Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “scope”

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 253 records · Page 14

Reflections on Centaur Upper Stage Integration by the NASA Lewis (Glenn) Research Center

The NASA Glenn (then Lewis) Research Center (GRC) led several expendable launch vehicle (ELV) projects from 1963 to 1998, most notably the Centaur upper stage. These major, comprehensive projects included system management, system development, integration (both payload and stage), and launch operations. The integration role that GRC pioneered was truly unique and highly successful. Its philosophy, scope, and content were not just invaluable to the missions and vehicles it supported, but also had significant Agency-wide benefits. An overview of the NASA Lewis Research Center (now the NASA Glenn Research Center) philosophy on ELV integration is provided, focusing on Atlas/Centaur, Titan/Centaur, and Shuttle/Centaur vehicles and programs. The necessity of having a stable, highly technically competent in-house staff is discussed. Significant depth of technical penetration of contractor work is another critical component. Functioning as a cohesive team was more than a concept: GRC senior management, NASA Headquarters, contractors, payload users, and all staff worked together. The scope, content, and history of launch vehicle integration at GRC are broadly discussed. Payload integration is compared to stage development integration in terms of engineering and organization. Finally, the transition from buying launch vehicles to buying launch services is discussed, and thoughts on future possibilities of employing the successful GRC experience in integrating ELV systems like Centaur are explored.

Centaur↗

Atmospheric Research 2014 Technical Highlights

Atmospheric research in the Earth Sciences Division (610) consists of research and technology development programs dedicated to advancing knowledge and understanding of the atmosphere and its interaction with the climate of Earth. The Division's goals are to improve understanding of the dynamics and physical properties of precipitation, clouds, and aerosols; atmospheric chemistry, including the role of natural and anthropogenic trace species on the ozone balance in the stratosphere and the troposphere; and radiative properties of Earth's atmosphere and the influence of solar variability on the Earth's climate. Major research activities are carried out in the Mesoscale Atmospheric Processes Laboratory, the Climate and Radiation Laboratory, the Atmospheric Chemistry and Dynamics Laboratory, and the Wallops Field Support Office. The overall scope of the research covers an end-to-end process, starting with the identification of scientific problems, leading to observation requirements for remote-sensing platforms, technology and retrieval algorithm development; followed by flight projects and satellite missions; and eventually, resulting in data processing, analyses of measurements, and dissemination from flight projects and missions. Instrument scientists conceive, design, develop, and implement ultraviolet, infrared, optical, radar, laser, and lidar technology to remotely sense the atmosphere. Members of the various Laboratories conduct field measurements for satellite sensor calibration and data validation, and carry out numerous modeling activities. These modeling activities include climate model simulations, modeling the chemistry and transport of trace species on regional-to-global scales, cloud resolving models, and developing the next-generation Earth system models. Satellite missions, field campaigns, peer-reviewed publications, and successful proposals are essential at every stage of the research process to meeting our goals and maintaining leadership of the Earth Sciences Division in atmospheric science research. Figure 1.1 shows the 20-year record of peer-reviewed publications and proposals among the various Laboratories. This data shows that the scientific work being conducted in the Laboratories is competitive with the work being done elsewhere in universities and other government agencies. The office of Deputy Director for Atmospheric Research will strive to maintain this record by rigorously monitoring and promoting quality while emphasizing coordination and integration among atmospheric disciplines. Also, an appropriate balance will be maintained between the scientists' responsibility for large collaborative projects and missions and their need to carry out active science research as a principal investigator. This balance allows members of the Laboratories to improve their scientific credentials, and develop leadership potentials. Interdisciplinary research is carried out in collaboration with other laboratories and research groups within the Earth Sciences Division, across the Sciences and Exploration Directorate, and with partners in universities and other government agencies. Members of the Laboratories interact with the general public to support a wide range of interests in the atmospheric sciences. Among other activities, the Laboratories raise the public's awareness of atmospheric science by presenting public lectures and demonstrations, by making scientific data available to wide audiences, by teaching, and by mentoring students and teachers. The Atmosphere Laboratories make substantial efforts to attract and recruit new scientists to the various areas of atmospheric research. We strongly encourage the establishment of partnerships with Federal and state agencies that have operational responsibilities to promote the societal application of our science products. This report describes our role in NASA's mission, provides highlights of our research scope and activities, and summarizes our scientists' major accomplishments during calendar year 2014. The composition of the organization is shown in Figure 1.2 for each code. This report is published in a printed version with an electronic version on our atmospheres Web site, http://atmospheres.gsfc.nasa.gov/.

Technical↗

Damage Simulation in Composite Materials: Why It Matters and What Is Happening Currently at NASA in This Area

Use of lightweight composite materials in space and aircraft structure designs is often challenging due to high costs associated with structural certification. Of primary concern in the use of composite structures is durability and damage tolerance. This concern is due to the inherent susceptibility of composite materials to both fabrication and service induced flaws. Due to a lack of general industry accepted analysis tools applicable to composites damage simulation, a certification procedure relies almost entirely on testing. It is this reliance on testing, especially compared to structures comprised of legacy metallic materials where damage simulation tools are available, that can drive costs for using composite materials in aerospace structures. The observation that use of composites can be expensive due to testing requirements is not new and as such, research on analysis tools for simulating damage in composite structures has been occurring for several decades. A convenient approach many researchers/model-developers in this area have taken is to select a specific problem relevant to aerospace structural certification and develop a model that is accurate within that scope. Some examples are open hole tension tests, compression after impact tests, low-velocity impact, damage tolerance of an embedded flaw, and fatigue crack growth to name a few. Based on the premise that running analyses is cheaper than running tests, one motivation that many researchers in this area have is that if generally applicable and reliable damage simulation tools were available the dependence on certification testing could be lessened thereby reducing overall design cost. It is generally accepted that simulation tools if applied in this manner would still need to be thoroughly validated and that composite testing will never be completely replaced by analysis. Research and development is currently occurring at NASA to create numerical damage simulation tools applicable to damage in composites. The Advanced Composites Project (ACP) at NASA Langley has supported the development of composites damage simulation tools in a consortium of aerospace companies with a goal of reducing the certification time of a commercial aircraft by 30%. And while the scope of ACP does not include spacecraft, much of the methodology and simulation capabilities can apply to spacecraft certification in the Space Launch System and Orion programs as well. Some specific applications of composite damage simulation models in a certification program are (1) evaluation of damage during service when maintenance may be difficult or impossible, (2) a tool for early design iterations, (3) gaining insight into a particular damage process and applying this insight towards a test coupon or structural design, and (4) analysis of damage scenarios that are difficult or impossible to recreate in a test. As analysis capabilities improve, these applications and more will become realized resulting in a reduction in cost for use of composites in aerospace vehicles. NASA is engaged in this process from both research and application perspectives. In addition to the background information discussed previously, this presentation covers a look at recent research at NASA in this area and some current/potential applications in the Orion program.

McElroy, Mack↗

Increasing Small Satellite Reliability- A Public-Private Initiative

At present, CubeSat components and buses are generally not appropriate for missions where significant risk of failure, or the inability to quantify risk or confidence, is acceptable. However, in the future we anticipate that CubeSats will be used for missions requiring reliability of 1-3 years for Earth-observing missions and even longer for Planetary, Heliophysics, and Astrophysics missions. Their growing potential utility is driving an interagency effort to improve and quantify CubeSat reliability, and more generally, small satellite mission risk. The Small Satellite Reliability Initiative (SSRI)—an ongoing activity with broad collaborative participation from civil, DoD, and commercial space systems providers and stakeholders—targets this challenge. The Initiative seeks to define implementable and broadly-accepted approaches to achieve reliability and acceptable risk postures associated with several SmallSat mission risk classes—from “do no harm” missions, to those associated with missions whose failure would result in loss or delay of key national objectives. These approaches will maintain, to the extent practical, cost efficiencies associated with small satellite missions and consider constraints associated with supply chain elements, as appropriate. The SSRI addresses this challenge from two architectural levels—the mission- or system-level, and the component- or subsystem-level. The mission- or system-level scope targets assessment approaches that are efficient and effective, with mitigation strategies that facilitate resiliency to mission or system anomalies while the component- or subsystem-level scope addresses the challenge at lower architectural levels. The initiative does not limit strategies and approaches to proven and traditional methodologies, but is focused on fomenting thought on novel and innovative solutions. This paper discusses the genesis of and drivers for this initiative, how the public-private collaboration is being executed, findings and recommendations derived to date, and next steps towards broadening small satellite mission potential.

SmallSat↗

The Network for the Detection of Atmospheric Composition Change (NDACC): History, Status and Perspectives

The Network for the Detection of Atmospheric Composition Change (NDACC) is an international global network of more than 90 stations making high-quality measurements of atmospheric composition that began official operations in 1991 after 5 years of planning. Apart from sonde measurements, all measurements in the network are performed by ground-based remote-sensing techniques. Originally named the Network for the Detection of Stratospheric Change (NDSC), the name of the network was changed to NDACC in 2005 to better reflect the expanded scope of its measurements. The primary goal of NDACC is to establish long-term databases for detecting changes and trends in the chemical and physical state of the atmosphere (mesosphere, stratosphere, and troposphere) and to assess the coupling of such changes with climate and air quality. NDACC's origins, station locations, organizational structure, and data archiving are described. NDACC is structured around categories of ground-based observational techniques (sonde, lidar, microwave radiometers, Fourier-transform infrared, UV-visible DOAS (differential optical absorption spectroscopy)-type, and Dobson-Brewer spectrometers, as well as spectral UV radiometers), timely cross-cutting themes (ozone, water vapour, measurement strategies, cross-network data integration), satellite measurement systems, and theory and analyses. Participation in NDACC requires compliance with strict measurement and data protocols to ensure that the network data are of high and consistent quality. To widen its scope, NDACC has established formal collaborative agreements with eight other cooperating networks and Global Atmosphere Watch (GAW). A brief history is provided, major accomplishments of NDACC during its first 25 years of operation are reviewed, and a forward-looking perspective is presented.

lidar↗

Exoplanet Biosignatures: At the Dawn of a New Era of Planetary Observations

The rapid rate of discoveries of exoplanets has expanded the scope of the science possible for the remote detection of life beyond Earth. The Exoplanet Biosignatures Workshop-Without-Walls (EBWWW) held in 2016 engaged the international scientific community across diverse scientific disciplines, to assess the state of the science and technology in the search for life on exoplanets, and to identify paths for progress. The workshop activities resulted in five (5) major review papers which provide: 1) an encyclopedic review of known and proposed biosignatures and models used to ascertain them; 2) an in-depth review of O2 as a biosignature, rigorously examining the nuances of false positives and negatives for evidence of life; 3) a Bayesian framework to comprehensively organize current understanding to quantify confidence in biosignature assessments; 4) an extension of that Bayesian framework in anticipation of increasing planetary data and novel concepts of biosignatures, and 5) a review of the upcoming telescope capabilities to characterize exoplanets and their environment. Because of the immense content of these review papers, this summary provides a guide to their complementary scope and highlights salient features. Strong themes that emerged from the workshop were that biosignatures must be interpreted in the context of their environment, and that frameworks must be developed to link diverse forms of scientific understanding of that context to quantify the likelihood that a biosignature has been observed. Models are needed to explore the parameter space where measurements will be widespread but sparse in detail. Given the technological prospects for large ground-based telescopes and direct imaging from space-based observatories, the detection of atmospheric signatures of a few potentially habitable planets may come before 2030.

spectral imaging↗

Is Structured Agile an Oxymoron? Tales from Implementing and Executing Agile in a US Government Environment

To paraphrase a famous quote, "No plan survives contact with the reality." Software (SW) development is often a classic example of this: whatever the plan was for a particular development, it often does not survive contact with technical realities, budget realities, program realities and schedule realities. Traditionally, SW development has followed a waterfall methodology with requirements being rigorously specified before the design, which was completed before the coding and unit testing started, which were in turn finished before validation and verification started. This model of SW engineering derives much from the HW engineering of large systems, and has been the standard methodology used in US government software acquisitions and systems for decades, with highly variable results. US Government SW requirements are built around Waterfall concepts, which assume that the plan will survive contact with reality, or at least that modifications to the plan are relatively small, and relatively few.Because of the inefficiencies and difficulties inherent in Waterfall, the commercial SW world started using a different SW development methodology called Agile more than 20 years ago. Agile believes that a plan should evolve and learn rapidly in response to the realities encountered. At its core, there are a few key elements of Agile:- A small team of people which is highly flexible and adaptive. The team collaborates and interoperates through sophisticated development architectures and release environments- An iterative, incremental development and release approach which is based upon the concept that knowledge comes from experience within the team, and that the team makes decisions based upon what it knows- A team culture which prizes transparency, inspection and adaptation. These values are necessary so that the team experience and decision making is transparent and responsive to the realities encountered during development and testingSo, how to use Agile in a US Government environment? GMSEC (Goddard Mission Services Evolution Center) develops satellite ground system software for NASA and other US Government agencies. The SW developed by the team contains a large code base of many applications used within satellite mission operations centers. It spans the full gamut of SW development types: from SW which is in a classic maintenance and sustainment mode, to new developments with a fairly well understood scope and approach, to new developments whose scope and approach are quite unclear and which require significant research and prototyping. Team members move between all of these different types of SW development. Waterfall was inadequate to the programmatic and technical needs of the team, as well as the various types of SW development being done. The software plan was not surviving contact with the technical and programmatic realities experienced by the team. To address this, the team started a small pilot project in 2016 to test the use of Agile within a small subset of the team for a new web services application. In early 2018, the use of Agile was expanded to the whole team and all the software, but we had to fulfill the NASA SW development requirements. And we needed to do this while still remaining true to the key Agile elements of transparency, inspection and adaption. In order to do this, the team worked very closely with the Software Process Improvement (SPI) team at NASA Goddard, as well as NASA engineering manageme

Beech, Theresa W.↗

Restricted and Uncontained: Health Care and Public Health Considerations in the Event of Loss of Containment During the Restricted Earth Return of Extraterrestrial Samples

The normal scope of an adequate public health response to released biological material is framed by working with biological vectors with known pathogenicity and virulence. Defining the scope of a response to the release of biological material with unknown pathogenicity and virulence enters into a novel and yet to be framed domain. A current case, the case of returning samples from a location other than Earth, extraterrestrial samples from a location such as Mars, which may harbor life as we know it, requires framing a public health response. An unintentional release of biological material with unknown pathogenicity and virulence may occur when biological containment mechanisms in the Earth-returning transport method are lost. This paper raises initial public health and healthcare response questions during a return of extraterrestrial samples to Earth, in the event of its release from biological containment mechanisms: How does the public health community prepare for a response when there is release of samples that may contain potential extraterrestrial organisms from a planetary body or hardy terrestrial organisms surviving a round trip? If a mishap occurs during the return of these samples, what considerations need to be made to confine, decontaminate, and collect material in regions around the mishap? How will the public health community work with relevant government organizations to prepare the general public? The unknowns of exposure, potential extraterrestrial pathogenicity, and decontamination approaches, underscore gaps in biopreparedness for this novel case from the federal to local levels.

Betsy Pugel↗

A Planning Pipeline for Large Multi-Agent Missions

In complex multi-agent applications, human operators are often tasked with planning and managing large heterogeneous teams of humans and autonomous vehicles. Although the use of these autonomous vehicles broadens the scope of meaningful applications, many of their systems remain unintuitive and difficult to master for human operators whose expertise lies in the application domain and not at the platform level. Current research focuses on the development of individual capabilities necessary to plan multi-agent missions of this scope, placing little emphasis on the integration of these components in to a full pipeline. The work presented in this paper presents a complete and user-agnostic planning pipeline for large multiagent missions known as the HOLII GRAILLE. The system takes a holistic approach to mission planning by integrating capabilities in human machine interaction, flight path generation, and validation and verification. Components – modules – of the pipeline are explored on an individual level, as well as their integration into a whole system. Lastly, implications for future mission planning are discussed.

Chandarana, Meghan↗

High-Efficiency Heat Exchanger to Achieve Low-Power CO2 Deposition

This document serves as the Concept of Operations (ConOps) for Iowa State University’s Space Habitat Research group’s design to fulfill the requirements of NASA’s eXploration Systems and Habitation (X-Hab) 2020 Academic Innovation Challenge. The title of the challenge awarded to the group is ‘High-Efficiency Heat Exchanger to Achieve Low-Power CO2 Deposition’, with the scope of the challenge being to ‘characterize the achievable efficiency of an air-to-air heat exchanger in order to cool air for CO2 removal utilizing phase change properties’. The scope of this document includes an introduction that provides background and rationale for the project, a high-level description of the envisioned system, functional requirements, operational scenarios and environment, risk mitigation, and costs and scheduling.

Ward Thomas↗

Trends in Small Satellite Presentations from 2017-2019

As the small satellite community expands and new technologies emerge, it is important to understand and interpret these changes over time. In doing so, we observe progress and aid future development within the field. During the summer of 2020 we compiled for assessment purposes, archived presentation data for years 2017-2019 from three primary sources: the CubeSat Developers Workshop, Interplanetary Small Satellite Conference, and the Small Satellite Conference. A few examples of the information we recorded and compiled were presenter names and affiliations, presentation topic, and mission progress status. Ultimately, we reviewed roughly 600 presentations between the three conferences and the data obtained therein form the basis of our trend assessment. The paper focuses on trends interpreted through the assessment of key elements available in the content of each presentation to include: SmallSat mission developers, subsystem developments and the expanded scope for small satellite destinations. Data was generalized using various forms of analysis depending on the type of information being assessed. In the end, we achieved our goal of reducing the content to its key points and major takeaways from the conference proceedings. In this presentation, the observed trends in data and our findings will be discussed. First, we will cover changes in presentation topics by categorizing them as either: science, technology, science/technology, or other. Our next topic will be about the agencies and organizations at the forefront of small satellite research and development. The following section will explain trends in subsystem developments for telecommunications, propulsion, power, and thermal management. Further discussion will highlight how the scope of interplanetary spaceflight has expanded since 2017 as new small spacecraft missions venture beyond low-Earth orbit into deep space exploration. And finally, we will observe what information was lacking in archived presentations which included but not limited to: mission’s funding source, presentation focus area, and software used.

Small Satellite↗

Probabilistic Modeling of a Three-Stage Human Landing System Architecture

Space Policy Directive-1 has led to NASA partnerships with commercial entities on procurement which includes the development of the Human Landing System (HLS) [1]. With the goal of delivering human crew to the lunar surface by 2024, system uncertainties become an important obstacle to the maturation of multiple new, driving technologies and mission concepts of the HLS program. As unmitigated uncertainties have previously led to failed development programs, these risks and their impacts must be understood and handled to ensure program success [2]. Sources of uncertainty include novel engine designs and configurations, increased reliance on cryogenic fluid management(CFM), and refueling technologies—which propagate as high-level performance metrics such as overall propellant mass and engine performance. Also, the occurrence of operational uncertainties—e.g. launch conditions or need to abort during the mission—can cause cascading effects on the rest of the mission that are difficult to definitively quantify, and are outside the scope of control. These concrete examples and other occurrences can be categorized as either epistemic or aleatory uncertainties.Epistemic uncertainty arises due to a lack of knowledge and can be alleviated with design and program maturation. Aleatory uncertainty is due to the inherent randomness of the system and cannot be directly reduced, unlike epistemic uncertainty. Robust design and probabilistic methods can compensate for aleatory effects. A taxonomy of uncertainty is referred to for this work [3]. In this paper, a probabilistic methodology to handle uncertainties has been demonstrated on a three-element HLS concept [1, 4], which allows tracking of current best estimates of the concept and assessment of concept design robustness against uncertainties. A sample case has been completed for this abstract, and an expansion on the methodology will be included in the final paper. This methodology has two key parts: first, the creation of a dynamic architecture model of a three-element HLS concept; and second, its use with surrogate modeling and range estimating techniques to capture and propagate uncertainties. This abstract will cover the basics of the approach used, and further details and justifications will be in the final paper.The mission profile associated with this three-element concept (Fig 1) was modeled as a set of mission events that facilitated mass changes, idles, or spacecraft maneuvers. The mission profile scope starts with each element’s NRHO orbit insertion and aggregation and ends at post-sortie rendezvous with Orion. More detail on the mission profile will be in the final paper. The DYnamic Rocket EQuation Tool (DYREQT), a space systems synthesis and sizing framework used by NASA, was used as the physics framework to model the HLS architecture for applying the probabilistic methodology [5, 6]. Specifically, a parametric representation of the lander, ascent, and transfer elements and the mission profile of each element was established, with vehicle and mission parameters available as inputs to allow for a dynamic model. Each vehicle stage was modeled with high-level performance metrics, using Isp and propellant mass fraction (PMF) to remain parametric. For the probabilistic analysis, uncertainties of interest within the HLS concept were enumerated and represented as parameters within the DYREQT model as inputs for vehicle stages or mission profile events. These parameters were frozen at their nominal values for the purposes of baselining architecture performance and sizing the vehicle appropriately based on reference documentation [1]. Range estimating—a probabilistic method that combines Monte Carlo sampling, focus on critical parameters, and heuristics to assess risk and opportunities—is traditionally used with Mass Equipment Lists (MELs), but has been adapted with operational parameters as well as vehicle parameters in theDYREQT model to capture mission uncertainty alongside vehicle uncertainty [7, 3]. This method was selected due to its application and insight on a system from a bottom-up perspective, independence from historical rules of thumb, and ability to generate sensitivities based on design decisions and uncertainties. As a sample case for the abstract, the boiloff rates of the vehicle elements and the loiter times during the mission (simulating launch time variations and changing window of opportunities) were used with range estimating to provide preliminary results. To perform the range estimation portion of this methodology (depicted in Fig. 3, further details in final paper), the DYREQT model was sampled using a Design of Experiments (DoE) to efficiently explore the architecture design space with respect to the sample set of uncertainty parameters; 5,000 cases via Latin Hypercube Sampling were computed on the DYREQT architecture model. Then, the results were used to create surrogate models, multivariate regressions that can visualize hypercube trends in the design space, of the architecture with respect to the uncertainty parameters. Range estimating was applied to the surrogates instead of the actual models, which saves computational expense due to the bulk of cases needed for the Monte Carlo simulation as part of range estimating. Uncertainty parameters were sampled independently from triangular distributions using the DoE ranges as ‘min’ and ‘max’, and the nominal value as ‘most likely’. Based engineering intuition, some uncertainty parameters are correlated—e.g. if the main propellant has a high boil-off rate, the oxidizer should follow suit as both are related to CFM technology.While a Monte Carlo simulation samples all inputs as independent, the results would show model correlations; thus, it is efficient to sample the inputs as correlated. Using a correlation matrix constructed for the uncertainty parameters, previously independent samples were transformed to perform a Correlated Monte Carlo. A table for the DoE ranges and probability distribution parameters is shown in Table 1, and more details on Correlated Monte Carlo Simulations will be discussed in the final paper. The model’s resulting DoE showed that multivariate polynomial equations fit via least squares method captured its behavior accurately for the sample case. For the Correlated Monte Carlo Simulation, a positive correlation between fuel and oxidizer boiloff rates was used as a demonstration. 10,000 cases were computed with the surrogates and the launched masses for each vehicle element was collated. The results can be displayed in a probability density function (PDF), showing the impact of the uncertainty parameters chosen. Integrating the PDFs will yield a cumulative distribution function (CDF) that shows the cumulative probability of a given value on the x-axis. For the sample case, the elements’ launch mass margin was calculated and represented in as CDFs, as a demonstrated representation of figures of merit for the HLS concept. For the lander and ascent elements, the NRHO mass insertion limit is 16t; the transfer element has a limit of 30t [1]. It can be seen with Figure 2 that this probabilistic methodology can provide insight into mass margin with respect to the uncertainties being modeled. Currently, the results show that the lander (descent) vehicle element has the most restrictive design space; it is the only element to show a 10% probability of negative margin. Further analysis on the Monte Carlo results will show sensitivities for driving constraints and parameters for architecture feasibility, which can lead to establishing potential mission rules.The combination of range estimating with a parametric architecture model for HLS demonstrated the capability of this probabilistic methodology in a sample case. As the HLS development progresses, this methodology has the potential for keeping current best estimates of architecture performance for awarded concepts due to the flexibility in DYREQT’s modeling framework and its parametric nature. Concept maturation and increased epistemic knowledge can be injected into the model probabilistic modeling, and thus continue to track probability of mission success.

Stephanie Y Zhu↗

Trends in Small Satellite Presentations from 2017 - 2019

As the small satellite community expands and new technologies emerge, it is important to understand and interpret these changes over time. In doing so, we observe progress and aid future development within the field. During the summer of 2020 we compiled for assessment purposes, archived presentation data for years 2017-2019 from three primary sources: the CubeSat Developers Workshop, Interplanetary Small Satellite Conference, and the Small Satellite Conference. A few examples of the information we recorded and compiled were presenter names and affiliations, presentation topic, and mission progress status. Ultimately, we reviewed roughly 600 presentations between the three conferences and the data obtained therein form the basis of our trend assessment. The paper focuses on trends interpreted through the assessment of key elements available in the content of each presentation to include: SmallSat mission developers, subsystem developments and the expanded scope for small satellite destinations. Data was generalized using various forms of analysis depending on the type of information being assessed. In the end, we achieved our goal of reducing the content to its key points and major takeaways from the conference proceedings. In this presentation, the observed trends in data and our findings will be discussed. First, we will cover changes in presentation topics by categorizing them as either: science, technology, science/technology, or other. Our next topic will be about the agencies and organizations at the forefront of small satellite research and development. The following section will explain trends in subsystem developments for telecommunications, propulsion, power, and thermal management. Further discussion will highlight how the scope of interplanetary spaceflight has expanded since 2017 as new small spacecraft missions venture beyond low-Earth orbit into deep space exploration. And finally, we will observe what information was lacking in archived presentations which included but not limited to: mission’s funding source, presentation focus area, and software used.

Small Satellites↗

Pilot Workload Rating Predictions Using Image Data and Recurrent Neural Networks

In this work, we augmented existing methods for estimating pilot workload ratings with deep neural networks trained using data from simulated flight tests in the Vertical Motion Simulator (VMS). We used an existing method, Spare Capacity Operations Estimator (SCOPE), along with a recurrent neural network and conducted comparison studies between the two methods individually, and when used together. We found that using both methods together can improve the result over using either approach alone. In our first test case, we achieved an improved linear correlation coefficient of 0.409 over that of SCOPE alone at 0.352 on the training dataset. Through cross validation, we also found that the results may be dependent on the split of training vs. validation data, and that further investigation should be conducted to understand what additional inputs to the neural network model should be made.

Image Data↗

Topographic Quintet: Comparing Five Methods for Measuring Ultra-High Resolution Topography

We compare different methods for collecting ultra-high resolution topography data within an analog planetary, human landing site scale area. Our aim is to investigate the cost and benefits of different 3D terrain mapping techniques, their associated data collection methods, and how their different specifications (e.g., range, spatial resolution, scanning-time, mobility, operating constraints, GPS-Denied operation, etc.) might be applied to landing-site characterization and mission operations. We compare 3D terrain data collected during a field campaign in November 2021 from an outcrop at Kilbourne Hole in southern New Mexico using different Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) sensors on the ground and stereo-derived 3D data from framing cameras mounted on small uncrewed aerial systems (sUAS).Our foci for this experiment are ground-based, surveying, and autonomous vehicle-type 3D scanning sensors that might be used for planetary surface exploration from landed assets (e.g., lander, rover, astronaut-mounted sensors, decent imaging, hoppers, or drones).[e.g. 1]This test is not meant to benchmark these scanners against one another, nor provide a recommendation for a specific make or model. Rather, our goal is to quantify time, effort, resolution, and operational trade-offs that are important for selecting a topographic instrument/methodology for a given scope of terrain characterization. Our results indicate that each technique is capable of exceptional quality terrain characterization for planetary exploration and scientific inquiry, but we hypothesize the appropriate technique is highly dependent on the scope of operational specifications and science requirements.

P Whelley↗

Reducing Risk of InSight Surface Operations Through High-Fidelity Command Sequence Modeling

Simulating spacecraft behavior is crucial for the success of deep space missions, and failure to do so may result in damages to or the loss of the spacecraft. Many previous deep space missions have made use of ground-simulation of sequenced commanding, at speeds far greater than real time, to predict spacecraft state over time through the execution of onboard sequences. This type of modeling can be done at any fidelity, and most missions have opted to decrease fidelity to reduce cost and complexity. However, NASA’s Interior Exploration using Seismic Investigations, Geodesy and Heat Transport (InSight) mission expanded the scope of ground modeling considerably, which has led to numerous benefits over past implementations. This paper will discuss the process and products that InSight created, as well as the lessons learned from successfully operating the spacecraft on Mars. InSight is the first JPL mission to expand the scope of ground modeling to include the uplink of files from Earth to the spacecraft, rather than making the simplification that any command sequences already exist onboard the spacecraft. The advantages of modeling the uplink of files are numerous. First, it allows for accurate modeling of the onboard filesystem of the spacecraft at all points in time, meaning that all file loads and deletions throughout the mission are modeled at the exact moment they are predicted to actually happen. Second, operators can be more certain that dependencies between sequences are not broken due to the dynamic nature of the filesystem as files are deleted, copied, and uplinked. Lastly, spacecraft filesystem tracking allows for management of sequences prior to uplink, limiting the uplink to only new sequences. The onboard filesystem model became crucial to mission success, emphasizing the importance of investing in accurate models before the need for them arises. During daily tactical operations of a spacecraft on Mars, a model is only useful if the results can be interpreted quickly. In this fast-paced environment, it is essential that command products are modeled and reviewed, errors are found and diagnosed, and new command products are redelivered, remodeled, re-reviewed in a timely manner. It is impossible to review the entire model and therefore the results of the model must be condensed and presented in a fashion that is intuitive, easy-to-navigate, complete, and trustworthy. InSight developed a number of innovative sequence review products that are designed to provide operators with the information required to quickly assess the validity of command products and diagnose potential issues. Together, these products provide a complete, yet succinct picture of the command and sequence model to the operators and facilitate a quick assessment of all sequence command products. This paper will cover planning and sequencing innovations made during InSight surface operations, and will compare the tools, processes, and results to those on other missions. Additionally, the paper will cover the flexible, yet robust nature of the planning and sequencing system architecture and how that flexibility allowed for rapid development and response to the unpredictability of Mars.

Cloutier, Kyle↗

The INSTEP Monitoring Network: Merging High-and-Low Cost Measurements to Characterize California Wildfires

Despite challenges with data quality and scope, low-cost sensor networks have skyrocketed in popularity over the last 15 years, making air quality data available on refined spatial scales. More recently, studies have leveraged both high and low-quality instruments to create stronger “hybrid” models, with most studies focusing on particulate matter. Low-cost measurements typically represent ground-level emissions only, providing context for human health issues from climate change-driven events such as wildfires. Since low-cost sensors’ capabilities are localized, daily events and microclimates tend to dominate the data rather than larger regional or atmospheric trends. Likewise, their low cost explains their high uncertainty. In contrast, some regulatory-grade instruments produce column measurements as well, providing reliable information on a broader scope. To bridge this gap while expanding into gas-phase measurements, we deployed 12 air quality sensor packages in California, USA during the 2022 wildfire season. These INSTEP (Inexpensive Network Sensor Technology Exploring Pollution) monitors measure carbon monoxide (CO), carbon dioxide (CO2), ozone (O3), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and several hydrocarbons including methane (CH4) and formaldehyde (HCHO). Half of the monitors were co-located with remote sensing spectrometers: NASA Pandora and Total Column Carbon Observing Network (TCCON). The overlap in pollutants includes NO2, O3, and HCHO between the INSTEP monitors and the Pandora column measurements. TCCON covers column CO, CO2, and CH4, rounding out our comparison. Most of the monitors were distributed throughout the San Francisco Bay area, and an additional three were located within 100 km of Los Angeles. The sites ranged in geographic and population characteristics, including desert, mountainous, coastal, and urban locations. Since varying environmental conditions such as temperature and pressure are known to challenge sensor performance, we will apply newer sensor “calibration” techniques meant to combat this. We will normalize our sensor signals by z-scoring them prior to applying a single calibration model in the form of multivariate linear regression or an artificial neural network. While this technique has been validated for the hydrocarbon and ozone sensor types (metal oxide), it has not yet been tested on electrochemical and non-dispersive infrared sensors, which are also used in the INSTEP monitors. This will serve as a test to see if this normalization technique – or another – is most effective in accounting for environmental differences among sensors. Related data analysis efforts have found success with a variety of geospatial analysis techniques, including weighted network models in which high-quality instruments are given higher weights than their low-cost counterparts. Our preliminary analysis will focus on kriging, which uses a Gaussian algorithm to assign weights, providing estimated pollution levels at locations between monitors. Smoke trajectory and evolution will also be considered using both measurement types. We also aim to baseline subtract our emission estimates from each region to determine which portion of emissions are regional and local, further characterizing burn differences in northern and southern California fires. Future directions include using INSTEP jointly with TEMPO satellite data, and mobile deployments on aircraft and uncrewed aerial vehicles (UAV).

Low-cost sensors↗

Pre-Launch Performance Trending of Joint Polar Satellite System (JPSS) Advanced Technology Microwave Sounder (ATMS)

The Advanced Technology Microwave Sounder (ATMS) microwave radiometer instrument is utilized on-board NOAA’s Joint Polar Satellite System (JPSS) fleet of spacecraft to perform temperature and water vapor soundings of Earth’s atmosphere. Consisting of 22 channels over a frequency range from 22 to 183 GHz, ATMS provides high-impact observations for numerical weather prediction (NWP) models. A general description of the ATMS instrument is discussed in [1]. There are five ATMS flight units in the polar-orbiting JPSS program; three are currently on-orbit and two are pending launch. The first ATMS was flown on the Suomi National Polar-orbiting Partnership (SNPP) satellite, launched in 2011. The second ATMS was launched on the NOAA-20 (previously JPSS-1) satellite in 2017. The third ATMS was launched on the NOAA-21 (previously JPSS-2) satellite in 2022. The SNPP and NOAA-20 ATMS units are operational. The NOAA-21 ATMS unit is completing on-orbit commissioning and checkout, having achieved provisional maturity status in December 2022 with validated maturity expected in May 2023 [2]. The fourth and fifth ATMS units are planned for the JPSS-3 (launch ~2028) and JPSS-4 (launch ~2032) satellites [3]. This paper will focus on trending performance characteristics of each JPSS ATMS build from the pre-launch activities. Pre-launch trending of some parameters have been previously published up to the JPSS-3 mission [4][5]. This paper differs from and expands the scope of the prior work as it will include all five of the JPSS ATMS builds. The entire suite of JPSS ATMS units have completed their pre-ship instrument-level I&T and verification activities. These activities include a radiometric performance characterization of each instrument. In addition to comparing the performance across builds, the performance will also be compared to requirements and specifications where applicable. The on-orbit performance of the launched units will be excluded from the scope of this paper in order to focus on evaluations that are common across all builds. The post-launch performance of SNPP ATMS is detailed in [1][6][7][8]. The post-launch performance of NOAA-20 ATMS is detailed in [6][8][9]. The pre-launch characterization of the ATMS occurs at both subassembly-level and instrument-level testing. The antenna subsystem is tested at Northrop Grumman’s Compact Antenna Test Range (CATR) in Azusa, CA [9]. This testing characterizes the antenna pattern and the pointing performance of the scan drive mechanism and antenna subsystem. Trended parameters from this evaluation will include beam pointing accuracy, beamwidth, and beam efficiency. These parameters are captured in each instrument’s Calibration Data Book [10]. Instrument-level radiometric performance evaluation is primarily done during thermal vacuum (TVAC) calibration testing at Northrop Grumman’s Azusa, CA facility [9]. A general description of the calibration activities is presented in [1][9]. The testing involves inferring a scene target brightness temperature (TB) and comparing it to the actual scene TB while the instrument is at flight-like temperature and pressure environmental conditions. Trended parameters from this activity will include Noise Equivalent Delta Temperature (NEDT), nonlinearity, radiometric accuracy, gain stability, striping, and inter-channel noise correlation. The trending evaluation will allow for a direct comparison of the ATMS performance across builds. The paper will highlight observed performance improvements.

Edward J Kim↗