breakthroughs that will revolutionize space exploration. There is no single propulsion technology that will benefit all missions or mission types. The requirements for in-space propulsion vary widely according to their intended application. This paper provides an updated summary of the In-Space Propulsion Systems technology area roadmap incorporating the recommendations of the NRC.

Meyer, Michael↗
NASA NTRS1993

Electric propulsion: An evolutionary technology

The NASA Lewis Research Center (LeRC) conducts and directs an electric propulsion research and technology program aimed at providing high-performance electric propulsion system options for a broad range of near and far-term missions. This evolutionary program emphasizes the development of propulsion systems for three classes of missions: (1) near term auxiliary propulsion applications such as North-South Stationkeeping for next generation communications satellites and orbit maintainence for orbiting platforms such as Space Station Freedom; (2) advanced solar electric propulsion and SP-100-class nuclear electric propulsion for Earth-space orbit transfer and robotic planetary missions; and (3) very high power systems to support major space missions including the Space Exploration Initiative. To cover widely disparate mission requirements, the LeRC program includes research on electrothermal, electrostatic, and electromagnetic systems. This paper provides an overview of the LeRC program with a focus on recent progress.

Curran, Francis M.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Becoming Earth Independent: Human-Automation-Robotics Integration Challenges for Future Space Exploration

Future exploration missions will require NASA to integrate more automation and robotics in order to accomplish mission objectives. This presentation will describe on the future challenges facing the human operator (astronaut, ground controllers) as we increase the amount of automation and robotics in spaceflight operations. It will describe how future exploration missions will have to adapt and evolve in order to deal with more complex missions and communication latencies. This presentation will outline future human-automation-robotic integration challenges.

human-robotic↗
NASA NTRS1991

Electric propulsion - An evolutionary technology

The NASA Lewis Research Center conducts and directs an electric propulsion research and technology program aimed at providing high-performance electric propulsion system options for a broad range of near- and far-term missions. This evolutionary program emphasizes the development of propulsion systems for three classes of missions: (1) near-term auxiliary propulsion applications such as North-South Stationkeeping for next generation communications satellites and orbit maintenance for orbiting platforms such as Space Station Freedom; (2) advanced solar electric propulsion and SP-100-class nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) for earth-space orbit transfer and robotic planetary missions; and (3) very high power systems to support major space missions including the Space Exploration Initiative. To cover widely disparate mission requirements, the program includes research on electrothermal, electrostatic, and electromagnetic systems. This paper provides an overview of the program with a focus on recent progress.

Curran, Francis M.↗
NASA NTRS2010

The NASA In-Space Propulsion Technology Project's Current Products and Future Directions

Since its inception in 2001, the objective of the In-Space Propulsion Technology (ISPT) project has been developing and delivering in-space propulsion technologies that enable or enhance NASA robotic science missions. These in-space propulsion technologies are applicable, and potentially enabling for future NASA flagship and sample return missions currently under consideration, as well as having broad applicability to future Discovery and New Frontiers mission solicitations. This paper provides status of the technology development, applicability, and availability of in-space propulsion technologies that recently completed, or will be completing within the next year, their technology development and are ready for infusion into missions. The paper also describes the ISPT project s future focus on propulsion for sample return missions. The ISPT technologies completing their development are: 1) the high-temperature Advanced Material Bipropellant Rocket (AMBR) engine providing higher performance for lower cost; 2) NASA s Evolutionary Xenon Thruster (NEXT) ion propulsion system, a 0.6-7 kW throttle-able gridded ion system; and 3) aerocapture technologies which include thermal protection system (TPS) materials and structures, guidance, navigation, and control (GN&C) models of blunt-body rigid aeroshells; and atmospheric and aerothermal effect models. The future technology development areas for ISPT are: 1) Planetary Ascent Vehicles (PAV); 2) multi-mission technologies for Earth Entry Vehicles (MMEEV) needed for sample return missions from many different destinations; 3) propulsion for Earth Return Vehicles (ERV) and transfer stages, and electric propulsion for sample return and low cost missions; 4) advanced propulsion technologies for sample return; and 5) Systems/Mission Analysis focused on sample return propulsion.

Anderson, David J.↗
NASA NTRS2005

A Sustained Proximity Network for Multi-Mission Lunar Exploration

Tbe Vision for Space Exploration calls for an aggressive sequence of robotic missions beginning in 2008 to prepare for a human return to the Moon by 2020, with the goal of establishing a sustained human presence beyond low Earth orbit. A key enabler of exploration is reliable, available communication and navigation capabilities to support both human and robotic missions. An adaptable, sustainable communication and navigation architecture has been developed by Goddard Space Flight Center and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory to support human and robotic lunar exploration through the next two decades. A key component of the architecture is scalable deployment, with the infrastructure evolving as needs emerge, allowing NASA and its partner agencies to deploy an interoperable communication and navigation system in an evolutionary way, enabling cost effective, highly adaptable systems throughout the lunar exploration program.

Soloff, Jason A.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Flight Plasma Diagnostics for High-Power, Solar-Electric Deep-Space Spacecraft

NASA's Asteroid Redirect Robotic Mission (ARRM) project plans included a set of plasma and space environment instruments, the Plasma Diagnostic Package (PDP), to fulfill ARRM requirements for technology extensibility to future missions. The PDP objectives were divided into the classes of 1) Plasma thruster dynamics, 2) Solar array-specific environmental effects, 3) Plasma environmental spacecraft effects, and 4) Energetic particle spacecraft environment. A reference design approach and interface requirements for ARRM's PDP was generated by the PDP team at JPL and GRC. The reference design consisted of redundant single-string avionics located on the ARRM spacecraft bus as well as solar array, driving and processing signals from multiple copies of several types of plasma, effects, and environments sensors distributed over the spacecraft and array. The reference design sensor types were derived in part from sensors previously developed for USAF Research Laboratory (AFRL) plasma effects campaigns such as those aboard TacSat-2 in 2007 and AEHF-2 in 2012.

Johnson, Lee↗
NASA NTRS2018

Flight Plasma Diagnostics for High-Power, Solar-Electric Deep-Space Spacecraft

NASA’s Asteroid Redirect Robotic Mission (ARRM) mission concept plans included a set of plasma and space environment instruments, the Plasma Diagnostic Package (PDP), to fulfill ARRM requirements for technology extensibility to future missions. The PDP objectives were divided into the classes of 1) Plasma thruster dynamics, 2) Solar array-specific environmental effects, 3) Plasma environmental spacecraft effects, and 4) Energetic particle spacecraft environment. A reference design approach and interface requirements for ARRM’s PDP was generated by the PDP team at JPL and GRC. The reference design consisted of redundant single-string avionics located on the ARRM spacecraft bus as well as solar array, driving and processing signals from multiple copies of several types of plasma, effects, and environments sensors distributed over the spacecraft and array. The reference design sensor types were derived in part from sensors previously developed for USAF Research Laboratory (AFRL) plasma effects campaigns such as those aboard TacSat-2 in 2007 and AEHF-2 in 2012. ARRM project leadership also encouraged the PDP team to convene a team of topical subject matter experts from across the country to review and confirm the reference design and to consider effective alternatives and/or enhancements to the reference design. This activity was proposed and accepted as an interactive, informal JPL “A-team” study and a cadre of 25 participants gathered in early 2017 for discussions. The outcome of the two-day A-team study was that the PDP reference design would allow the most important induced-environment unknowns to be measured in the appropriate space environment. Another outcome addressed technology developments of new or improved space plasma environmental sensors. The A-team study concluded that selected developments would lead to improved measurements that could efficiently provide important and otherwise unavailable information about plasma thruster operation in the space environment as well as the plasma induced spacecraft environment. Specifically, the A-team group recommended greater sensor diversity, by inclusion of deployed sensor capabilities in the thruster plume, or by occasional gimbaling of the thruster(s) toward the sensor arrays. The A-team also recommended developing high-speed probes, optical plasma probes, energy selective probes, and direct erosion/deposition sensors, among others; and recommended the inclusion of cameras as well as, since ARRM was to be recovered in cis-lunar orbit by a crewed mission, astronaut assessments of thruster induced environments and collection of sample coupons. Overall, the PDP A-team study provided a clear, consensus supported validation of the reference design PDP approach and pointed out important directions for future flight plasma sensor development.

Choi, Maria↗