Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Process Mission Teams”

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 217 records · Page 12
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2004

Manned Spacecraft Landing and Recovery

As recent history has tragically demonstrated, a successful space mission is not complete until the crew has safely returned to earth and has been successfully recovered. It is noted that a safe return to earth does not guarantee a successful recovery. The focus of this presentation will be a discussion of the ground operation assets involved in a successful recovery. The author's experience in land and water-based recovery of crewed vehicles and flight hardware at Kennedy Space Center (KSC), Edwards Air Force Base, international landing sites, and the Atlantic Ocean provides for some unique insight into this topic. He has participated in many aspects of Space Shuttle landing and recovery operations including activation of Transatlantic Abort Landing (TAL) sites and Emergency Landing Sites (ELS) as an Operations Test Director, execution of post landing convoy operations as an Orbiter Move Director, Operations Test Director, and Landing and Recovery Director, and recovery of solid rocket boosters, frustum and their parachutes 140 miles offshore in a wide range of sea states as a Retrieval Diver/Engineer. The recovery operations for the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo were similar from a landing and recovery perspective in th t they all were capsules with limited "flying" capability and had a planned End of Mission (EOM) in an ocean with a descent slowed by parachutes. The general process was to deploy swim teams via helicopters to prepare the capsule for recovery and assist with crew extraction when required. The capsule was then hoisted onto the deck of a naval vessel. This approach required the extensive use and deployment of military assets to support the primary landing zone as well as alternate and contingency locations. The Russian Soyuz capsule also has limited "flying" capability; however, the planned EOM is terrestrial. In addition to use of parachutes to slow the reentry descent, soft-landing rockets on the bottom of the vehicle are employed to cushion the landing. The recovery forces are deployed via helicopters and the capsule is transported by a specialized all-terrain vehicle. The Space Shuttle Orbiter landing and recovery process is considerably different. The added lift capability and maneuverability allow the Orbiter to land at an exact location/runway for a nominal EOM. This allows for a timely response of recovery/contingency rescue forces, centralized staging of personnel and equipment, and assured access by ground vehicles. The well defined landing zone also provides for far more options when selecting landing sites for EOM and emergency returns and the relatively large cross-range capability increases the number of landing opportunities at the preferred sites.

Hammel, Don↗
NASA NTRS2008

Orbit Control Operations for the Cassini-Huygens Mission

The Cassini-Huygens spacecraft was launched in 1997 as an international and collaborative mission to study Saturn and its many moons. After a seven-year cruise, Cassini began orbiting Saturn for a four- year tour. This tour consists of 157 planned maneuvers, and their back-up locations, designed to target 52 encounters, mostly of Saturn's largest moon Titan. One of the mission's first activities was to release the Huygens probe to Titan in December 2004. Currently in its last year of the prime mission, Cassini-Huygens continues to obtain valuable data on Saturn, Titan, and Saturn's other satellites. Return of this information is in large part due to a healthy spacecraft and successful navigation. A two-year extended mission, beginning July 2008, will offer the opportunity to continue science activities. With a demanding navigation schedule that compares with the prime tour, the Cassini Navigation team relies on operations procedures developed during the prime mission to carry-out the extended mission objectives. Current processes for orbit control operations evolved from the primary navigational requirement of staying close to predetermined targeting conditions according to Cassini science sequence planning. The reference trajectory is comprised of flyby conditions to be accomplished at minimal propellant cost. Control of the planned reference trajectory orbit, and any trajectory updates, is achieved with the execution of Orbit Trim Maneuvers (OTMs). The procedures for designing, processing, and analyzing OTMs during Cassini operations is presented. First, a brief overview of the Cassini-Huygens Mission is given, followed by a general description of navigation. Orbit control and maneuver execution methods are defined, along with an outline of the orbit control staffing and operations philosophy. Finally, an example schedule of orbit control operations is shown.

navigation↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The ANGSA Program: A Low-cost Lunar "Sample Return Mission". An Overview and Progress over the Last 18 Months

The Apollo Program returned 381 kg of samples. Analyses of these samples have provided fundamental insights into the origin and history of the Earth-Moon system and how planets and even solar systems work. These samples have provided ground truth for every post-Apollo mission to the Moon for the interpretation of remotely sensed data. After 50 years of analysis and study, our sophistication for handling and examining samples has greatly increased. Some special samples that were collected or preserved in unique containers or environments remain unexamined by standard or advanced analytical approaches. The Apollo Next Generation Sample Analysis (ANGSA) Program was designed to examine a subset of these special samples. The ANGSA consortium consists of 9 original teams funded by NASA that have combined into a single science team referred to as the ANGSA Science Team. The program was designed to function as the sample analysis portion of a sample return mission with processing, preliminary examination, and analyses utilizing new and improved technologies and recent mission observations. The ANGSA Program links the first generation of lunar explorers (Apollo) with future explorers of the Moon (Artemis). The purpose of this abstract is to highlight the ANGSA samples, science and engineering goals, and progress made so far. Related abstracts and talks will focus on the links between Apollo and Artemis, geologic context, and initial examination, processing, and results.

F M McCubbin↗
NASA NTRS2005

Team X Spacecraft Instrument Database Consolidation

In the past decade, many changes have been made to Team X's process of designing each spacecraft, with the purpose of making the overall procedure more efficient over time. One such improvement is the use of information databases from previous missions, designs, and research. By referring to these databases, members of the design team can locate relevant instrument data and significantly reduce the total time they spend on each design. The files in these databases were stored in several different formats with various levels of accuracy. During the past 2 months, efforts have been made in an attempt to combine and organize these files. The main focus was in the Instruments department, where spacecraft subsystems are designed based on mission measurement requirements. A common database was developed for all instrument parameters using Microsoft Excel to minimize the time and confusion experienced when searching through files stored in several different formats and locations. By making this collection of information more organized, the files within them have become more easily searchable. Additionally, the new Excel database offers the option of importing its contents into a more efficient database management system in the future. This potential for expansion enables the database to grow and acquire more search features as needed.

Wallenstein, Kelly A.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Derivation of the Most Influential Medical Conditions for An Extended Duration Artemis Mission

BACKGROUND: The risk of loss of mission due to medical conditions may be influenced by loss of crew life (LOCL), need for evacuation (RTDC; return to definitive care), and crew task time lost. Predicting what medical conditions are most likely to lead to crew morbidity and mortality may influence medical system design, clinical capability prioritization, and research strategies. NASA’s Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces tool (IMPACT) applies Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) methodology to assess these risks. OVERVIEW: A team of subject matter experts (SME) from a variety of medical disciplines developed a consensus-based process to determine 120 of the most clinically relevant medical conditions for long-duration exploration missions (LDEMs) . This IMPACT Condition List (ICL) expanded upon previous work done for Integrated Medical Model (IMM). For each condition a best-case and worst-case definition were derived. These definitions were used to identify probability of occurrence, proportion of cases that are best case vs. worst case, clinical phase duration, and risk of outcomes (task time loss [TTL], RTDC, and LOCL) for both treated and untreated states. These data were sources from existing spaceflight databases (e.g. Longitudinal Survey of Astronaut Health), relevant models (e.g. the ISS fire model), and/or terrestrial literature. Each condition was then tied to diagnostic and therapeutic resources and capabilities. IMPACT was then run for the LDLOLS DRM (see Abstract #2 for this panel). DISCUSSION: This abstract will present the process for generating the IMPACT condition list, the relevant data for each clinical condition, and present results for the ten most influential conditions impacting LOCL, RTDC, and TTL for a representative extended duration Artemis mission.

A Nelson↗
NASA NTRS2006

Next-generation concurrent engineering: developing models to complement point designs

Concurrent Engineering Design teams have made routine the rapid development of point designs for space missions. The Jet Propulsion Laboratory's Team X is now evolving into a next generation CED; nin addition to a point design, the team develops a model of the local trade space. The process is a balance between the power of model-developing tools and the creativity of human experts, enabling the development of a variety of trade models for any space mission.

trade space exploration↗
NASA NTRS2021

Concept of Operations for OSIRIS-REx Optical Navigation Image Planning

Optical navigation (OpNav) is a critical subsystem of the OSIRIS-REx asteroid sample return mission, which operated in the vicinity of near-Earth asteroid (101955) Bennu from August 2018 through April 2021. A substantial amount of mission resources across multiple subsystems and institutions is required to ensure that the OpNav data are successfully acquired. The KinetX OpNav team, part of the Flight Dynamics System (FDS), is responsible for performing required analysis to develop the OpNav operations plans; requesting, reviewing and verifying the plans; and ultimately using the image data for critical navigation operations. The FDS team, responsible for the mission navigation, is operated by KinetX Aerospace with management and operations support from NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center. The Science Processing and Operations Center (SPOC), located at the University of Arizona’s Lunar and Planetary Laboratory, is responsible for generating the planning products for all science and most OpNav data. These plans are integrated into the spacecraft sequences, tested, and commanded by the Mission Support Area (MSA) at Lockheed Martin Space. To ensure mission-critical navigation image data are successfully acquired, the plan is developed through a waterfall of planning cycles over the course of 3 months prior to onboard plan execution. During the initial strategic planning for a mission phase, detailed analysis is performed by the OpNav team to conceptualize the concept of operations (ConOps) for image data collection. This phase OpNav Narrative is included along with other strategic planning documents for the key ground segment stakeholders to review and provide feedback. The detailed OpNav plans get defined in the tactical planning cycle, which spans 8 to 3 weeks before the week-long integrated sequence is executed on-board the spacecraft. During the tactical cycle, the initial OpNav Request is submitted along with the science requests, kicking off development of the science and OpNav plans. Once the initial plan is drafted, interfaces are exercised so that the plan can be reviewed and iterated, if necessary. A rigorous schedule is followed by the planning teams during the implementation cycle, spanning the last 18 days before uplink, to ensure all the necessary integration, testing, and reviewing can occur on time. The development of the OpNav planning ConOps, including responsibilities, interfaces, timelines, and procedures, took extensive collaboration across mission elements and institutions. The process was robust throughout the 137 weeks of continuous Optical Navigation Operations at Bennu, which concluded on April 9th, 2021.

Coralie D. Adam↗
NASA NTRS2015

Technology Readiness Level Assessment Process as Applied to NASA Earth Science Missions

Technology assessments of fourteen science instruments were conducted within NASA using the NASA Technology Readiness Level (TRL) Metric. The instruments were part of three NASA Earth Science Decadal Survey missions in pre-formulation. The Earth Systematic Missions Program (ESMP) Systems Engineering Working Group (SEWG), composed of members of three NASA Centers, provided a newly modified electronic workbook to be completed, with instructions. Each instrument development team performed an internal assessment of its technology status, prepared an overview of its instrument, and completed the workbook with the results of its assessment. A team from the ESMP SEWG met with each instrument team and provided feedback. The instrument teams then reported through the Program Scientist for their respective missions to NASA's Earth Science Division (ESD) on technology readiness, taking the SEWG input into account. The instruments were found to have a range of TRL from 4 to 7. Lessons Learned are presented; however, due to the competition-sensitive nature of the assessments, the results for specific missions are not presented. The assessments were generally successful, and produced useful results for the agency. The SEWG team identified a number of potential improvements to the process. Particular focus was on ensuring traceability to guiding NASA documents, including the NASA Systems Engineering Handbook. The TRL Workbook has been substantially modified, and the revised workbook is described.

Systems Engineering↗
NASA NTRS2006

Next-generation concurrent engineering: developing models to complement point designs

Concurrent Engineering Design (CED) teams have made routine the rapid development of point designs for space missions. The Jet Propulsion Laboratory's Team X is now evolving into a 'next-generation CED; in addition to a point design, the Team develops a model of the local trade space. The process is a balance between the power of a model developing tools and the creativity of humal experts, enabling the development of a variety of trade models for any space mission. This paper reviews the modeling method and its practical implementation in the ED environment. Example results illustrate the benefit of this approach.

concurrent engineering↗
NASA NTRS2017

CisLunar Habitat Internal Architecture Design Criteria

BACKGROUND: In preparation for human exploration to Mars, there is a need to define the development and test program that will validate deep space operations and systems. In that context, a Proving Grounds CisLunar habitat spacecraft is being defined as the next step towards this goal. This spacecraft will operate differently from the ISS or other spacecraft in human history. The performance envelope of this spacecraft (mass, volume, power, specifications, etc.) is being defined by the Future Capabilities Study Team. This team has recognized the need for a human-centered approach for the internal architecture of this spacecraft and has commissioned a CisLunar Phase-1 Habitat Internal Architecture Study Team to develop a NASA reference configuration, providing the Agency with a "smart buyer" approach for future acquisition. THE CISLUNAR HABITAT INTERNAL ARCHITECTURE STUDY: Overall, the CisLunar Habitat Internal Architecture study will address the most significant questions and risks in the current CisLunar architecture, habitation, and operations concept development. This effort is achieved through definition of design criteria, evaluation criteria and process, design of the CisLunar Habitat Phase-1 internal architecture, and the development and fabrication of internal architecture concepts combined with rigorous and methodical Human-in-the-Loop (HITL) evaluations and testing of the conceptual innovations in a controlled test environment. The vision of the CisLunar Habitat Internal Architecture Study is to design, build, and test a CisLunar Phase-1 Habitat Internal Architecture that will be used for habitation (e.g. habitability and human factors) evaluations. The evaluations will mature CisLunar habitat evaluation tools, guidelines, and standards, and will interface with other projects such as the Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) Program integrated Power, Avionics, Software (iPAS), and Logistics for integrated human-in-the-loop testing. The mission of the CisLunar Habitat Internal Architecture Study is to become a forcing function to establish a common understanding of CisLunar Phase-1 Habitation Internal Architecture design criteria, processes, and tools. The scope of the CisLunar Habitat Internal Architecture study is to design, develop, demonstrate, and evaluate a Phase-1 CisLunar Habitat common module internal architecture based on design criteria agreed to by NASA, the International Partners, and Commercial Exploration teams. This task is to define the CisLunar Phase-1 Internal Architecture Government Reference Design, assist NASA in becoming a "smart buyer" for Phase-1 Habitat Concepts, and ultimately to derive standards and requirements from the Internal Architecture Design Process. The first step was to define a Habitat Internal Architecture Design Criteria and create a structured philosophy to be used by design teams as a filter by which critical aspects of consideration would be identified for the purpose of organizing and utilizing interior spaces. With design criteria in place, the team will develop a series of iterative internal architecture concept designs which will be assessed by means of an evaluation criteria and process. These assessments will successively drive and refine the design, leading to the combination and down-selection of design concepts. A single refined reference design configuration will be developed into in a medium-to-high fidelity mockup. A multi-day human-in-the-loop mission test will fully evaluate the reference design and validate its configuration. Lessons learned from the design and evaluation will enable the team to identify appropriate standards for Phase-1 CisLunar Habitat Internal Architecture and will enable NASA to develop derived requirements in support of maturing CisLunar Habitation capabilities. This paper will describe the criteria definition process, workshop event, and resulting CisLunar Phase-1 Habitat Internal Architecture Design Criteria.

Jones, R.↗
NASA NTRS1995

A High Efficiency System for Science Instrument Commanding for the Mars Global Surveyor Mission

The Mars Global Surveyor (MGS) mission will return to Mars to re- cover most of the science lost when the ill fated Mars Observer space- craft suffered a catastrophic anomaly in its propulsion system and did not go into orbit. Described in detail are the methods employed by the MGS Sequence Team to accelerate science command processing by using standard command generation process and standard UNIX control scripts.

mars global surveyor mission science instrument co↗
NASA NTRS2014

The Cassini Solstice Mission: Streamlining Operations by Sequencing with PIEs

The Cassini Solstice Mission (CSM) is the second extended mission phase of the highly successful Cassini/Huygens mission to Saturn. Conducted at a much-reduced funding level, operations for the CSM have been streamlined and simplified significantly. Integration of the science timeline, which involves allocating observation time in a balanced manner to each of the five different science disciplines (with representatives from the twelve different science instruments), has long been a labor-intensive endeavor. Lessons learned from the prime mission (2004-2008) and first extended mission (Equinox mission, 2008-2010) were utilized to design a new process involving PIEs (Pre-Integrated Events) to ensure the highest priority observations for each discipline could be accomplished despite reduced work force and overall simplification of processes. Discipline-level PIE lists were managed by the Science Planning team and graphically mapped to aid timeline deconfliction meetings prior to assigning discrete segments of time to the various disciplines. Periapse segments are generally discipline-focused, with the exception of a handful of PIEs. In addition to all PIEs being documented in a spreadsheet, allocated out-of-discipline PIEs were entered into the Cassini Information Management System (CIMS) well in advance of timeline integration. The disciplines were then free to work the rest of the timeline internally, without the need for frequent interaction, debate, and negotiation with representatives from other disciplines. As a result, the number of integration meetings has been cut back extensively, freeing up workforce. The sequence implementation process was streamlined as well, combining two previous processes (and teams) into one. The new Sequence Implementation Process (SIP) schedules 22 weeks to build each 10-week-long sequence, and only 3 sequence processes overlap. This differs significantly from prime mission during which 5-week-long sequences were built in 24 weeks, with 6 overlapping processes.

Vandermey, Nancy↗
NASA NTRS2005

STS-114 Discovery Return to Flight: International Space Station Processing Overview

Bruce Buckingham, NASA Public Affairs, introduces Scott Higgenbotham, STS-114 Payload Manager. Higgenbotham gives a power point presentation on the hardware that is going to fly in the Discovery Mission to the International Space Station. He presents a layout of the hardware which includes The Logistics Flight 1 (LF1) launch package configuration Multipurpose Logistics Module (MPLM), External Stowage Platform-2 (ESP-2) and the Lightweight Mission Peculiar Equipment Support Structure Carrier (LMC). He explains these payloads in detail. The LF-1 team is also shown in the International Space Station Processing Facility. This presentation ends with a brief question and answer period.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2018

NASA's Space Launch System Moves into Testing and Integration

NASA's Space Launch System (SLS) has moved from design and manufacturing into testing and integration for its first flight as early as December 2019. In 2017, the NASA/industry team completed manufacturing of all major structural elements for the launch vehicle for Exploration Mission-I (EM-1 ). That work included shipping the first major flight hardware element to the launch site. The team processed all four RS-25 engines for stage integration, cast all 10 booster flight motor segments, and manufactured all five major sections of the core stage. The program also completed major structural work on the B-2 test stand at Stennis Space Center, which will be used for the core stage "green run" test; delivered the core stage and engine simulators used for training; and much of the transportation equipment for the core stage. Engineers completed structural testing on the upper stage/payload section of the vehicle as well as the engine section test article. In 2018, the program will deliver the Orion Stage Adapter (OSA) to Exploration Ground Systems (EGS) at KSC and send the test articles for the core stage liquid hydrogen tank, liquid oxygen tank, and intertank to NASA's Marshall Space Flight center for structural testing. Additionally, workers will begin the challenging process of integrating the major sections of the 212-foot EM-1 core stage. This work is focused on the initial Block 1 variant of SLS, capable of launching more than 70 metric tons (t) to low Earth orbit (LEO). However, work concurrently is underway on the Block lB variant, which will enable 105 t to LEO and more than 37t to trans-lunar injection (TLI). Block lB will be the workhorse vehicle of NASA's lunar exploration plans. As the needs of the nation's deep space exploration program grow, SLS performance is designed to evolve to a payload mass of 130 t to LEO and up to 45t to TLI. The advantages of this mass - as well as volume- are critical to the entire exploration architecture for deep space exploration. They translate to greater capability, greater infrastructure and operational simplicity, less overall mission risk, and opportunities to accomplish unprecedented exploration and discovery. This paper will discuss SLS progress to date and planned future work.

Honeycutt, John↗
NASA NTRS2016

NASA Advanced Explorations Systems: Advancements in Life Support Systems

The NASA Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) Life Support Systems (LSS) project strives to develop reliable, energy-efficient, and low-mass spacecraft systems to provide environmental control and life support systems (ECLSS) critical to enabling long duration human missions beyond low Earth orbit (LEO). Highly reliable, closed-loop life support systems are among the capabilities required for the longer duration human space exploration missions assessed by NASA's Habitability Architecture Team (HAT). The LSS project is focused on four areas: architecture and systems engineering for life support systems, environmental monitoring, air revitalization, and wastewater processing and water management. Starting with the international space station (ISS) LSS systems as a point of departure (where applicable), the mission of the LSS project is three-fold: 1. Address discrete LSS technology gaps 2. Improve the reliability of LSS systems 3. Advance LSS systems towards integrated testing on the ISS. This paper summarized the work being done in the four areas listed above to meet these objectives. Details will be given on the following focus areas: Systems Engineering and Architecture- With so many complex systems comprising life support in space, it is important to understand the overall system requirements to define life support system architectures for different space mission classes, ensure that all the components integrate well together and verify that testing is as representative of destination environments as possible. Environmental Monitoring- In an enclosed spacecraft that is constantly operating complex machinery for its own basic functionality as well as science experiments and technology demonstrations, it's possible for the environment to become compromised. While current environmental monitors aboard the ISS will alert crew members and mission control if there is an emergency, long-duration environmental monitoring cannot be done in-orbit as current methodologies rely largely on sending environmental samples back to Earth. The LSS project is developing onboard analysis capabilities that will replace the need to return air and water samples from space for ground analysis. Air Revitalization- The air revitalization task is comprised of work in carbon dioxide removal, oxygen generation and recovery and trace contamination and particulate control. The CO2 Removal and associated air drying development efforts under the LSS project are focused both on improving the current SOA technology on the ISS and assessing and examining the viability of other sorbents and technologies available in academia and industry. The Oxygen Generation and Recovery technology development area encompasses several sub-tasks in an effort to supply O2 to the crew at the required conditions, to recover O2 from metabolic CO2, and to recycle recovered O2 back to the cabin environment. Current state-of-the-art oxygen generation systems aboard space station are capable of generating or recovering approximately 40% of required oxygen; for exploration missions this percentage needs to be greatly increased. A spacecraft cabin trace contaminant and particulate control system serves to keep the environment below the spacecraft maximum allowable concentration (SMAC) for chemicals and particulates. Both passive (filters) and active (scrubbers) methods contribute to the overall TC & PC design. Work in the area of trace contamination and particulate control under the LSS project is focused on making improvements to the SOA TC & PC systems on ISS to improve performance and reduce consumables. Wastewater Processing and Water Management- A major goal of the LSS project is the development of water recovery systems to support long duration human exploration beyond LEO. Current space station wastewater processing and water management systems distill urine and wastewater to recover water from urine and humidity condensate in the spacecraft at a approximately 74% recovery rate. For longer, farther missions into deep space, that recovery rate must be greatly increased so that astronauts can journey for months without resupply cargo ships from Earth.

Shull, Sarah A.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Mission Operations Assurance

Integrate the mission operations assurance function into the flight team providing: (1) value added support in identifying, mitigating, and communicating the project's risks and, (2) being an essential member of the team during the test activities, training exercises and critical flight operations.

project tracking↗
NASA NTRS2006

Lessons Learned from Daily Uplink Operations during the Deep Impact Mission

The daily preparation of uplink products (commands and files) for Deep Impact was as problematic as the final encounter images were spectacular. The operations team was faced with many challenges during the six-month mission to comet Tempel One of the biggest difficulties was that the Deep Impact Flyby and Impactor vehicles necessitated a high volume of uplink products while also utilizing a new uplink file transfer capability. The Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) Multi-Mission Ground Systems and Services (MGSS) Mission Planning and Sequence Team (MPST) had the responsibility of preparing the uplink products for use on the two spacecraft. These responsibilities included processing nearly 15,000 flight products, modeling the states of the spacecraft during all activities for subsystem review, and ensuring that the proper commands and files were uplinked to the spacecraft. To guarantee this transpired and the health and safety of the two spacecraft were not jeopardized several new ground scripts and procedures were developed while the Deep Impact Flyby and Impactor spacecraft were en route to their encounter with Tempel-1. These scripts underwent several adaptations throughout the entire mission up until three days before the separation of the Flyby and Impactor vehicles. The problems presented by Deep Impact's daily operations and the development of scripts and procedures to ease those challenges resulted in several valuable lessons learned. These lessons are now being integrated into the design of current and future MGSS missions at JPL.

uplink↗
NASA NTRS2005

Multi-Agent Modeling and Simulation Approach for Design and Analysis of MER Mission Operations

A space mission operations system is a complex network of human organizations, information and deep-space network systems and spacecraft hardware. As in other organizations, one of the problems in mission operations is managing the relationship of the mission information systems related to how people actually work (practices). Brahms, a multi-agent modeling and simulation tool, was used to model and simulate NASA's Mars Exploration Rover (MER) mission work practice. The objective was to investigate the value of work practice modeling for mission operations design. From spring 2002 until winter 2003, a Brahms modeler participated in mission systems design sessions and operations testing for the MER mission held at Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL). He observed how designers interacted with the Brahms tool. This paper discussed mission system designers' reactions to the simulation output during model validation and the presentation of generated work procedures. This project spurred JPL's interest in the Brahms model, but it was never included as part of the formal mission design process. We discuss why this occurred. Subsequently, we used the MER model to develop a future mission operations concept. Team members were reluctant to use the MER model, even though it appeared to be highly relevant to their effort. We describe some of the tool issues we encountered.

Seah, Chin↗