Results for “Ground Autonomy” — Page 11

NASA NTRS2012

Evidence Report: Risk of Performance Errors Due to Training Deficiencies

The Risk of Performance Errors Due to Training Deficiencies is identified by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Human Research Program (HRP) as a recognized risk to human health and performance in space. The HRP Program Requirements Document (PRD) defines these risks. This Evidence Report provides a summary of the evidence that has been used to identify and characterize this risk. Given that training content, timing, intervals, and delivery methods must support crew task performance, and given that training paradigms will be different for long-duration missions with increased crew autonomy, there is a risk that operators will lack the skills or knowledge necessary to complete critical tasks, resulting in flight and ground crew errors and inefficiencies, failed mission and program objectives, and an increase in crew injuries.

Barshi, Immanuel↗

NASA NTRS2002

NASA's Autonomous Formation Flying Technology Demonstration, Earth Observing-1(EO-1)

NASA's first autonomous formation flying mission, the New Millennium Program's (NMP) Earth Observing-1 (EO-1) spacecraft, recently completed its principal goal of demonstrating advanced formation control technology. This paper provides an overview of the evolution of an onboard system that was developed originally as a ground mission planning and operations tool. We discuss the Goddard Space Flight Center s formation flying algorithm, the onboard flight design and its implementation, the interface and functionality of the onboard system, and the implementation of a Kalman filter based GPS data smoother. A number of safeguards that allow the incremental phasing in of autonomy and alleviate the potential for mission-impacting anomalies from the on- board autonomous system are discussed. A comparison of the maneuvers planned onboard using the EO-1 autonomous control system to those from the operational ground-based maneuver planning system is presented to quantify our success. The maneuvers discussed encompass reactionary and routine formation maintenance. Definitive orbital data is presented that verifies all formation flying requirements.

Folta, David↗

NASA NTRS1993

GLRS-R 2-colour retroreflector target design and predicted performance

This paper reports on the retroreflector ground-target design for the GLRS-R spaceborne dual-wavelength laser ranging system. The described passive design flows down from the requirements of high station autonomy, high global FOV (up to 60 degrees zenith angle), little or no multiple pulse returns, and adequate optical cross section for most ranging geometries. The proposed solution makes use of 5 hollow cube-corner retroreflectors of which one points to the zenith and the remaining four are inclined from the vertical at uniform azimuthal spacings. The need for fairly large (is approximately 10 cm) retroreflectors is expected (within turbulence limitations) to generate quite narrow diffraction lobes, thus placing non-trivial requirements on the vectorial accuracy of velocity aberration corrections. A good compromise solution is found by appropriately spoiling just one of the retroreflector dihedral angles from 90 degrees, thus generating two symmetrically oriented diffraction lobes in the return beam. The required spoil angles are found to have little dependence on ground target latitude. Various link budget analyses are presented, showing the influence of such factors as point-ahead optimization, turbulence, ranging angle, atmospheric visibility and ground target thermal deformations.

Lund, Glenn↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Establishing Trust in NASA’s Artemis Campaign Computer-Human Interface (CHI) Implementation

The NASA Artemis program will return humans to the Moon. This time, with the help of commercial and international partners, the program's objective is a permanent moon base. The moon base infrastructure, including an orbiting moon station and moon surface assets, will be developed for astronauts to stay for the long haul to learn to live and work on another planet in preparation for an eventual Humans-to-Mars mission. As the roundtrip communication delays increase in deep space exploration, the crew will need more onboard systems autonomy and functionality to maintain and control the vehicle or habitat. These mission constraints will change the current Earth-based spacecraft to ground control support approach that will demand more safe, efficient, and effective Computer-Human Interface (CHI) control. For Artemis, CHI is defined as the elements that the crew interfaces with: audio, video, lighting, and crew controls subsystems. Understanding how CHI will need to evolve to support deep space missions will be critical for the Artemis program--especially crew controls, which is the focus of this paper. How does NASA ensure crew controls are reliable enough to control complex systems and prevent a catastrophic event due to human error--especially when the astronauts could be physiologically and/or psychologically impaired? NASA's approach to mitigating catastrophic hazards in human spaceflight system development such as crew controls, is through a holistic system engineering and Human System Integration methodology that focuses on incorporating NASA's Human-Rating Requirements-that ensures human performance characteristics to control/safely recover the crew from hazardous situations within the human interface design are considered. This paper discusses, at a high level, CHI for the Artemis program. Next, a discussion of what it means to human-rate a space system crew controls and how trust in the human-computer interface begins with the NASA human rating requirements. Finally, a discussion on how systems engineering and the human system integration process ensures that crew control implementation incorporates the NASA human-rating requirements.

artemis↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Establishing Trust in NASA’s Artemis Campaign Computer-Human Interface (CHI) Implementation

The NASA Artemis program will return humans to the Moon. This time, with the help of commercial and international partners, the program's objective is a permanent moon base. The moon base infrastructure, including an orbiting moon station and moon surface assets, will be developed for astronauts to stay for the long haul to learn to live and work on another planet in preparation for an eventual Humans-to-Mars mission. As the roundtrip communication delays increase in deep space exploration, the crew will need more onboard systems autonomy and functionality to maintain and control the vehicle or habitat. These mission constraints will change the current Earth-based spacecraft to ground control support approach that will demand more safe, efficient, and effective Computer-Human Interface (CHI) control. For Artemis, CHI is defined as the elements that the crew interfaces with: audio, video, lighting, and crew controls subsystems. Understanding how CHI will need to evolve to support deep space missions will be critical for the Artemis program--especially crew controls, which is the focus of this paper. How does NASA ensure crew controls are reliable enough to control complex systems and prevent a catastrophic event due to human error--especially when the astronauts could be physiologically and/or psychologically impaired? NASA's approach to mitigating catastrophic hazards in human spaceflight system development such as crew controls, is through a holistic system engineering and Human System Integration methodology that focuses on incorporating NASA's Human-Rating Requirements-that ensures human performance characteristics to control/safely recover the crew from hazardous situations within the human interface design are considered. This paper discusses, at a high level, CHI for the Artemis program. Next, a discussion of what it means to human-rate a space system crew controls and how trust in the human-computer interface begins with the NASA human rating requirements. Finally, a discussion on how systems engineering and the human system integration process ensures that crew control implementation incorporates the NASA human-rating requirements.

artemis↗

NASA NTRS1987

Space station operations task force. Panel 2 report: Ground operations and support systems

The Ground Operations Concept embodied in this report provides for safe multi-user utilization of the Space Station, eases user integration, and gives users autonomy and flexibility. It provides for meaningful multi-national participation while protecting U.S. interests. The concept also supports continued space operations technology development by maintaining NASA expertise and enabling technology evolution. Given attention here are pre/post flight operations, logistics, sustaining engineering/configuration management, transportation services/rescue, and information systems and communication.

Source record↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Autonomous Navigation, Guidance, and Control Software in a Low SWaP Box

Onboard autonomy is a necessity for responsive space operations. Autonomous navigation, guidance, and control (NGC) enables space missions to reduce their dependence on high demand ground assets and costly ground personnel. It also allows for in-situ decision making and higher return on mission data. A flight software and hardware system providing this capability, called “autoNGC,” is currently being developed at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center for infusion into multiple future missions. The autoNGC flight software is built on the plug-and-play architecture of the core Flight System (cFS) consisting of the standard cFS apps and newly developed autoNGC interface apps and libraries. The various apps cooperate through communication over the message-based software bus. With the plug-and-play architecture of autoNGC, cFS apps can easily be added and replaced to meet the needs of different missions, even after launch. The first flight software release of autoNGC is targeted for Summer 2024 to provide autonomous navigation at the Moon and beyond. It can perform sensor fusion of multiple measurement types including pseudo-range from a Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) receiver (including weak signal), 1-way and 2-way range and Doppler from ground stations (i.e., direct to Earth (DTE)), bearing and range from optical camera images, and accelerometer data. Accurate onboard navigation and timing is obtained through the Goddard Enhanced Onboard Navigation System (GEONS) software library which fuses different measurement types through an extended Kalman filter (EKF) framework. Optical measurements that are ingested in GEONS are first extracted from optical images by the cFS Goddard Image Analysis and Navigation Tool (cGIANT) app. If the imaged body is far enough away that it appears as a pixel or cluster of pixels, then bearing angles to the body centroid can be provided. If the body is close enough and the shape is known coarsely, then bearing angles and range to the body centroid can be derived from the limb. Bearing angles to individual surface features can also be extracted (i.e., terrain relative navigation (TRN)). Onboard guidance and control capabilities are being developed for a future release to perform autonomous station-keeping and trajectory correction maneuvers in multiple orbital regimes. Capabilities to enable distributed systems missions and constellations, such as crosslink measurements, and onboard time management are being developed as well. The first hardware implementation of autoNGC is a minimal size, weight, and power (SWaP) design allowing for inclusion into CubeSats and SmallSat-size buses. Advancements in miniaturized space processors, such as the SpaceCube 3.0 Mini and the SpaceCube Mini-Z are utilized for low SWaP while maintaining a high level of performance. The current enclosure design is 12 cm x 17 cm x 13.5 cm. The box mass is expected to be less than 2 kg, and the nominal power is 21 W. In order to accommodate a wide range of missions, the hardware interfaces are designed for flexibility with a variety of sensor inputs. Through comprehensive testing in the software-in-the-loop, processor-in-the-loop, and hardware-in-the-loop test beds that are concurrently being developed, autoNGC is expected to achieve TRL 6 by late 2024.

Sun Hur-Diaz↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Low SWaP Onboard Satellite Navigation, Guidance, and Control Technology

Onboard autonomy is a necessity for responsive space operations. Autonomous navigation, guidance, and control (NGC) enables space missions to reduce their dependence on high demand ground assets and costly ground personnel. It also allows for in-situ decision making and higher return on mission data. A flight software and hardware system providing this capability, called “autoNGC,” is currently being developed at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center for infusion into multiple future missions. The first build of autoNGC, providing autonomous navigation for lunar orbiting spacecraft, is targeted for completion by Fall 2024. It provides sensor fusion of multiple measurement types including pseudo-range from a weak signal Global Navigation Satellite Service (GNSS) receiver, 1-way and 2-way direct to Earth (DTE) range and Doppler, bearing and range from optical camera sensed images, and an accelerometer. AutoNGC is also being targeted for future missions that involve small body proximity operations, Sun Earth Libration point orbits, and distributed systems missions (DSMs) including those at outer planets. AutoNGC flight software is being built upon the plug-and-play architecture of the core Flight System (cFS) [Ref. 1]. Figure (Slide 7) shows the message-based software bus layout of various software applications (“apps”) consisting of the standard cFS apps and autoNGC interface apps and libraries. Accurate onboard navigation and timing is obtained through the Goddard Enhanced Onboard Navigation System (GEONS) software library [Ref. 2], which fuses different measurement types through an extended Kalman filter (EKF) framework. Optical measurements that are ingested in GEONS are provided by the cFS Goddard Image Analysis and Navigation Tool (cGIANT) app [Ref. 3]. This app processes optical images to extract the bearing angles of the centroid of the imaged body (near or far), the range to the imaged body, and/or of the features on the surface of a body to perform terrain relative navigation (TRN). Measurement of range to the body’s center of mass can also be derived from the detection of the limb. The first build of autoNGC for a lunar orbiting spacecraft is a minimal size, weight, and power (SWaP) hardware design allowing for inclusion into CubeSats and SmallSat-size class buses. Advancements in miniaturized space processors, such as the SpaceCube 3.0 Mini and the SpaceCube Mini-Z [Ref. 4] are utilized for low SWaP while maintaining a high level of performance. Figure (Slide 11) shows the composition of the first autoNGC build. The current enclosure design has dimensions 12 cm x 17 cm x 13.5 cm. The box mass is expected to be less than 2 kg, and the nominal power is 21 W. The hardware interfaces are designed for flexibility with a variety of sensor inputs. The achievable navigation performance depends on the sensors utilized, including the onboard clock for 1-way pseudo-range measurements. Analysis using a configuration that consists of weak signal GPS, TRN, and 1-way DTE has shown position and velocity accuracies of 10 meters and 2 cm/s (3-σ ) RSS, respectively, with onboard time knowledge estimated to better than 13 ns (3-σ ), for a spacecraft in a representative 12-hour eccentric lunar orbit. Other measurement types such as x-rays from known pulsars (called XNAV) and cross-links can also be processed in GEONS. With the plug-and-play architecture of autoNGC, cFS apps can easily be added and replaced, even after launch. Goddard is actively seeking partners to collaborate in the development of additional capabilities for autoNGC, including industry, academia, and others across the US Government. Plans are being formulated to make the autoNGC software platform available for use by any US government organization to leverage the non-recurring engineering associated with the development of onboard autonomous NGC 3 capabilities. As advancements in space qualified sensors, microprocessors, and algorithms are made, the autoNGC platform provides a ready starting point for inclusion of these technologies.

C. J. Gramling↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Where is the Human in the Loop? Human Factors Analysis of Extended Visual Line of Sight Unmanned Aerial System Operations within a Remote Operations Environment

Many envisioned technological and conceptual innovations focus on allocating more functions to automation, relegating the human as an afterthought if not a nuisance. Yet, until complete autonomy is realized, the human will remain “in the loop”. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is supporting research for the development and maturation of automated technologies and architectures for the future of advanced air mobility. Standing up a remote operations center used to control, manage, and monitor multiple highly automated vehicles is an important step towards realizing the advanced air mobility vision. At the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Langley Research Center, a remote operation center exists and has been tested using humans piloting simulated vehicles. In this paper, we explore the human element within live flight operations that rely on increasingly automated technologies. Four ground control station operators performed multiple live flight operations. We employed a naturalistic approach and relied on qualitative data such as interviews and discussions with subject matter experts to help facilitate discovery. The present work evaluates the functions that the human and the automation had during the live operations, lists psychological constructs that may have promoted or reduced task performance, and provides recommendations on design of the remote operations environment and training of future ground control station operators.

Advanced Air Mobility↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Where is the Human in the Loop? Human Factors Analysis of Extended Visual Line of Sight Unmanned Aerial System Operations within a Remote Operations Environment

Many envisioned technological and conceptual innovations focus on allocating more functions to automation, relegating the human as an afterthought if not a nuisance. Yet, until complete autonomy is realized, the human will remain “in the loop”. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is supporting research for the development and maturation of automated technologies and architectures for the future of advanced air mobility. Standing up a remote operations center used to control, manage, and monitor multiple highly automated vehicles is an important step towards realizing the advanced air mobility vision. At the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Langley Research Center, a remote operation center exists and has been tested using humans piloting simulated vehicles. In this paper, we explore the human element within live flight operations that rely on increasingly automated technologies. Four ground control station operators performed multiple live flight operations. We employed a naturalistic approach and relied on qualitative data such as interviews and discussions with subject matter experts to help facilitate discovery. The present work evaluates the functions that the human and the automation had during the live operations, lists psychological constructs that may have promoted or reduced task performance, and provides recommendations on design of the remote operations environment and training of future ground control station operators.

Advanced Air Mobility↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Simulation Architecture for Air Traffic Over Urban Environments Supporting Autonomy Research in Advanced Air Mobility

As part of its research, NASA investigates concepts, aircraft, and operations related to Advanced Air Mobility (AAM). One of the most challenging scenarios for AAM will be enabling safe routine access near densely populated urban centers. AAM flight operations over a regional area require a moderately high-fidelity simulation capability to develop and evaluate autonomy technologies in the urban environment. This paper aims to describe a system to simulate flight operations around regions such as the San Francisco-Oakland Bay area at a moderately-high scale (tens to hundreds of flights) that incorporates detailed vehicle models and control necessary to support research in airborne autonomy. The flight vehicle utilizes NASA AAM concept vehicle dynamics integrated with a custom flight management system and flight control system to simulate all flight phases accurately. The simulation incorporates a detailed simulated urban environment and includes glass cockpit displays to monitor aircraft operations. Simulation models integrate to simulate air and ground-based sensors, such as Radar and LiDAR. As a commercially available rendering engine, X-Plane 11 is used as the renderer to simulate vision-based sensors (such as onboard and ground-based cameras) with a detailed graphical model of a city at different times of the day and weather conditions. This paper presents the simulation and software architecture used for simulating AAM traffic over this urban region. This system enables the evaluation of NASA research concepts in autonomy for urban AAM operations on the path toward flight test evaluation.

distributed sensing↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Simulation Architecture for Air Traffic Over Urban Environments Supporting Autonomy Research in Advanced Air Mobility

As part of its research, NASA investigates concepts, aircraft, and operations related to Advanced Air Mobility (AAM). One of the most challenging scenarios for AAM will be enabling safe routine access near densely populated urban centers. AAM flight operations over a regional area require a moderately high-fidelity simulation capability to develop and evaluate autonomy technologies in the urban environment. This paper aims to describe a system to simulate flight operations around regions such as the San Francisco-Oakland Bay area at a moderately-high scale (tens to hundreds of flights) that incorporates detailed vehicle models and control necessary to support research in airborne autonomy. The flight vehicle utilizes NASA AAM concept vehicle dynamics integrated with a custom flight management system and flight control system to simulate all flight phases accurately. The simulation incorporates a detailed simulated urban environment and includes glass cockpit displays to monitor aircraft operations. Simulation models integrate to simulate air and ground-based sensors, such as Radar and LiDAR. As a commercially available rendering engine, X-Plane 11 is used as the renderer to simulate vision-based sensors (such as onboard and ground-based cameras) with a detailed graphical model of a city at different times of the day and weather conditions. This paper presents the simulation and software architecture used for simulating AAM traffic over this urban region. This system enables the evaluation of NASA research concepts in autonomy for urban AAM operations on the path toward flight test evaluation.

Distributed sensing↗

NASA NTRS1978

Command and control of unmanned scientific spacecraft

Recent developments in command and control technology for use with the Voyager and the planned Galileo are discussed. These spacecraft each carry more than 10 scientific instruments, many of which are very complex, and these instruments must be able to function with a considerable degree of autonomy because the round-trip light time to the spacecraft in the vicinity of Jupiter and Saturn is too great to permit prompt ground-based management of onboard anomalies or control of some observation programs. Command and control procedures, including data storage procedures, for systems of the two spacecraft are examined.

Gates, C. R.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Establishing Trust in NASA’s Artemis Program Computer-Human Interface (CHI) Implementation

The NASA Artemis program will return humans to the moon. This time, with the help of commercial and international partners, the program’s objective is a permanent moon base. The moon base infrastructure, including an orbiting moon station and moon surface assets, will be developed for astronauts to stay for the long haul to learn to live and work on another planet in preparation for an eventual Humans-to-Mars mission. As the roundtrip communication delays increase in deep space exploration, more onboard systems autonomy and functionality will be needed to maintain and control the vehicle or habitat. These mission constraints will change the current Earth-based spacecraft ground control support approach that will demand more safe, efficient, and effective Computer-Human Interface (CHI) control. For Artemis, CHI is defined as the elements that the crew interfaces with-audio, video, lighting, and crew controls. Understanding how CHI will need to evolve to support deep space missions will be critical for the Artemis program-especially crew controls which is the focus of this paper. How does NASA ensure crew controls are reliable to control complex systems and prevent a catastrophic event due to human error-especially when the astronauts could be physiologically and/or psychologically impaired? NASA’s approach to mitigating catastrophic hazards in human spaceflight system development such as crew controls is through a holistic system engineering and Human System Integration methodology that embraces NASA’s Human-Rating Requirements-ensuring human performance characteristics to control/safely recover the crew from hazardous situations within the human interface design are considered. This paper discusses, at a high level, CHI for the Artemis program. Next, a discussion of what it means to human-rate a space system crew controls and how trust in the human-computer interface begins with the NASA human rating requirements. Finally, a discussion on how systems engineering, and the human system integration process ensures that crew control implementation incorporates the NASA human-rating requirements.

Human-Rating↗

NASA NTRS2017

A Human-Autonomy Teaming Approach for a Flight-Following Task

Managing aircraft is becoming more complex with increasingly sophisticated automation responsible for more flight tasks. With this increased complexity, it is becoming more difficult for operators to understand what the automation is doing and why. Human involvement with increasingly autonomous systems must adjust to allow for a more dynamic relationship involving cooperation and teamwork. As part of an ongoing project to develop a framework for human-autonomy teaming (HAT) in aviation, a part-task study was conducted to demonstrate, evaluate and refine proposed critical aspects of HAT. These features were built into an automated recommender system on a ground station available from previous studies. Participants performed a flight-following task once with the original ground station (i.e., No HAT condition) and once with the HAT features enabled (i.e., HAT condition). Behavioral and subjective measures were collected; subjective measures are presented here. Overall, participants preferred the ground station with HAT features enabled compared to the station without the HAT features. Participants reported that the HAT displays and automation were preferred for keeping up with operationally important issues. Additionally, participants reported that the HAT displays and automation provided enough situation awareness to complete the task and reduced workload relative to the No HAT baseline.

ACFP↗

NASA NTRS1994

Distributed intelligence for ground/space systems

DI is short for Distributed Intelligence for Ground/Space Systems and the DI Study is one in a series of ESA projects concerned with the development of new concepts and architectures for future autonomous spacecraft systems. The kick-off of DI was in January 1994 and the planned duration is three years. The background of DI is the desire to design future ground/space systems with a higher degree of autonomy than seen in today's missions. The aim of introducing autonomy in spacecraft systems is to: (1) lift the role of the spacecraft operators from routine work and basic troubleshooting to supervision; (2) ease access to and increase availability of spacecraft resources; (3) carry out basic mission planning for users; (4) enable missions which have not yet been feasible due to eg. propagation delays, insufficient ground station coverage etc.; and (5) possibly reduce mission cost. The study serves to identify the feasibility of using state-of-the-art technologies in the area of planning, scheduling, fault detection using model-based diagnosis and knowledge processing to obtain a higher level of autonomy in ground/space systems.

Aarup, Mads↗

NASA NTRS1997

Spacecraft Demand Access: Autonomy for Low-Cost Planetary Operations

In this paper we describe a new concept and prototype for dramtically reducing the cost of contact with planetary spacecraft. Known as spacecraft Demand Access, a suite of spacecraft and ground automation technologies, it enables future intelligent spacecraft to act as initiators of cost effective contact with the ground - doing it only when necessary.

Low cost planetary operations Spacecraft Demand Ac↗

NASA NTRS1975

IUS/TUG orbital operations and mission support study. Volume 2: Interim upper stage operations

Background data and study results are presented for the interim upper stage (IUS) operations phase of the IUS/tug orbital operations study. The study was conducted to develop IUS operational concepts and an IUS baseline operations plan, and to provide cost estimates for IUS operations. The approach used was to compile and evaluate baseline concepts, definitions, and system, and to use that data as a basis for the IUS operations phase definition, analysis, and costing analysis. Both expendable and reusable IUS configurations were analyzed and two autonomy levels were specified for each configuration. Topics discussed include on-orbit operations and interfaces with the orbiter, the tracking and data relay satellites and ground station support capability analysis, and flight control center sizing to support the IUS operations.

Source record↗