Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “mission architecture”

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 NTRS2010

A Summary of NASA Architecture Studies Utilizing Fission Surface Power Technology

Beginning with the Exploration Systems Architecture Study in 2005, NASA has conducted various mission architecture studies to evaluate implementation options for the U.S. Space Policy (formerly the Vision for Space Exploration). Several of the studies examined the use of Fission Surface Power (FSP) systems for human missions to the lunar and Martian surface. This paper summarizes the FSP concepts developed under four different NASA-sponsored architecture studies: Lunar Architecture Team, Mars Architecture Team, Lunar Surface Systems/Constellation Architecture team, and International Architecture Working Group-Power Function team. The results include a summary of FSP design characteristics, a compilation of mission-compatible FSP configuration options, and an FSP concept-of-operations that is consistent with the overall mission objectives.

Mason, Lee↗
NASA NTRS2022

NASA’s Strategic Analysis Cycle 2021 (SAC21) Human Mars Architecture

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Mars Architecture Team (MAT) was challenged to develop a mission architecture capable of transporting humans to the surface of Mars and back as fast—and as soon—as practical. This challenge represented a significant departure from previous approaches that minimized Earth-launched mass and maximized in-space transportation efficiency, often resulting in roundtrip missions of three years or more in duration. In the interest of crew health, MAT’s cross-Agency team of subject matter experts was challenged to develop an architecture capable of shortening crew time away from Earth to about two years. MAT was given specific mission constraints, such as number of crew, as well as mandates to minimize surface infrastructure as much as possible and to incorporate nuclear transportation options. The resulting MAT-developed concept, referred to here as the Strategic Analysis Cycle 2021 (SAC21) architecture, leverages Artemis elements and emerging commercial capabilities for cargo and logistics launches, and features a hybrid Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP)/Chemical transportation system able to complete the 1.8 billion kilometer round-trip journey to Mars and back in 760 to 850 days transit time for the 2039 Earth departure opportunity. Three Mars Descent Systems (MDS), each capable of landing about 25 metric tons of useful cargo on the surface of Mars, would be pre-deployed in advance of crew departure from Earth; two of these MDS’s would deliver a partially fueled Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV), a fission power system, surface mobility, and additional MAV propellant. To minimize surface infrastructure, only two of the four Mars crew would descend and live in an MDS-landed pressurized rover, exploring the martian surface for 30 martian days, or sols, before returning to Mars orbit aboard their MAV and rejoining the other two crew on the Deep Space Transport for the Earth return voyage. Specifics of many of these architecture elements are detailed in separate technical publications; this paper outlines the end-to-end integrated architecture performance and concept of operations, including synergies with Artemis lunar architecture elements. It is important to note that NASA does not have a formal human Mars program and no decisions have been made; the architecture described here is intended to fill in an often-overlooked corner of the trade space, helping to complete the menu of options available to decision-makers as they chart the course for humans to Mars.

exploration↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s Strategic Analysis Cycle 2021 (SAC21) Human Mars Architecture

[Note: this is the presentation for a companion paper with the following abstract] The National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Mars Architecture Team (MAT) was challenged to develop a mission architecture capable of transporting humans to the surface of Mars and back as fast—and as soon—as practical. This challenge represented a significant departure from previous approaches that minimized Earth-launched mass and maximized in-space transportation efficiency, often resulting in roundtrip missions of three years or more in duration. In the interest of crew health, MAT’s cross-Agency team of subject matter experts was challenged to develop an architecture capable of shortening crew time away from Earth to about two years. MAT was given specific mission constraints, such as number of crew, as well as mandates to minimize surface infrastructure as much as possible and to incorporate nuclear transportation options. The resulting MAT-developed concept, referred to here as the Strategic Analysis Cycle 2021 (SAC21) architecture, leverages Artemis elements and emerging commercial capabilities for cargo and logistics launches, and features a hybrid Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP)/Chemical transportation system able to complete the 1.8 billion kilometer round-trip journey to Mars and back in 760 to 850 days transit time for the 2039 Earth departure opportunity. Three Mars Descent Systems (MDS), each capable of landing about 25 metric tons of useful cargo on the surface of Mars, would be pre-deployed in advance of crew departure from Earth; two of these MDS’s would deliver a partially fueled Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV), a fission power system, surface mobility, and additional MAV propellant. To minimize surface infrastructure, only two of the four Mars crew would descend and live in an MDS-landed pressurized rover, exploring the martian surface for 30 martian days, or sols, before returning to Mars orbit aboard their MAV and rejoining the other two crew on the Deep Space Transport for the Earth return voyage. Specifics of many of these architecture elements are detailed in separate technical publications; this paper outlines the end-to-end integrated architecture performance and concept of operations, including synergies with Artemis lunar architecture elements. It is important to note that NASA does not have a formal human Mars program and no decisions have been made; the architecture described here is intended to fill in an often-overlooked corner of the trade space, helping to complete the menu of options available to decision-makers as they chart the course for humans to Mars. Note: Slide 9 contains a ~2 min video, best viewed when downloaded. Once downloaded to begin video you may be requested to hit options and Trust this document.

Long-duration spaceflight↗
NASA NTRS2011

A Summary of NASA Architecture Studies Utilizing Fission Surface Power Technology

Beginning with the Exploration Systems Architecture Study in 2005, NASA has conducted various mission architecture studies to evaluate implementation options for the U.S. Space Policy. Several of the studies examined the use of Fission Surface Power (FSP) systems for human missions to the lunar and Martian surface. This paper summarizes the FSP concepts developed under four different NASA-sponsored architecture studies: Lunar Architecture Team, Mars Architecture Team, Lunar Surface Systems/Constellation Architecture Team, and International Architecture Working Group-Power Function Team.

Mason, Lee S.↗
NASA NTRS2003

Citizen Explorer: An Earth Observer With New Small Satellite Technology - 1

Citizen Explorer-I (CX-I), designed and built by students at Colorado Space Grant Consortium in Boulder to provide global ozone monitoring, employs a unique mission architecture and several innovative technologies during its mission. The mission design allows K-12 schools around the world to be involved as ground stations available to receive science data and telemetry from CX-I. Another important technology allows the spacecraft to be less reliant on ground operators. Spacecraft Command Language (SCL) allows mission designers to set constraints on the satellite operations. The satellite then automatically adheres to the constraints when the satellite is out of contact with Mission Operations. In addition to SCL, a low level of artificial intelligence will be supplied to the spacecraft through the use of the Automated Scheduling and Planning ENvironment (ASPEN). ASPEN is used to maintain a spacecraft schedule in order to achieve the objectives a mission operator would normally have to complete. Within the communications system of CX-I, internet of CX-I, internet protocols are the main method for communicating with the satellite. As internet protocols have not been widely used in satellite communication, CX-I provides an opportunity to study the effectiveness of using internet protocols over radio links. The Attitude Determination and Control System (ADCS) on CX-I uses a gravity gradient boom as a means of orienting the satellite's science instruments toward nadir. The boom design is unique because it is constructed of tape measure material. These new technologies' effectiveness will be tested for use on future small satellite projects within the space satellite industry.

Allen, Zachary↗
NASA NTRS2011

Advanced EMU Portable Life Support System (PLSS) and Shuttle/ISS EMU Schematics, A Comparison

In order to be able to adapt to differing vehicle interfaces such as suitport and airlock, adjust to varying vehicle pressure schedules, tolerate lower quality working fluids, and adapt to differing suit architectures as dictated by a range of mission architectures, the next generation space suit requires more adaptability and robustness over that of the current Shuttle/ISS Extra-vehicular Mobility Unit (EMU). While some features have been added to facilitate interfaces to differing vehicle and suit architectures, the key performance gains have been made via incorporation of new technologies such as the variable pressure regulators, Rapid Cycle Amine swing-bed, and Suit Water Membrane Evaporator. This paper performs a comparison between the Shuttle/ISS EMU PLSS schematic and the Advanced EMU PLSS schematic complete with a discussion for each difference.

Campbell, Colin↗
NASA NTRS2012

Advanced EMU Portable Life Support System (PLSS) and Shuttle/ISS EMU Schematics, a Comparison

In order to be able to adapt to differing vehicle interfaces such as suitport and airlock, adjust to varying vehicle pressure schedules, tolerate lower quality working fluids, and adapt to differing suit architectures as dictated by a range of mission architectures, the next generation space suit requires more adaptability and robustness over that of the current Shuttle/ISS Extra-vehicular Mobility Unit (EMU). While some features have been added to facilitate interfaces to differing vehicle and suit architectures, the key performance gains have been made via incorporation of new technologies such as the variable pressure regulators, Rapid Cycle Amine swing-bed, and Suit Water Membrane Evaporator. This paper performs a comparison between the Shuttle/ISS EMU PLSS schematic and the Advanced EMU PLSS schematic complete with a discussion for each difference.

Campbell, Colin↗
NASA NTRS2014

NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations: Science Operations Development for Human Exploration

The purpose of NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) mission 16 in 2012 was to evaluate and compare the performance of a defined series of representative near-Earth asteroid (NEA) extravehicular activity (EVA) tasks under different conditions and combinations of work systems, constraints, and assumptions considered for future human NEA exploration missions. NEEMO 16 followed NASA's 2011 Desert Research and Technology Studies (D-RATS), the primary focus of which was understanding the implications of communication latency, crew size, and work system combinations with respect to scientific data quality, data management, crew workload, and crew/mission control interactions. The 1-g environment precluded meaningful evaluation of NEA EVA translation, worksite stabilization, sampling, or instrument deployment techniques. Thus, NEEMO missions were designed to provide an opportunity to perform a preliminary evaluation of these important factors for each of the conditions being considered. NEEMO 15 also took place in 2011 and provided a first look at many of the factors, but the mission was cut short due to a hurricane threat before all objectives were completed. ARES Directorate (KX) personnel consulted with JSC engineers to ensure that high-fidelity planetary science protocols were incorporated into NEEMO mission architectures. ARES has been collaborating with NEEMO mission planners since NEEMO 9 in 2006, successively building upon previous developments to refine science operations concepts within engineering constraints; it is expected to continue the collaboration as NASA's human exploration mission plans evolve.

Bell, Mary S.↗
NASA NTRS2018

System-of-Systems Tools for the Analysis of Technological Choices in Space Propulsion

Difficulties in space mission architecture design arise from many factors. Performance, cost, and risk constraints become less obvious due to complex interactions between the systems involved in the mission; decisions regarding long-term goals can heavily impact technological choices for short-term parts of the mission, while conversely decisions in the near future will impact the whole flexibility of long-term plans. Furthermore, the space community is broadening its borders, and space agencies from different countries are collaborating with industry and commercial partners towards large-scale endeavors. This paradigm shift is prompting the development of non-traditional approaches to the design of space missions. This paper reports the results of the first year of a continuing collaboration of the authors to develop and demonstrate System-of-System engineering methodologies for the deep analysis of dependencies and synthesis of robust architectures in exploration mission contexts. We present the procedure that we followed to develop and apply our methodology, obstacles found, steps taken to improve the methods based on the needs of experts and decision makers, required data for the analysis, and results produced by our holistic analysis. In particular, we focus on the analysis of technological choices for space propulsion for a generic cislunar mission, including both complex interactions between subsystems in different type of propulsion and availability of different providers. We identify critical systems and sets of systems based on cascading effects of performance degradation, assessment of the robustness of different designs in the operational domain, and simultaneous analysis of schedule dependencies between the constituent systems.

Guariniello, Cesare↗
NASA NTRS2019

Quantifying the Impact of Systems Interdependencies in Space Systems Architectures

Due to the high number of systems in a space mission architecture and to their complex interactions, identifying risk and critical operational dependencies is not obvious. Traditional systems engineering methodology and risk assessment does not capture the impact of interactions between systems nor the cascading effects of disruptions. Based on these considerations, the Systems Operational Dependency Analysis methodology was developed for use by systems analysts and decision makers. This methodology utilizes a parametric model of interdependencies between systems to quantify the direct and indirect impact of system disruptions on other systems, as well as identify root causes. The results are effective at providing decision support for prioritizing technology investment based on risk reduction associated with potential system disruptions. Expanding on research presented at IAC 2018 and based on a collaboration with NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, this paper applies the Systems Operational Dependency Analysis methodology to NASA Lunar Gateway in collaboration with NASA’s lunar exploration plans. The paper presents a hierarchical representation of the interdependencies between a Gateway habitat’s systems and subsystems, demonstrates quantification of the impact of disruption, and assesses the criticality of the constituent systems and subsystems.

Guariniello, Cesare↗
NASA NTRS2006

Can We Power Future Mars Missions?

The Vision for Space Exploration identified the exploration of Mars as one of the key pathways. In response, NASAs Mars Program Office is developing a detailed mission lineup for the next decade that would lead to future explorations. Mission architectures for the next decade include both orbiters and landers. Existing power technologies, which could include solar panels, batteries, radioisotope power systems, and in the future fission power, could support these missions. Second and third decade explorations could target human precursor and human in-situ missions, building on increasingly complex architectures. Some of these could use potential feed forward from earlier Constellation missions to the Moon, discussed in the ESAS study. From a potential Mars Sample Return mission to human missions the complexity of the architectures increases, and with it the delivered mass and power requirements also amplify. The delivered mass at Mars mostly depends on the launch vehicle, while the landed mass might be further limited by EDL technologies, including the aeroshell, parachutes, landing platform, and pinpoint landing. The resulting in-situ mass could be further divided into payload elements and suitable supporting power systems. These power systems can range from tens of watts to multi-kilowatts, influenced by mission type, mission configuration, landing location, mission duration, and season. Regardless, the power system design should match the power needs of these surface assets within a given architecture. Consequently, in this paper we will identify potential needs and bounds of delivered mass and architecture dependent power requirements to surface assets that would enable future in-situ exploration of Mars.

solar panels↗
NASA NTRS2004

JPL Facilities and Software for Collaborative Design: 1994 - Present

The viewgraph presentation provides an overview of the history of the JPL Project Design Center (PDC) and, since 2000, the Center for Space Mission Architecture and Design (CSMAD). The discussion includes PDC objectives and scope; mission design metrics; distributed design; a software architecture timeline; facility design principles; optimized design for group work; CSMAD plan view, facility design, and infrastructure; and distributed collaboration tools.

project design center↗
NASA NTRS1993

Mars rover sample return mission utilizing in situ production of the return propellants

This paper presents an unmanned Mars sample return mission that utilizes propellants manufactured in situ from the Martian atmosphere for the return trip. A key goal of the mission is to demonstrate the considerable benefits that can be realized through the use of indigenous resources and to test the viability of this approach as a precursor to manned missions to Mars. Two in situ propellant combinations, methane/oxygen and carbon monoxide/oxygen, are compared to imported terrestrial hydrogen/oxygen within a single mission architecture, using a single Earth launch vehicle. The mission is assumed to be launched from Earth in 2003. Upon reaching Mars, the landing vehicle aerobrakes, deploys a small satellite, and lands on the Martian surface. Once on the ground, the propellant production unit is activated, and the product gases are liquefied and stored in the empty tanks of the Earth Return Vehicle (ERV). Power for these activities is provided by a dynamic isotope power system. A semiautonomous rover, powered by the indigenous propellants, gathers between 25 and 30 kg of soil and rock samples which are loaded aboard the ERV for return to Earth. After a surface stay time of approximately 1.5 years, the ERV leaves Mars for the return voyage to Earth. When the vehicle reaches the vicinity of Earth, the sample return capsule detaches, and is captured and circularized in LEO via aerobraking maneuvers.

Bruckner, A. P.↗
NASA NTRS2000

Integration of Planetary Protection Activities

Research and activities under this grant have focused on a systematic examination and analysis of critical questions likely to impact planetary protection (PP) controls and implementation for Mars sample return missions (MSR). Four areas in the non-scientific and social realms were selected for special attention because of their importance to future mission planning and concern about critical timing or possible economic impacts on MSR mission implementation. These include: (1) questions of legal uncertainty and the decision making process, (2) public perception of risks associated with sample return, (3) risk communication and Education/Public Outreach , and (4) planetary protection implications of alternative mission architectures, for both robotic and human sample return missions. In its entirety, NAG 2-986 has encompassed three categories of activity: (1) research and analysis (Race), (2) subcontracted research (MacGregor/Decision Research), and (3) consulting services.

Race, Margaret S.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Using Systems Engineering to Develop an Integrated Crew Health and Performance System to Mitigate Risk for Human Exploration Missions

New space exploration missions are currently being designed to take humanity beyond low Earth orbit (LEO) to cis-lunar space, the lunar surface, and eventually to Mars. These missions carry increased risks due to a number of factors, including distance from Earth, exposure to deep space hazards, reduced capacity and ability to resupply and evacuate, and increased communication delays. As distance from Earth grows and mission length increases, a growing proportion of mission risk can be attributed to the “human system.” Almost twenty years ago, the Institute of Medicine in the United States recommended the early and complete integration of the human system into the spacecraft and mission design process to mitigate this increased risk inherent in exploration missions. Exploration missions will require increasing levels of crew self-sufficiency that will challenge the current operational paradigms established in LEO. Enabling progressive Earth independence requires management of the increasingly complex interactions among spacecraft systems and integration of all the data and functions that affect human health and performance into one coordinated system –the Crew Health and Performance (CHP) system. This system is a critical spacecraft system that is analogous to other systems such as propulsion, guidance and navigation, or avionics. Design and integration of the CHP system requires the evidence-based merger of typically disparate disciplines such as medicine, human factors, and life support system design, using systems engineering (SE) practices. SE provides traceability of spacecraft requirements and enables reliable and repeatable trade space analysis of the many competing options for hardware and software to be included in the mission architecture. The approach described here enables spacecraft and mission designers to align the scope of a CHP system with mission specific requirements, decrease risk to the crew, and increase the probability of mission success.

Kerry McGuire↗
NASA NTRS2016

Using an Integrated Distributed Test Architecture to Develop an Architecture for Mars

The creation of a crew-rated spacecraft architecture capable of sending humans to Mars requires the development and integration of multiple vehicle systems and subsystems. Important new technologies will be identified and matured within each technical discipline to support the mission. Architecture maturity also requires coordination with mission operations elements and ground infrastructure. During early architecture formulation, many of these assets will not be co-located and will required integrated, distributed test to show that the technologies and systems are being developed in a coordinated way. When complete, technologies must be shown to function together to achieve mission goals. In this presentation, an architecture will be described that promotes and advances integration of disparate systems within JSC and across NASA centers.

Othon, William L.↗