Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “owner”

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.

172 records · Page 10

Human-Autonomy Teaming Research in Support of m:N Operations

Since 2019, the NASA and industry partners have been involved in research focused on a novel paradigm for operations of remotely piloted aircraft. This paradigm involves multiple people sharing a fleet of multiple vehicles between them. Referred to as m:N (pronounced “em-to-en”), this configuration describes a ratio where m is the number of operators and N is the number of vehicles. Through force and asset multiplication, the m:N concept seeks to enable a scalable and resilient operation of remotely crewed vehicles. The primary means of obtaining such a robust operation is through allowing a flexible crew of variable size to dynamically attend to the needs of assets in while performing real-time operator workload management. It is in that sense that assets are shared between operators: as needed (such as in events of elevated workload) an operator in an m:N context can “handoff” the responsibility for some amount of assets, nh < N, to be absorbed by the m – 1 crew members on staff. At some time later, these nh assets could be returned to their original owner or they may be further distributed to other crew if called for by the mission. During this panel, I will elaborate on the research activity undertaken by the Human-Autonomy Teaming (HAT) Laboratory at NASA Ames Research Center over the previous three years. The studies conducted by the HAT Lab range from interviews with subject matter experts, a cognitive walkthrough, a task analysis, and two simulation experiments to-date. During experimentation, pilots made use of an advanced Ground Control Station developed by the HAT Lab and industry partners to simulate m:N operations in two large, metropolitan areas of Southern California: Los Angeles and San Diego. Further experimentation planned over the next few years. Results from our research to-date indicates that pilots of a moderately sized fleet of about a dozen remotely crewed aircraft adequately maintained safety performance and situation awareness of their aircraft, even when presented with unexpected situations of heightened workload.

multi-vehicle control↗

Survive the Dust: Dust Mitigation Technology to Enable Survive the Night Capabilities

Introduction: As we return to the Moon, the lunar regolith (i.e. lunar dust) covering the surface will be an obstacle to nominal operations. Accounts from Apollo astronauts and analysis of hardware returned from the surface illustrate just how deleterious the dust can be [1]. During Apollo missions, the lunar dust adhered to hardware mechanically and electrostatically [2]. Surviving the Night: Mitigating the lunar dust will be critical to surviving the night. Going hand-in-hand with other extreme environment considerations, dust mitigation is critical to mission success. Dust Impacts on Other Systems: The lunar dust can have negative implications for power, thermal, mechanisms, and several other systems or sub-systems. For example, Apollo encountered marked degradation of performance in heat rejection systems for the lunar roving vehicle, science packages, and other components because of the lunar dust [1]. For power alone, dust can cause internal clogging for power connectors, heat rejection issues, excessive dust on reflective surfaces, reduced power output for solar arrays, and so on. Dust Mitigation Strategy: In addition to considering technology solutions, it is important for hardware, systems, and or components to have a dust mitigation strategy. At a high level, hardware that will encounter the lunar dust should consider these things when defining a dust mitigation strategy: • Understand Natural Environment • Understand Induced Environment • Understand Tolerance to Dust • Write Dust Requirements • Select Dust Mitigation Solutions • Test Hardware in Dusty Environment More information on each of these can be provided to hardware owners. Dust Mitigation Technology Development: NASA has a series of technologies that may be available for hardware that needs to survive the lunar night. Many of these solutions are leveraging dust mitigation technology development efforts from NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD), as well as efforts from ESDMD programs, industry, and academia. Through a series of STMD programs (both internal to NASA and through partnerships), there are several technologies in development as considerations as dust mitigation solutions for hardware. Within STMD, the Game Changing Development Program (GCD) has funded several internal dust mitigation projects including low to mid TRL development, demonstrations on CLPS landers of high TRL solutions, and creating standards and best practices for dust mitigation. STMD dust mitigation efforts also include a series of partnerships for developing technologies and advancing the state of dust mitigation at NASA. This includes the Lunar Surface Innovation Consortium (LSIC), Small Business Innovation Research, Early Stage Innovations (ESI), Space Technology Research Grants (STRG), Announcement of Collaboration Opportunities (ACOs) and Tipping Points (TPs), and Challenges and Crowdsourcing, among others. There are also a series of dust mitigation solutions that have been widely used terrestrially, or during Apollo. In recent years, several studies have produced more data on the efficacy of these potential solutions in the lunar environment. Dust Mitigation Solutions: Dust mitigation solutions generally fall into four categories: • Dust Tolerant Mechanisms • Passive Dust Mitigation Capabilities • Active Dust Mitigation Capabilities • Dust Measurement Capabilities There are a series of solutions that may prove beneficial for hardware that needs to survive the lunar night, including new technology development as well as proven, terrestrial solutions. This presentation will discuss in more detail what some of these solutions are for payloads going to the surface. References: [1] J. R. Gaier, NASA/TM—2005-213610, The Effects of Lunar Dust on EVA Systems During the Apollo Missions [2] T. J. Stubbs, et al. Impact of Dust on Lunar Exploration, 2005

dust mitigation↗

Lessons Learned on Mega-Constellation Deployments and Impact to Space Domain Awareness

The breakneck expansion of multi-payload launches in low Earth orbit (LEO) has seen significant escalation over the last three years in the Space Domain Awareness (SDA) enterprise. The uptick in satellite deployment frequency, gradation of Mega-constellation deployments utilizing electric propulsion, and surge in metric observation density from the Space Surveillance Network (SSN) have imposed major system enhancements to ensure spaceflight safety. Beginning with the launch phase, new tactics, software, and procedures have been developed over the last few years to optimize the tasking of the SSN and ensure custody of all recently launched satellites that are added to the space catalog. Ensuring appropriate tasking levels were pivotal during the satellite separation phase, which necessitated updates to the mission systems for improved delineation between clustered satellites in a short window of time. The improved incorporation of utilizing owner operator provided ephemeris coupled with critical code improvements have now revolutionized how we maintain custody of earth orbiting objects. The exponential population growth of low-Earth orbiting satellites have also increased the quantity of Conjunction Data Messages sent out to partners such as the Trajectory Operations Group (TOPO) in Johnson Space Center. We will discuss the need for continued collaboration between the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and other Mega-Constellation Satellite Operators to safeguard Human Space Flight operations. Lastly, we will discuss the increase in reentry reporting for satellites falling back to Earth’s atmosphere, and the challenges associated with these events.

Christian C Ramos↗

SERFE PLSS Component Lessons Learned from ISS

NASA has been developing a new spacesuit, called the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) for over a decade. This spacesuit is under development to support missions to the International Space Station (ISS) and also to the Moon. Improvements in the life and robustness of the Portable Life Support System (PLSS) has been a major objective of these efforts. The Suit Water Membrane Evaporator (SWME) was chosen as the technology to provide cooling to the xEMU and has undergone several iterations of development over this period. An ISS flight experiment centered around the SWME and other thermal control loop (TCL) technologies was developed and tested in an ISS EXpedite PRocessing of Experiments to the Space Station (EXPRESS) rack from November of 2020 to August of 2022. In addition to the SWME, the SWME EXPRESS Rack Flight Experiment (SERFE) contains several technologies from the xEMU project and demonstrated their performance in micro-gravity and over an extended duration. These included two dissimilar water pumps, custom check valves, custom bypass relieve valves, a custom thermal control valve, development pressure and temperature sensors, and the thermal loop controller. This paper presents PLSS component lessons learned after return of the SERFE flight unit in August of 2022. The SERFE team took the flight unit apart and handed hardware components over to hardware owners to see how parts of the TCL managed after almost 2 years on the ISS and 25 simulated EVAs (Exploration Extravehicular Activity) on orbit. The team performed inspection, testing, and analysis and provided lessons learned on PLSS components for NASA’s prototype spacesuit. This analysis included how well SWME maintained its heat rejection capability, as well as looked at the robustness of the other TCL hardware.

SERFE↗

SERFE PLSS Component Lessons Learned from ISS

NASA has been developing a new spacesuit, called the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) for over a decade. This spacesuit is under development to support missions to the International Space Station (ISS) and also to the Moon. Improvements in the life and robustness of the Portable Life Support System (PLSS) has been a major objective of these efforts. The Suit Water Membrane Evaporator (SWME) was chosen as the technology to provide cooling to the xEMU and has undergone several iterations of development over this period. An ISS flight experiment centered around the SWME and other thermal control loop (TCL) technologies was developed and tested in an ISS EXpedite PRocessing of Experiments to the Space Station (EXPRESS) rack from November of 2020 to August of 2022. In addition to the SWME, the SWME EXPRESS Rack Flight Experiment (SERFE) contains several technologies from the xEMU project and demonstrated their performance in micro-gravity and over an extended duration. These included two dissimilar water pumps, custom check valves, custom bypass relieve valves, a custom thermal control valve, development pressure and temperature sensors, and the thermal loop controller. This paper presents PLSS component lessons learned after return of the SERFE flight unit in August of 2022. The SERFE team took the flight unit apart and handed hardware components over to hardware owners to see how parts of the TCL managed after almost 2 years on the ISS and 25 simulated EVAs (Exploration Extravehicular Activity) on orbit. The team performed inspection, testing, and analysis and provided lessons learned on PLSS components for NASA’s prototype spacesuit. This analysis included how well SWME maintained its heat rejection capability, as well as looked at the robustness of the other TCL hardware.

SERFE↗

Validation of A Simulation Environment for Future Space Traffic Management

This study presents initial results of a newly developed simulation environment intendedto explore and assess future Space Traffic Management (STM) scenarios. The number ofnew Resident Space Objects (RSOs) in near-Earth orbit is expected to increase significantlywith the expected future deployment of a number of large constellations. These futurescenarios involve the addition of many tens of thousands of new RSOs, making the analysisinto their impact on collision risk extend beyond what traditional data-mining of present-dayconjunction data can reliably predict. To address this, a robust simulation environment wasdeveloped that implements a full force-model for orbit propagation, and computes continuousall-on-all conjunction statistics for arbitrarily large catalog sizes and simulation timeframes.Collision avoidance and station-keeping maneuvers can be optionally implemented based onconfigurable user inputs including physical characteristics and spacecraft meta-data (e.g.,commercial/government, owner country, etc.). Constellation build-out and de-orbit scenarioswere also implemented and modeled based on real-data analysis. Validation of the simulationresults was a critical component of the simulation development, and was done using the currentcatalog with comparisons against both public and internal NASA data-sets. The comparisonsdemonstrate that, with the appropriate settings, representative levels of conjunction ratesand probabilities can be obtained, providing confidence that the simulation tool can generatemeaningful outcomes for test scenarios. As an initial demonstration of the tool’s capabilities,year-long simulations with station-keeping were conducted to examine conjunction historiesusing both the current object catalog (5800 active satellites) and a hypothetical 60,000 objectscenario involving five potential large constellations. Output metrics include the number ofconjunction events, estimates of collision consequence (fragmentation), delta-V maneuver costs,and the probability of at least one collision occurring. The results highlight the potential thatthe simulation tool has for incorporating and running performance comparisons between, e.g.,various sets of maneuver guidelines, industry norms, and definitions of risk, with the overallobjective of providing actionable data to STM policy makers. The presentation will providean overview of the simulation development and validation efforts, as well as a discussion ofobservations gathered from the initial simulations performed.

conjunction assessment↗

Analysis of Launch Vehicle Liftoff Debris: Historical Perspective from Space Shuttle and Application to Artemis I

Human exploration-class launch vehicles are inherently prone to debris due to the extreme environments generated during pre-launch operations, liftoff, and flight. The use of cryogenic propellants often requires thermal protection system (TPS) coatings, typically foam, to maintain the propellant conditions in the tank and prevent an accumulation ice on the external surface of the vehicle. Some ice growth is to be expected at umbilical interfaces, vents, flanges, or brackets where it is difficult to apply TPS. This ice may come loose at any time due to wind on the launch pad, structural vibration and acoustics after rocket ignition, or aerodynamic forces during flight. This phenomena is especially apparent on vehicles with no TPS, such as the Saturn V rockets used in the Apollo Program, see Figure 1. During propellant tanking, the thermal contraction of the underlying substrate may generate cracks in the TPS (Figure 1). Chunks of TPS can release due to the expansion of ingested gas from cryopumping or from aerodynamic forces if the crack creates an offset surface. Most foams will also have a certain amount of “popcorning” where small pieces of foam will pop off during flight because of the differential between the static surface pressure and the pressure of the gas trapped in the foam cell structure. There are a number of other coating or closeout materials that may be shed from the vehicle and become debris. During pre-launch operations and liftoff, the vehicle may also be exposed to debris originating from the launch pad or ground support equipment. This debris is separate from foreign object debris, or FOD, which is not intended to be present and is strictly controlled through operations and maintenance procedures. In this case, debris is generated from hardware and materials that are necessary for launch and are subject to the intense vibration, acoustics, and direct plume impingement of the launch environment. Examples include ice from umbilicals, tape and tie wraps that protect cables, and rust or corrosion from the launch platform. While NASA has historically been aware of debris as a potential issue that could cause a failure resulting in loss of mission, loss of vehicle, or loss of crew, the likelihood and severity of that risk was not always well understood or given sufficient weight in program and flight decisions. After the Space Shuttle Columbia accident (STS-107), the investigation found that foam TPS debris shed from the external tank was the proximate cause of the damage to the orbiter wing. Six previous observations of debris released from the foam ramp that covered the bipod connecting the forward end of the orbiter to the external tank resulted in minor changes or were determined to be accepted flight risks. Two occurrences of bipod ramp foam loss were not identified until the STS-107 investigation. Despite the damage inflicted by these debris strikes, the Shuttle Program Requirements Control Board deemed the vehicle safe to fly. During the Return to Flight effort following the Columbia disaster, NASA Engineering developed a process for the assessment of debris transport, impact, and damage tolerance to support independent assessments of risk by NASA Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA). Under this system, each element (vehicle or ground system) defines a catalog of all expected debris based on launch history, component testing, or analysis. Debris transport analysis (DTA) is conducted using the debris catalog characteristics and potential flow transport mechanisms (e.g., vehicle aerodynamics, gravity, wind, plume-driven). The predicted debris impact locations and velocities are provided to the hardware owners, who use available test data and analysis to determine whether each component can withstand the impacts. In cases where the element hardware may be severely damaged or fail, the options are to mitigate the debris source through some change in design or operation, or to work with S&MA to try to characterize the probability of the impact and damage for program risk acceptance. Because of the differences in debris characteristics and transport, the DTA has been divided between the Liftoff and Ascent regimes. The development and application of Liftoff DTA methodology from the Shuttle Program to the current Artemis Program is the subject of this paper. Liftoff DTA covers the time from the start of pre-launch operations at the launch pad, up until the vehicle clears the launch tower and there is no longer any interaction with ground systems. Debris transport during this period is broadly classified as either gravity, wind, and plume-entrained (GWPE) or plume driven (PD). GWPE debris is generally lower speed, travelling in a forward-to-aft direction. PD transport includes flow features from the rocket ignition transient, as well as plume impingement and recirculation that occur as the vehicle lifts off the launch platform. In these cases, the debris typically moves in an aft-to-forward direction at higher speeds. The applicable transport mechanisms must be considered for each piece of debris depending on the material, and release location and time. For example, rust or metallic debris from the tower could fall (GWPE) and impact the vehicle before landing on the launch platform deck where it could be also be transported by plume impingement (PD). However, falling ice (GWPE) from an umbilical is unlikely to survive impact with the vehicle or launch platform and be available for PD transport. Modeling of debris transport is accomplished using a set of DTA tools which simulate debris trajectories subject to a reference frame acceleration (i.e., gravity) and aerodynamic drag. Where the trajectory encounters a solid surface, the debris is allowed to rebound with a specified coefficient of restitution. The drag is calculated by interpolating the fluid state at each point in the debris trajectory from high-fidelity computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations of the launch vehicle and pad. The CFD data may either be static (steady state or time averaged), typically for GWPE transport, or dynamic (time-accurate) for PD flow features like the ignition transient. Examples of the CFD flow field solutions for the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket and launch pad are shown in Figure 2. Typical SLS debris trajectory predictions from DTA are illustrated in Figure 3. The final version of this paper will include a more detailed examination of the Liftoff DTA process developed during the Shuttle Program, and how it has been augmented and applied to the SLS rocket under the Artemis Program. Comparisons with debris observations from the Artemis I launch will demonstrate validation of the tools and methodology.

Debris↗

Exploring the Impact of Compliance With Maneuvering Guidelines for Space Traffic Management

If the current estimate of proposed large constellations is realized, the near-Earth space environment will see more than 50,000 new satellites added to the catalog of resident space objects (RSOs) in the coming decade. This is an order of magnitude increase from the current population and poses new policy challenges as global operators seek to leverage the benefits these new satellite systems provide while also ensuring a sustainable approach to collision avoidance. Various guidelines have been proposed to date to support this effort, including the development of right of way rules to guide how a collision avoidance maneuver should be performed, and how the maneuver burden should be shared between the two satellites involved. However, it is very difficult to evaluate and compare proposed guidelines due to the complex nature of space traffic and the rapidly changing space environment. This study seeks to address this issue by utilizing the Virtual Environment for Space Traffic Analysis (VESTA), a high-fidelity simulation tool that has been developed at Georgia Tech over the past few years with the explicit purpose of evaluating the future of space traffic environment. Using this tool, a sensitivity study is performed that incorporates a likely set of future large constellations and provides metrics on the impact that a select set of proposed maneuvering guidelines would have on operators given realistic variations in spacecraft capabilities (e.g. maneuverability and propulsion capabilities), and other factors (owner-country, public vs. private, etc.). Specifically, this study compares three potential right of way rules: 1) a rule based on maneuverability proposed by the Space Safety Coalition, 2) a rule based on the geometry of the spacecraft rendezvous, and 3) a rule that equally distributes the maneuver burden between two operators, The results highlight general observations on the effectiveness and limitations of each of the proposed maneuvering guidelines. In addition to the choice of right of way rule, success of space traffic management will be significantly impacted by compliance – which operators, or how many operators, comply with the space traffic rules. The findings of this analysis have important implications for future methods that could be pursued to put in place right of way rules. For example, non-binding right of way rules may have variable levels of compliance that differ across actors. The impact of compliance by just one nation, or non-compliance by just one nation, help to demonstrate the impact of ensuring all major space actors coordinate on this effort. Overall, this analysis provides insight into the relative gains in safety (decrease in collision risk) that would likely result from more politically intense efforts to increase the number of countries implementing space traffic management rules.

conjunction assessment↗

Communicating NASA's Knowledge: A Report of the Communicate Knowledge Process Team

NASA has a unique charter in the Space Act of 1958 to 'provide for the widest practicable and appropriate dissemination of information concerning its activities and the results thereof.' As NASA approaches the new millennium, Government legislation and regulations, budgetary reductions that have necessitated downsizing the workforce, an emphasis on measurable results from Government agencies, and technological communications breakthroughs have provided the impetus for NASA to reexamine the way it communicates the knowledge that it generates. NASA has been challenged to manage knowledge as a resource that we owe to the American people.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NAS↗

Wald Sequential Probability Ratio Test for Space Object Conjunction Assessment

This paper shows how satellite owner/operators may use sequential estimates of collision probability, along with a prior assessment of the base risk of collision, in a compound hypothesis ratio test to inform decisions concerning collision risk mitigation maneuvers. The compound hypothesis test reduces to a simple probability ratio test, which appears to be a novel result. The test satisfies tolerances related to targeted false alarm and missed detection rates. This result is independent of the method one uses to compute the probability density that one integrates to compute collision probability. A well-established test case from the literature shows that this test yields acceptable results within the constraints of a typical operational conjunction assessment decision timeline. Another example illustrates the use of the test in a practical conjunction assessment scenario based on operations of the International Space Station.

Navigation↗