Results for “Spacecraft,” — Page 15

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 NTRSDate not supplied

Move to Talk, Talk to Move: Tightly Integrated Communication and Control for Coordinated Swarms of Small Spacecraft

The Move to Talk, Talk to Move: Tightly Integrated Communication and Control for Coordinated Swarms of Small Spacecraft project will build on existing research on collaborative autonomy of multi-agent systems and design techniques that will enable coordinated communication and control of spacecraft. The success of many space exploration and science missions hinges on real-time monitoring of time-varying and/or geographically distributed phenomena. This monitoring can be achieved using a swarm of small spacecraft, which collect data about the environment and share information within the swarm of spacecraft. Current space exploration missions typically issue commands to control each spacecraft individually from Earth, and the data gathered by each spacecraft is also transmitted to Earth separately via X-band communication over the Deep Space Network (DSN). This approach is expensive, slow, and unreliable. Many coordinated tasks amongst a swarm of autonomous agents (or, specifically, small spacecraft) rely on communication. Existing control, estimation, and decision algorithms often assume that mostly reliable communications are available; however, this is often not the case in actual environments and thus is a barrier to operating swarms of small spacecraft.

Qi Han↗

NASA NTRS2020

State of the Art Small Spacecraft Technology

When the first edition of NASA’s Small Spacecraft Technology State-of-the-art report was published in 2013, 247 CubeSats and 105 other non-CubeSat small spacecraft under 50 kilograms (kg) had been launched, and these represented less than 2% of launched mass into orbit. By 2019, small spacecraft with mass less than 180 kg made up almost 7% of all mass launched into orbit. Additionally, 63% of spacecraft under 600 kg had mass less than 180 kg and of those 47% were CubeSats (1). Since 2013, flight heritage for small spacecraft, primarily CubeSats, has nearly doubled and with dedicated smallsat launch capabilities readily available and expanding, opportunities to demonstrate new technologies and systems are expected to increase. The 2020 edition of this report captures and distills the wealth of new information available on small spacecraft systems from NASA and other publicly available sources. Overall, this report is a survey of small spacecraft technologies sourced from open literature; it does not endeavor to be an original source, and only considers literature in the public domain to identify and classify devices. Commonly used sources for data include manufacturer datasheets, press releases, conference papers, journal papers, public filings with government agencies, news articles, presentations, and Small Spacecraft Systems Virtual Institute Federated Search. Data not appropriate for public dissemination, such as proprietary, export controlled, or otherwise restricted data, are not considered. As a result, this report includes many dedicated hours of desk research performed by subject matter experts reviewing resources noted above.

Bruce Yost↗

NASA NTRS2025

State-of-the-Art Small Spacecraft Technology

The objective of this report is to assess and provide an overview of the state of the art in small spacecraft technologies for use by mission designers, project managers, technologists, and students, connecting current small spacecraft missions to available technologies. This report focuses on the spacecraft system in its entirety, provides current best practices for integration and key considerations for the reader where possible, and presents devices from publicly available sources for each specific spacecraft subsystem. This report is a survey of small spacecraft technologies sourced from open literature; it is not an original source. In addition, this report only considers literature in the public domain. Information presented in this report is limited to SmallSat technology that is publicly available as of September 30, 2024. It does not include information on instrumentation, science payloads, or advances or developments that have not been publicly disclosed. Commonly used sources for data include manufacturer data sheets, press releases, conference papers, journal papers, public filings with government agencies, news articles, presentations, the compendium of databases accessed via NASA’s Small Spacecraft Systems Virtual Institute (S3VI) Information Search, and engagement with companies. Data not appropriate for public dissemination, such as proprietary, export controlled, or otherwise restricted data, are not considered. We encourage the SmallSat community to publish mission outcomes and technology development milestones in publicly available conference papers, press releases, or company websites so they can be reflected in future editions of this report. This report is funded by NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD). It was first commissioned by the Small Spacecraft Technology (SST) program within NASA’s STMD in mid2012 in response to the rapid growth in interest in using small spacecraft for low-Earth orbit, lowcost missions. The report was subsequently updated in 2015, 2018, 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023 to capture SmallSat technology growth and maturation. In addition to reporting currently available state-of-the-art technologies that have achieved Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 5 or above, a prognosis is provided describing technologies as "on the horizon" if they are being considered for future application.

Sasha V Weston↗

NASA NTRS2026

The Contaminant Footprint of Landed Spacecraft: Toward an Inventory and Modelling Framework

All spacecraft generate and carry contaminants, i.e., unwanted and potentially harmful material. When a spacecraft lands and operates in near-vacuum, as onto Earth’s Moon, it introduces contaminants into its environment that may compromise mission science objectives and engineering performance. Contamination of solar system bodies may irrevocably degrade targets of unique value to planetary scientists, for instance, as lunar landed spacecraft introduce propellant effluents into the otherwise pristine ice of the Moon’s permanently shadowed regions. NASA’s planetary protection discipline seeks to ensure that solar system bodies are not contaminated, for scientific purposes, by terrestrial material (i.e., forward contamination). This interest aligns with planetary science interest in mitigating the transport of terrestrial contaminants onto solar system bodies and in controlling types of contamination that could compromise the scientific value of samples or measurements. NASA, and other entities that practice planetary science, have compelling and multidisciplinary interests in the preservation of special regions and sampling sites of high scientific value – including lunar permanently shadowed regions (PSRs) – from inadvertent contamination by any spacecraft, and in understanding the contamination of such regions by all spacecraft. Organic molecular contamination here represents a primary threat. Organic molecules will be introduced to solar system bodies by nominal landed spacecraft and crew processes – including by the action of descent and ascent engines; natural materials outgassing; and crew environmental and life support system sources. Molecular contaminants can also travel in the free-molecular sense at global scale across near-vacuum bodies, including into regions where they may be permanently trapped. This presentation will address a high-level study to identify sources of contaminants – in particular, organic material – generated by landed spacecraft along with the transport vectors by which these contaminants can reach sites of scientific interest on bodies like the Moon. A vision for an integrated modeling framework for the organic contamination footprint of spacecraft missions, individually and collectively, will also be described and presented along with initial conclusions related to organic molecular transport.

Gas Dynamics↗

NASA NTRS2000

Comparison of Spacecraft Charging Environments at the Earth, Jupiter, and Saturn

Studies of the Earth with the ATS-5, ATS-6, and SCATHA spacecraft led to the development of several simple tools for predicting the potentials to be expected on a spacecraft in the space environment. These tools have been used to estimate the expected levels of worst case charging at Jupiter and Saturn for the Galileo and the Cassini spacecraft missions. This paper reviews those results and puts them in the context of the design issues addressed by each mission including the spacecraft design mitigation strategies adopted to limit differential charging. The model shows that shadowed surfaces in Earth orbit can reach 25 kV or higher in worst case environments. For Galileo, spacecraft- to-space potentials of 900 V were predicted in shadow. Since such potentials could produce possible discharges and could effect low energy plasma measurements, the outer surface of Galileo was designed to rigid conductivity requirements. Even though the surface of Galileo is not entirely conducting, after 27 orbits no adverse effects due to surface charging aside from limited effects on low energy plasma measurements have been reported. The saturnian environment results in spacecraft potentials to space in shadow of 100 V or less. Although the overall surface of the Cassini spacecraft was not entirely conducting and grounded, it is shown that only in the most extreme conditions, is it expected that Cassini will experience any effects of surface charging at Saturn.

plasma environments↗

NASA NTRS2015

Survey and Assessment of Crew Performance Evaluation Methods Applicable to Human Spacecraft Design

Space is an unforgiving environment where the actions of the crew play a critical role in their health and safety. Given the limited number of crewmembers typically onboard a spacecraft and the multitude of complex systems they must operate, the performance of each individual is of paramount importance. Spacecraft habitat layout and operations are two main drivers affecting crew performance efficiency. Having the capability to analyze and compare crew performance across various spacecraft configurations can help identify improvements early in the conceptual design process where changes are less costly to implement, ultimately reducing overall project costs and improving long-term operations of the system. Currently, there are few comprehensive methods readily available for evaluating crew integration within a spacecraft in the conceptual design phase. In order to address this shortcoming, the goal of this work was to analyze various specialized evaluation methods found in analogous industries that have potential application to human spacecraft design. A survey of more than 400 human performance evaluation methods was completed. Over twenty different attributes were identified for each method and a variety of analyses were conducted to characterize and evaluate their potential use for assessing human spacecraft design options. The analysis revealed a particular deficiency of quantitative evaluation methods that are applicable early in the systems engineering design phase. It also identified five existing methods that could be supplemented to achieve the needs of an early design evaluation method. Additional discussion describes potential issues that must be overcome when developing a method specific for use in human spacecraft evaluations.

crew performance↗

NASA NTRS1977

Active control of spacecraft charging on ATS-5 and ATS-6

Effects on spacecraft ground potential of active emission of charged particles are being investigated through experiments using the ATS-5 and ATS-6 spacecraft. Each spacecraft is equipped with ion engine neutralizers which emit low energy charged particles. Despite great differences in design between the two spacecraft, they attain similar potentials in similar environments. Therefore, effects on spacecraft potential of neutralizer operations can be used to compare the effects of operating the two different neutralizers (hot wire filament and plasma bridge). The neutralizers on both spacecraft were operated in eclipse. Results of these operations are presented and spacecraft responses compared.

Purvis, C. K.↗

NASA NTRS1977

Active spacecraft potential control system selection for the Jupiter orbiter with probe mission

It is shown that the high flux of energetic plasma electrons and the reduced photoemission rate in the Jovian environment can result in the spacecraft developing a large negative potential. The effects of the electric fields produced by this charging phenomenon are discussed in terms of spacecraft integrity as well as charged particle and fields measurements. The primary area of concern is shown to be the interaction of the electric fields with the measuring devices on the spacecraft. The need for controlling the potential of the spacecraft is identified, and a system capable of active control of the spacecraft potential in the Jupiter environment is proposed. The desirability of using this system to vary the spacecraft potential relative to the ambient plasma potential is also discussed. Various charged particle release devices are identified as potential candidates for use with the spacecraft potential control system. These devices are evaluated and compared on the basis of system mass, power consumption, and system complexity and reliability.

Beattie, J. R.↗

NASA NTRS1977

A charging model for three-axis stabilized spacecraft

A charging model was developed for geosynchronous, three-axis stabilized spacecraft when under the influence of a geomagnetic substorm. The differential charging potentials between the thermally coated or blanketed outer surfaces and metallic structure of a spacecraft were determined when the spacecraft was immersed in a dense plasma cloud of energetic particles. The spacecraft-to-environment interaction was determined by representing the charged particle environment by equivalent current source forcing functions and by representing the spacecraft by its electrically equivalent circuit with respect to the plasma charging phenomenon. The charging model included a sun/earth/spacecraft orbit model that simulated the sum illumination conditions of the spacecraft outer surfaces throughout the orbital flight on a diurnal as well as a seasonal basis. Transient and steady-state numerical results for a three-axis stabilized spacecraft are presented.

Massaro, M. J.↗

NASA NTRS1983

The drag coefficient of cylindrical spacecraft in orbit at altitudes greater than 150 km

The spacecraft of the Geopotential Research Mission (GRM) are cylindrical in form and designed to fly with their longitudinal axes parallel to their direction of flight. The ratio of length to diameter of these spacecraft is roughly equal to 5.0. Other spacecraft previously flown had corresponding ratios roughly equal to 1.0, and therefore the drag produced by impacts on the lateral surfaces of those spacecraft was not as large as it will be on the GRM spacecraft. Since the drag coefficient is essentially the drag force divided by the frontal area in flight, lateral impacts, when taken into account make the GRM drag coefficient significantly larger than the coefficients used before for shorter spacecraft. A simple formula is derived for the drag coefficient of a cylindrical body flying with its long axis along the direction of flight, and it is used to estimate the drag for the GRM. The formula shows that the drag due to lateral surface impacts depends on the ratio of length-to-diameter and on a coefficient C sub LS (lateral surface impact coefficient) which can be determined from previous cylindrical spacecraft flown with the same attitude, or can be obtained from laboratory measurements of momentum accommodation coefficients.

Herrero, F. A.↗

NASA NTRS1986

Numerical simulation of spacecraft charging by impact-induced plasmas during a cometary flyby

A numerical model is developed for the interaction of a cometary probe, such as Giotto, with its environment, i.e., dust particles and gas. The spacecraft was set on a course to pass the comet at a velocity of 69 km/sec, so a chance existed that a potential field would form around the spacecraft and block lower energy particles from reaching the spacecraft instruments. The motion of electrons and ions is traced as a function of time to examine the evolution of the electric field, electric potential and the total space charge distributions on the surface of the spacecraft and its environment. Account is taken of the density of the particles and gas molecules at various distances from the comet, the collision energies involved, and the Giotto geometry. A solution is defined for the Poisson equation to describe the evolution of the plasma around Giotto, including the effects of ion collisions with the Al bumper protecting the spacecraft. The simulation predicts formation of an ion wake behind Giotto and the evolution of a positive potential on the order of 10 V around the spacecraft, i.e., sufficient for a positive potential barrier near the surface of the spacecraft.

Thiemann, H.↗

NASA NTRS1986

The Venus radar mapper spacecraft design

This paper discusses the driving mission requirements on the VRM spacecraft, the resulting design, and the spacecraft performance capabilities. The spacecraft design is driven by fine pointing requirements for radar mapping resolution, by extremes of thermal environment in the Venus orbit, and by high instrument power requirements. The spacecraft design emphasized use of as much existing hardware and software as possible to meet the cost constraints. Existing design was used where hardware was not already available. The VRM spacecraft utilizes the spare Voyager High Gain Antenna (HGA) and equipment bus, the Galileo computers and power conditioning equipment, and Mariner Medium Gain Antenna (MGA). Further cost savings were possible by using the HGA for both radar mapping at S-band frequency and high rate data playback at X-band frequency. The use of the Star 48 B solid rocket motor for VOI reduced propulsion system cost and complexity. The design tradeoffs that led to the VRM spacecraft configuration and the performance capabilities of the spacecraft are summarized for each subsystem.

Gamber, T.↗

NASA NTRS1989

Advanced Solar-propelled Cargo Spacecraft for Mars Missions

Three concepts for an unmanned, solar powered, cargo spacecraft for Mars support missions were investigated. These spacecraft are designed to carry a 50,000 kg payload from a low Earth orbit to a low Mars orbit. Each design uses a distinctly different propulsion system: A Solar Radiation Absorption (SRA) system, a Solar-Pumped Laser (SPL) system and a solar powered magnetoplasmadynamic (MPD) arc system. The SRA directly converts solar energy to thermal energy in the propellant through a novel process. In the SPL system, a pair of solar-pumped, multi-megawatt, CO2 lasers in sunsynchronous Earth orbit converts solar energy to laser energy. The MPD system used indium phosphide solar cells to convert sunlight to electricity, which powers the propulsion system. Various orbital transfer options are examined for these concepts. In the SRA system, the mother ship transfers the payload into a very high Earth orbit and a small auxiliary propulsion system boosts the payload into a Hohmann transfer to Mars. The SPL spacecraft and the SPL powered spacecraft return to Earth for subsequent missions. The MPD propelled spacecraft, however, remains at Mars as an orbiting space station. A patched conic approximation was used to determine a heliocentric interplanetary transfer orbit for the MPD propelled spacecraft. All three solar-powered spacecraft use an aerobrake procedure to place the payload into a low Mars parking orbit. The payload delivery times range from 160 days to 873 days (2.39 years).

Auziasdeturenne, Jacqueline↗

NASA NTRS1990

A review of nuclear electric propulsion spacecraft system concepts

The last 25-30 years of system concepts and design philosophies for spacecraft employing nuclear-electric propulsion (NEP) are reviewed. NEP spacecraft-system design constraints and criteria are identified, including radiation exposure of humans and electronics, thermal control requirements, effluent contamination of spacecraft surfaces, surface erosion, launch-vehicle integration, operations and safety requirements, attitude control, EM interference, and power control and distribution. The impact on spacecraft design philosophy of these constraints and criteria is explored. Several NEP spacecraft are characterized and discussed with respect to the propulsion system used. The electric propulsion system catagories are electrothermal (arcjet), EM (magnetoplasmadynamic and pulsed-inductive thruster) and electrostatic (ion engine). A brief summary of the mission, nuclear power source, electric propulsion system, and spacecraft configuration are provided for each NEP spacecraft concept.

Deininger, W. D.↗

NASA NTRS1991

SHARP: Automated monitoring of spacecraft health and status

Briefly discussed here are the spacecraft and ground systems monitoring process at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL). Some of the difficulties associated with the existing technology used in mission operations are highlighted. A new automated system based on artificial intelligence technology is described which seeks to overcome many of these limitations. The system, called the Spacecraft Health Automated Reasoning Prototype (SHARP), is designed to automate health and status analysis for multi-mission spacecraft and ground data systems operations. The system has proved to be effective for detecting and analyzing potential spacecraft and ground systems problems by performing real-time analysis of spacecraft and ground data systems engineering telemetry. Telecommunications link analysis of the Voyager 2 spacecraft was the initial focus for evaluation of the system in real-time operations during the Voyager spacecraft encounter with Neptune in August 1989.

Atkinson, David J.↗

NASA NTRS1990

SHARP - Automated monitoring of spacecraft health and status

Briefly discussed here are the spacecraft and ground systems monitoring process at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL). Some of the difficulties associated with the existing technology used in mission operations are highlighted. A new automated system based on artificial intelligence technology is described which seeks to overcome many of these limitations. The system, called the Spacecraft Health Automated Reasoning Prototype (SHARP), is designed to automate health and status analysis for multi-mission spacecraft and ground data systems operations. The system has proved to be effective for detecting and analyzing potential spacecraft and ground systems problems by performing real-time analysis of spacecraft and ground data systems engineering telemetry. Telecommunications link analysis of the Voyager 2 spacecraft was the initial focus for evaluation of the system in real-time operations during the Voyager spacecraft encounter with Neptune in August 1989.

Atkinson, David J.↗