Results for “Guidelines for Space Systems” — Page 15

NASA NTRS1983

Packet telemetry and packet telecommand - The new generation of spacecraft data handling techniques

Because of rising costs and reduced reliability of spacecraft and ground network hardware and software customization, standardization Packet Telemetry and Packet Telecommand concepts are emerging as viable alternatives. Autonomous packets of data, within each concept, which are created within ground and space application processes through the use of formatting techniques, are switched end-to-end through the space data network to their destination application processes through the use of standard transfer protocols. This process may result in facilitating a high degree of automation and interoperability because of completely mission-independent-designed intermediate data networks. The adoption of an international guideline for future space telemetry formatting of the Packet Telemetry concept, and the advancement of the NASA-ESA Working Group's Packet Telecommand concept to a level of maturity parallel to the of Packet Telemetry are the goals of the Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems. Both the Packet Telemetry and Packet Telecommand concepts are reviewed.

Hooke, A. J.↗

NASA NTRS1990

Structural design considerations for a Personnel Launch System

A vehicle capable of performing the transfer of eight people to and from the Space Station Freedom is currently in the conceptual/preliminary design stages at the NASA Langley Research Center. Structural definition of this Personnel Launch System (PLS) and the considerations leading to it are described. Issues such as cost, technology level, human factors, and maintainability are used as guidelines for the structural definition. A synergistic design technique involving aerodynamics, performance, mission, packaging, and weights and sizing analyses is utilized to evaluate the structural design. A closed-loop design is achieved when the mission requirements are met by each previously mentioned analysis for a particular vehicle weight. Although satisfactory, the structural concept presented herein is not to be treated as a final answer, but one promising solution. An examination of alternative designs and more detailed analyses can be undertaken in order to identify design inadequacies and more efficient approaches.

Bush, Lance B.↗

NASA NTRS2012

End-of-Mission Passivation: Successes and Challenges

The passivation of spacecraft and launch vehicle orbital stages at end-of-mission has been a principal space debris mitigation measure world-wide since the 1980 s. Space vehicle passivation includes the removal of stored energies, especially those associated with propulsion and electrical power systems. Prior to 2007 the breakup of non-functioning, non-passivated space vehicles was the major source of hazardous debris in Earth orbit. The United Nations and the Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee have both included passivation in their formal space debris mitigation guidelines. This often simple countermeasure has been adopted by many spacefaring countries and organizations and has undoubtedly prevented numerous major satellite breakups. For some existing space vehicle designs, passivation requires changes in hardware, software, and/or operational procedures. Questions about the permissible degree of passivation for both current and future space vehicles have arisen and are addressed herein. An important element to be considered is the potentially long period in which the space vehicle will remain in orbit, i.e., up to 25 years after mission termination in LEO and for centuries in orbits above LEO. Finally, the issue of passivation of space vehicles which have failed prematurely is addressed.

Johnson, Nicholas↗

NASA NTRS2015

Replacement of Hydrochlorofluorocarbon (HCFC) -225 Solvent for Cleaning and Verification Sampling of NASA Propulsion Oxygen Systems Hardware, Ground Support Equipment, and Associated Test Systems

Since the 1990's, when the Class I Ozone Depleting Substance (ODS) chlorofluorocarbon-113 (CFC-113) was banned, NASA's rocket propulsion test facilities at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) and Stennis Space Center (SSC) have relied upon hydrochlorofluorocarbon-225 (HCFC-225) to safely clean and verify the cleanliness of large scale propulsion oxygen systems. Effective January 1, 2015, the production, import, export, and new use of HCFC-225, a Class II ODS, was prohibited by the Clean Air Act. In 2012 through 2014, leveraging resources from both the NASA Rocket Propulsion Test Program and the Defense Logistics Agency - Aviation Hazardous Minimization and Green Products Branch, test labs at MSFC, SSC, and Johnson Space Center's White Sands Test Facility (WSTF) collaborated to seek out, test, and qualify a replacement for HCFC-225 that is both an effective cleaner and safe for use with oxygen systems. Candidate solvents were selected and a test plan was developed following the guidelines of ASTM G127, Standard Guide for the Selection of Cleaning Agents for Oxygen Systems. Solvents were evaluated for materials compatibility, oxygen compatibility, cleaning effectiveness, and suitability for use in cleanliness verification and field cleaning operations. Two solvents were determined to be acceptable for cleaning oxygen systems and one was chosen for implementation at NASA's rocket propulsion test facilities. The test program and results are summarized. This project also demonstrated the benefits of cross-agency collaboration in a time of limited resources.

Mitchell, Mark A.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Replacement of HCFC-225 Solvent for Cleaning NASA Propulsion Oxygen Systems

Since the 1990's, when the Class I Ozone Depleting Substance (ODS) chlorofluorocarbon‐113 (CFC‐113) was banned, NASA's rocket propulsion test facilities at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) and Stennis Space Center (SSC) have relied upon hydrochlorofluorocarbon‐225 (HCFC‐225) to safely clean and verify the cleanliness of large scale propulsion oxygen systems. Effective January 1, 2015, the production, import, export, and new use of HCFC‐225, a Class II ODS, was prohibited by the Clean Air Act. In 2012 through 2014, leveraging resources from both the NASA Rocket Propulsion Test Program and the Defense Logistics Agency ‐ Aviation Hazardous Minimization and Green Products Branch, test labs at MSFC, SSC, and Johnson Space Center's White Sands Test Facility (WSTF) collaborated to seek out, test, and qualify a replacement for HCFC‐225 that is both an effective cleaner and safe for use with oxygen systems. Candidate solvents were selected and a test plan was developed following the guidelines of ASTM G127, Standard Guide for the Selection of Cleaning Agents for Oxygen Systems. Solvents were evaluated for materials compatibility, oxygen compatibility, cleaning effectiveness, and suitability for use in cleanliness verification and field cleaning operations. Two solvents were determined to be acceptable for cleaning oxygen systems and one was chosen for implementation at NASA's rocket propulsion test facilities. The test program and results are summarized. This project also demonstrated the benefits of cross‐agency collaboration in a time of limited resources.

Mitchell, Mark A.↗

NASA NTRS2002

Technical Interchange Meeting Guidelines Breakout

Along with concept developers, the Systems Evaluation and Assessment (SEA) sub-element of VAMS will develop those scenarios and metrics required for testing the new concepts that reside within the System-Level Integrated Concepts (SLIC) sub-element in the VAMS project. These concepts will come from the NRA process, space act agreements, a university group, and other NASA researchers. The emphasis of those concepts is to increase capacity while at least maintaining the current safety level. The concept providers will initially develop their own scenarios and metrics for self-evaluation. In about a year, the SEA sub-element will become responsible for conducting initial evaluations of the concepts using a common scenario and metric set. This set may derive many components from the scenarios and metrics used by the concept providers. Ultimately, the common scenario\metric set will be used to help determine the most feasible and beneficial concepts. A set of 15 questions and issues, discussed below, pertaining to the scenario and metric set, and its use for assessing concepts, was submitted by the SEA sub-element for consideration during the breakout session. The questions were divided among the three breakout groups. Each breakout group deliberated on its set of questions and provided a report on its discussion.

Fong, Rob↗

NASA NTRS1989

Considerations for an exercise prescription

A number of past and most recent research findings that describe some of the physiological responses to exercise in man and their relationship with exposure to various gravitational environments are discussed. Most of the data pertain to adaptations of the cardiovascular and body fluid systems. It should be kept in mind that the data from studies on microgravity simulation in man include exposures of relatively short duration (5 hours to 14 days). However, it is argued that the results may provide important guidelines for the consideration of many variables which are pertinent to the development of exercise prescription for long-duration space flight. The following considerations for exercise prescriptions during long-duration space flight are noted: (1) Relatively high aerobic fitness and strength, especially of the upper body musculature, should be a criterion for selection of astronauts who will be involved in EVA, since endurance and strength appear to be predominant characteristics for work performance. (2) Some degree of upper body strength will probably be required for effective performance of EVA. However, the endurance and strength required by the upper body for EVA can probably be obtained through preflight exercise prescription which involves swimming. (3) Although some degree of arm exercise may be required to maintain preflight endurance and strength, researchers propose that regular EVA will probably be sufficient to maintain the endurance and strength required to effectively perform work tasks during space flight. (4) A minimum of one maximal aerobic exercise every 7 to 10 days during space flight may be all that is necessary for maintenance of normal cardiovascular responsiveness and replacement of body fluids for reentry following prolonged space flight. (5) The possible reduction in the amount of exercise required for maintenance of cardiovascular system and body fluids in combination with the use of electromyostimulation (EMS) or methods other than conventional exercise for maintaining size and strength of muscles and bones needs great consideration for further research. These approaches represent a potential solution to the problem of compromising valuable time for exercise that is needed for daily operations.

Convertino, Victor A.↗

NASA NTRS2006

Space Environment Effects on Materials : An Overview

A general overview on the space environment and its effects on materials is presented. The topics include: 1) Impact of Space Effects on Spacecraft Costs; 2) Space Environment Effects on Spacecraft by Source; 3) Primary Source of Space Effects: The Sun; 4) The Earth's Environment; 5) Trapped Radiation Belts; 6) Aurora Are Everywhere; 7) Spacecraft Interactions; 8) Atmospheric Effects; 9) Contaminant Effects on Materials; 10) Meteoroid/Debris Effects on Materials; 11) Spacecraft Surface Charging; 12) Surface Discharge Effects; 13) Internal Electrostatic Discharge--Satellite Killer; 14) Plasma Interactions DS-1 Ion Engines; 15) Radiation Effects on Spacecraft Systems and Materials; 16) Total Ionizing Dose Effects Total Ionizing Dose Effects; 17) Man-Made Sources of Space Effects Man-Made Sources of Space Effects; and 18) Space Environments Versus Interactions.

charged particles↗

NASA NTRS2005

Influence of Planetary Protection Guidelines on Waste Management Operations

Newly outlined missions in the Space Exploration Initiative include extended human habitation on Mars. During these missions, large amounts of waste materials will be generated in solid, liquid and gaseous form. Returning these wastes to Earth will be extremely costly, and will therefore likely remain on Mars. Untreated, these wastes are a reservoir of live/dead organisms and molecules considered to be "biomarkers" i.e., indicators of life). If released to the planetary surface, these materials can potentially confound exobiology experiments and disrupt Martian ecology indefinitely (if existent). Waste management systems must therefore be specifically designed to control release of problematic materials both during the active phase of the mission, and for any specified post-mission duration. To effectively develop waste management requirements for Mars missions, planetary protection guidelines must first be established. While previous policies for Apollo lunar missions exist, it is anticipated that the increased probability of finding evidence of life on Mars, as well as the lengthy mission durations will initially lead to more conservative planetary protection measures. To facilitate the development of overall requirements for both waste management and planetary protection for future missions, a workshop was conducted to identify how these two areas interface, and to establish a preliminary set of planetary protection guidelines that address waste management operations. This paper provides background regarding past and current planetary protection and waste management issues, and their interactions. A summary of the recommended planetary protection guidelines, anticipated ramifications and research needs for waste management system design for both forward (Mars) and backward (Earth) contamination is also provided.

Hogan, John A.↗

NASA NTRS1991

The development of a post-test diagnostic system for rocket engines

An effort was undertaken by NASA to develop an automated post-test, post-flight diagnostic system for rocket engines. The automated system is designed to be generic and to automate the rocket engine data review process. A modular, distributed architecture with a generic software core was chosen to meet the design requirements. The diagnostic system is initially being applied to the Space Shuttle Main Engine data review process. The system modules currently under development are the session/message manager, and portions of the applications section, the component analysis section, and the intelligent knowledge server. An overview is presented of a rocket engine data review process, the design requirements and guidelines, the architecture and modules, and the projected benefits of the automated diagnostic system.

Zakrajsek, June F.↗

NASA NTRS1991

The development of a post-test diagnostic system for rocket engines

An effort was undertaken by NASA to develop an automated post-test, post-flight diagnostic system for rocket engines. The automated system is designed to be generic and to automate the rocket engine data review process. A modular, distributed architecture with a generic software core was chosen to meet the design requirements. The diagnostic system is initially being applied to the Space Shuttle Main Engine data review process. The system modules currently under development are the session/message manager, and portions of the applications section, the component analysis section, and the intelligent knowledge server. An overview is presented of a rocket engine data review process, the design requirements and guidelines, the architecture and modules, and the projected benefits of the automated diagnostic system.

Zakrajsek, June F.↗

NASA NTRS2016

The IOAG Recommendations on Spacecraft Emergency Cross Support

In 2014, the Inter-agency Operations Advisory Group (IOAG) chartered a multi-agency team effort to study how to best handle spacecraft emergency as part of cross support among network assets. The original intent is to put in place for the first time a process and guidelines to make emergency support as part of a permanent cross-support capability between space agencies. From the perspective of space communications service providers, a few key issues, common to all agencies, concerning the Spacecraft Emergency Cross Support (SECS) have been explored. They are: context of emergency support, provision of emergency support under a cross-support agreement, provision of emergency support with no cross-support agreement, legal and liability issues, response time, support priority, services provided, sustaining emergency support capabilities, and charge for the support. The positions of the various participating agencies with respect to these issues have been collected, analyzed, and finally harmonized to form the recommended IOAG positions. A central challenge most communications service providers are facing is that since the spacecraft emergency is an unplanned critical event, it typically requires fast response to the emergency call, hence lacking an international standard process for the operational interfaces seems to exacerbate the difficulty in providing SECS. For reducing the response time, i.e. from the time of accepting a request for SECS to the readiness for support, it is recommended that a “cross-support emergency system” be established by IOAG member agencies. Along with it, the IOAG core services, just-in-time ground communications line, cross support service management (CSSM), and standard operations procedures (SOP) for operational interfaces form the basic foundation of the “cross support emergency system”. Of the above, new to the cross support conducted thus far in the IOAG community is the concept of the SOP specifically for the interfaces between the service provider and service user during the SECS. Use cases, salient features, and definition of the key operational activities/tasks relevant to the interfaces are addressed by the effort. Underpinning such a system is the availability of the RF license granted by the local authority, at national and/or regional level, for a given ground station to communicate with and track the spacecraft in emergency mode at the uplink and downlink frequencies assigned to that spacecraft. That means it is critical for the IOAG member agencies to obtain a priori all-band licenses (for the entire X-band or S-band) for some, if not all, of their ground stations that are most capable of or likely to provide SECS. It is also recommended that certain prior arrangements be made with the relevant local licensing authorities for a process that will allow expedited authorization to transmit/receive signals to/from the declared spacecraft over the declared ground stations specifically and solely for the emergency case. Our analysis of the SECS has also uncovered a few fundamental programmatic issues. Recognizing any IOAG positions reached on these issues do not necessarily lead to any binding authority, it is recommended that they, along with those key attributes of the cross support emergency system, be explicitly stated as multi-agency guidelines to guide the implementation and provision of the SECS. The paper will present the results of the working group on Spacecraft Emergency Cross Support and, in particular, its findings, products and recommendations. It will also identify the next steps of this work that may include the production of some international standards as an extension of this work, or the process to make this emergency system usable by other spacecraft operators beyond the space agencies.

Tai, Wallace S.↗

NASA NTRS2016

The IOAG Recommendations on Spacecraft Emergency Cross Support

In 2014, the Inter-agency Operations Advisory Group (IOAG) chartered a multi-agency team effort to study how to best handle spacecraft emergency as part of cross support among network assets. The original intent is to put in place for the first time a process and guidelines to make emergency support as part of a permanent cross-support capability between space agencies. From the perspective of space communications service providers, a few key issues, common to all agencies, concerning the Spacecraft Emergency Cross Support (SECS) have been explored. They are: context of emergency support, provision of emergency support under a cross-support agreement, provision of emergency support with no cross-support agreement, legal and liability issues, response time, support priority, services provided, sustaining emergency support capabilities, and charge for the support. The positions of the various participating agencies with respect to these issues have been collected, analyzed, and finally harmonized to form the recommended IOAG positions. A central challenge most communications service providers are facing is that since the spacecraft emergency is an unplanned critical event, it typically requires fast response to the emergency call, hence lacking an international standard process for the operational interfaces seems to exacerbate the difficulty in providing SECS. For reducing the response time, i.e. from the time of accepting a request for SECS to the readiness for support, it is recommended that a “cross-support emergency system” be established by IOAG member agencies. Along with it, the IOAG core services, just-in-time ground communications line, cross support service management (CSSM), and standard operations procedures (SOP) for operational interfaces form the basic foundation of the “cross support emergency system”. Of the above, new to the cross support conducted thus far in the IOAG community is the concept of the SOP specifically for the interfaces between the service provider and service user during the SECS. Use cases, salient features, and definition of the key operational activities/tasks relevant to the interfaces are addressed by the effort. Underpinning such a system is the availability of the RF license granted by the local authority, at national and/or regional level, for a given ground station to communicate with and track the spacecraft in emergency mode at the uplink and downlink frequencies assigned to that spacecraft. That means it is critical for the IOAG member agencies to obtain a priori all-band licenses (for the entire X-band or S-band) for some, if not all, of their ground stations that are most capable of or likely to provide SECS. It is also recommended that certain prior arrangements be made with the relevant local licensing authorities for a process that will allow expedited authorization to transmit/receive signals to/from the declared spacecraft over the declared ground stations specifically and solely for the emergency case. Our analysis of the SECS has also uncovered a few fundamental programmatic issues. Recognizing any IOAG positions reached on these issues do not necessarily lead to any binding authority, it is recommended that they, along with those key attributes of the cross support emergency system, be explicitly stated as multi-agency guidelines to guide the implementation and provision of the SECS. The paper will present the results of the working group on Spacecraft Emergency Cross Support and, in particular, its findings, products and recommendations. It will also identify the next steps of this work that may include the production of some international standards as an extension of this work, or the process to make this emergency system usable by other spacecraft operators beyond the space agencies.

Tai, Wallace S.↗

NASA NTRS2007

An Integrated High Resolution Hydrometeorological Modeling Testbed using LIS and WRF

Scientists have made great strides in modeling physical processes that represent various weather and climate phenomena. Many modeling systems that represent the major earth system components (the atmosphere, land surface, and ocean) have been developed over the years. However, developing advanced Earth system applications that integrates these independently developed modeling systems have remained a daunting task due to limitations in computer hardware and software. Recently, efforts such as the Earth System Modeling Ramework (ESMF) and Assistance for Land Modeling Activities (ALMA) have focused on developing standards, guidelines, and computational support for coupling earth system model components. In this article, the development of a coupled land-atmosphere hydrometeorological modeling system that adopts these community interoperability standards, is described. The land component is represented by the Land Information System (LIS), developed by scientists at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center. The Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model, a mesoscale numerical weather prediction system, is used as the atmospheric component. LIS includes several community land surface models that can be executed at spatial scales as fine as 1km. The data management capabilities in LIS enable the direct use of high resolution satellite and observation data for modeling. Similarly, WRF includes several parameterizations and schemes for modeling radiation, microphysics, PBL and other processes. Thus the integrated LIS-WRF system facilitates several multi-model studies of land-atmosphere coupling that can be used to advance earth system studies.

Kumar, Sujay V.↗

NASA NTRS2010

A Perspective on Computational Human Performance Models as Design Tools

The design of interactive systems, including levels of automation, displays, and controls, is usually based on design guidelines and iterative empirical prototyping. A complementary approach is to use computational human performance models to evaluate designs. An integrated strategy of model-based and empirical test and evaluation activities is particularly attractive as a methodology for verification and validation of human-rated systems for commercial space. This talk will review several computational human performance modeling approaches and their applicability to design of display and control requirements.

Jones, Patricia M.↗

NASA NTRS2012

Establishment of a Spaceport Network Architecture

Since the beginning of the space age, the main actors in space exploration have been governmental agencies, enabling a privileged access to space, but with very restricted and rare missions. The last decade has seen the rise of space tourism, and the founding of ambitious private space mining companies, showing the beginnings of a new exploration era, that is based on a more generalized and regular access to space and which is not limited to the Earth's vicinity. However, the cost of launching sufficient mass into orbit to sustain these inspiring challenges is prohibitive, and the necessary infrastructures to support these missions is still lacking. To provide easy and affordable access into orbital and deep space destinations, there is the need to create a network of spaceports via specific waypoint locations coupled with the use of natural resources, or In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU), to provide a more economical solution. As part of the International Space University Space Studies Program 2012, the international and intercultural team of Operations and Service Infrastructure for Space (OASIS) proposes an interdisciplinary answer to the problem of economical space access and transportation. This paper presents a summary of a detailed report [1] of the different phases of a project for developing a network of spaceports throughout the Solar System in a timeframe of 50 years. The requirements, functions, critical technologies and mission architecture of this network of spaceports are outlined in a roadmap of the important steps and phases. The economic and financial aspects are emphasized in order to allow a sustainable development of the network in a public-private partnership via the formation of an International Spaceport Authority (ISPA). The approach includes engineering, scientific, financial, legal, policy, and societal aspects. Team OASIS intends to provide guidelines to make the development of space transportation via a spaceports logistics network feasible, and believes that this pioneering effort will revolutionize space exploration, science and commerce, ultimately contributing to permanently expand humanity into space.

Larson, Wiley J.↗

NASA NTRS1985

The results of a limited study of approaches to the design, fabrication, and testing of a dynamic model of the NASA IOC space station. Executive summary

The options for the design, construction, and testing of a dynamic model of the space station were evaluated. Since the definition of the space station structure is still evolving, the Initial Operating Capacity (IOC) reference configuration was used as the general guideline. The results of the studies treat: general considerations of the need for and use of a dynamic model; factors which deal with the model design and construction; and a proposed system for supporting the dynamic model in the planned Large Spacecraft Laboratory.

Brooks, George W.↗

NASA NTRS1992

Vehicle health management technology needs

Background material on vehicle health management (VHM) and health monitoring/control is presented. VHM benefits are described and a list of VHM technology needs that should be pursued is presented. The NASA funding process as it impacts VHM technology funding is touched upon, and the VHM architecture guidelines for generic launch vehicles are described. An example of a good VHM architecture, design, and operational philosophy as it was conceptualized for the National Launch System program is presented. Consideration is given to the Strategic Avionics Technology Working Group's role in VHM, earth-to-orbit, and space vehicle avionics technology development considerations, and some actual examples of VHM benefits for checkout are given.

Hammond, Walter E.↗