SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “mission objectives”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 289 records · Page 16

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2013

Mission Design Evaluation Using Automated Planning for High Resolution Imaging of Dynamic Surface Processes from the ISS

A challenge for any proposed mission is to demonstrate convincingly that the proposed systems will in fact deliver the science promised. Funding agencies and mission design personnel are becoming ever more skeptical of the abstractions that form the basis of the current state of the practice with respect to approximating science return. To address this, we have been using automated planning and scheduling technology to provide actual coverage campaigns that provide better predictive performance with respect to science return for a given mission design and set of mission objectives given implementation uncertainties. Specifically, we have applied an adaptation of ASPEN and SPICE to the Eagle-Eye domain that demonstrates the performance of the mission design with respect to coverage of science imaging targets that address climate change and disaster response. Eagle-Eye is an Earth-imaging telescope that has been proposed to fly aboard the International Space Station (ISS).

International Space Station↗

NASA NTRS2020

IV&V Assurance Case Design for Artemis II

As human-rated missions like those in NASA’s Artemis program continue to grow in both size and complexity, and the role of software in achieving mission objectives expands dramatically, NASA’s Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) Teams face evolving challenges in assuring the safety and performance of the safety- and mission-critical embedded software that is essential to landing astronauts on the surface of the Moon by 2024. Key among these challenges is IV&V’s desire to present a cohesive, integrated assurance statement to its stakeholders that encapsulates and summarizes our assurance positions across the integrated Artemis systems and their combined role in support of a safe and successful flight. In order to meet this challenge, the IV&V Teams have begun a transition to using formal assurance case concepts and documentation in the Goal Structuring Notation (GSN) to build an argument in support of software assurance. IV&V recognizes significant benefits to the logical argumentation structure provided by assurance cases and GSN over our current practices for documenting and managing assurance claims. In order to reap these benefits, IV&V is integrating the use of assurance case concepts with our paradigm of follow-the-risk capability based assurance. Because of this, assurance cases created and used by IV&V are distinct from the sort of assurance case created by a development project or embedded software assurance organization. IV&V’s assurance cases depend much less upon standards and regulations, and more on evidence captured by IV&V regarding the environment, requirements, design, and implementation. IV&V constructs an independent network of claims based on an independent decomposition of arguments. Based upon the risk posture of these claims and their associated software and software artifacts, IV&V then develops and executes engineering analyses and testing, which provide evidence to either support or refute the claim. This emerging risk-informed assurance case methodology is being put into practice as IV&V plans for support of the Artemis II mission, the first flight of the Orion capsule and Space Launch System with astronauts on board.

Gerek Whitman↗

NASA NTRS2020

IV&V Assurance Case Design for Artemis II

As human-rated missions like those in NASA's Artemis program continue to grow in both size and complexity, and the role of software in achieving mission objectives expands dramatically, NASA's Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) Teams face evolving challenges in assuring the safety and performance of the safety- and mission-critical embedded software that is essential to landing astronauts on the surface of the Moon by 2024. Key among these challenges is IV&V's desire to present a cohesive, integrated assurance statement to its stakeholders that encapsulates and summarizes our assurance positions across the integrated Artemis systems and their combined role in support of a safe and successful flight. In order to meet this challenge, the IV&V Teams have begun a transition to using formal assurance case concepts and documentation in the Goal Structuring Notation (GSN) to build an argument in support of software assurance. IV&V recognizes significant benefits to the logical argumentation structure provided by assurance cases and GSN over our current practices for documenting and managing assurance claims. In order to reap these benefits, IV&V is integrating the use of assurance case concepts with our paradigm of follow-the-risk capability based assurance. Because of this, assurance cases created and used by IV&V are distinct from the sort of assurance case created by a development project or embedded software assurance organization. IV&V's assurance cases depend much less upon standards and regulations, and more on evidence captured by IV&V regarding the environment, requirements, design, and implementation. IV&V constructs an independent network of claims based on an independent decomposition of arguments. Based upon the risk posture of these claims and their associated software and software artifacts, IV&V then develops and executes engineering analyses and testing, which provide evidence to either support or refute the claim. This emerging risk-informed assurance case methodology is being put into practice as IV&V plans for support of the Artemis II mission, the first flight of the Orion capsule and Space Launch System with astronauts on board.

Whitman, Gerek↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Centers and Universities Collaborate in Annual Smallsat Technology Partnerships

The Small Spacecraft Technology program within the NASA Space Technology Mission Directorate sponsors the Smallsat Technology Partnerships (STP) initiative. The STP initiative awards cooperative agreements between NASA centers and university teams for technology development efforts that advance the capabilities of small spacecraft to achieve NASA mission objectives in unique and more affordable ways. NASA’s announcement to return humans to the Moon by 2024 raises new opportunities for Smallsats to contribute to missions in cislunar space, though technical challenges are to be overcome to establish their value in this environment. Precursor missions utilizing small spacecraft will blaze the trail for lunar exploration, establishing infrastructure such as communication and navigation networks, and performing assembly and repair services for larger structures and human habitats. To achieve these goals, certain novel Smallsat technologies will need to be developed and demonstrated. The 2020 STP solicitation sought proposals for specific technologies to enable these lunar missions. For the 2020 STP cycle, NASA selected nine university teams to mature new systems and capabilities in the laboratory, and in some cases, demonstrate in suborbital or orbital spaceflights. This paper describes the STP portfolio, past and present efforts, and the nine partnerships selected.

James J. Cockrell↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center’s Distributed Systems Missions Architecture

Space and Earth Science are being transformed by applying a distributed approach to missions, where the fusion of data from components, systems, instruments, models, and observation locations works in concert with timely responses and feedback mechanisms to multiply the knowledge obtained. Additionally, a disaggregated approach allows for a distributed cost and schedule that can be shared across multiple organizations to enable the greater mission. With the advances in reduced size, weight, and power for space-worthy components leading to the revolution in smaller spacecraft, the cost and timeliness proposition for launching multiple space assets has also greatly improved. Thus, the aerospace industry is undergoing a paradigm shift toward a proliferation of small satellites as a networked approach to meet mission objectives. This paper will describe the impetus, goal, and path to provide an openly available framework as a unifying catalyst for broad-ranging Distributed Systems Missions (DSMs) contributors.

Distributed Systems↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center’s Distributed Systems Missions Architecture

Distributed Systems↗

NASA NTRS1997

NASA X-34 Technology in Motion

The X-34 technology development program is a joint industry/government project to develop, test, and operate a small, fully-reusable hypersonic flight vehicle. The objective is to demonstrate key technologies and operating concepts applicable to future reusable launch vehicles. Integrated in the vehicle are various systems to assure successful completion of mission objectives, including the Main Propulsion System (MPS). NASA-Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) is responsible for developing the X-34's MPS including the design and complete build package for the propulsion system components. The X-34 will be powered by the Fastrac Engine, which is currently in design and development at NASA-MSFC. Fastrac is a single-stage main engine, which burns a mixture of liquid oxygen (LOX) and kerosene(RP-1). The interface between the MPS and Fastrac engine are critical for proper system operation and technologies applicable to future reusable launch vehicles. Deneb's IGRIP software package with the Dynamic analysis option provided a key tool for conducting studies critical to this interface as well as a mechanism to drive the design of the LOX and RP-1 feedlines. Kinematic models were created for the Fastrac Engine and the feedlines for various design concepts. Based on the kinematic simulation within Envision, design and joint limits were verified and system interference controlled. It was also critical to the program to evaluate the effect of dynamic loads visually, providing a verification tool for dynamic analysis and in some cases uncovering areas that had not been considered. Deneb's software put the X-34 technology in motion and has been a key factor in facilitating the strenuous design schedule.

Beech, Geoffrey↗

NASA NTRS2019

Agile Approach to Assuring the Safety-Critical Embedded Software for NASA's Orion Spacecraft

Human-rated missions like NASA's Exploration Mission - 1 (EM-1) and the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle are becoming exceedingly complex in terms of software's contribution to achieving mission objectives. The increasing complexity and inherent safety critical nature of the embedded flight software imposes a unique resource challenge to assurance providers responsible for affirming that the mission is going to fly safely. Another challenge NASA and other Government agencies are facing is that more and more software is being developed using an agile development methodology, which is divergent from the typical waterfall, iterative, and incremental development methodologies assurance providers generally observe in the development of safety-critical embedded software. Orion Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) has addressed these challenges by providing focused assurance results of critical mission capabilities prioritized by a dynamic assessment of risk level. Prior to this approach, Orion IV&V evaluated areas of risk in much broader, and more static, terms. Due to the agile software development life cycle that Orion follows, IV&V findings were often reported months out of phase with the developer thereby imposing increased rework costs. As a result of evolving the approach to adding assurance on Orion, IV&V is able to incrementally deliver high-priority assurance conclusions and more impactful issues more in phase with the developer activities, thereby increasing the value of the findings to the project. The agile IV&V approach employed by the Orion IV&V team strives to achieve a cadence of delivery that matches the pace of development. This agile approach provides increased flexibility for the assurance provider to become more efficient in reporting assurance conclusions and issues. This paper and presentation will discuss the principles which drive the design of our approach, results to date, and stimulate thinking for groups looking to add assurance to software being developed using an agile methodology.

Justin Smith↗

NASA NTRS2022

Assurance Equations: A Cost and Criticality Model for Optimizing Quality Assurance Surveillance

The cost of quality vs cost of failure correction has been a long-running topic of discussion within the Aerospace community. It leads directly to concepts of “risk tolerance”, and risk-based decision-making. It would be valuable if there was a way to compute the optimal investment in customer-executed quality assurance activities using defect significance with respect to performance objectives, the activities’ defect detection effectiveness, and the cost-penalty for late discovery of impactful defects. This optimization is particularly of interest to projects whose budget constraints significantly limit their risk management options.The cost to fix defects (i.e., failure correction) escalates as the project matures. There have been studies attempting to determine the relative cost of fixing defects discovered during various phases of a project life cycle with important implications, all of which suggest growth factors are large. The commonly referred to 1:10:100 rule represents a cost multiplier for repair/rework across the Design to Fab to Test hardware development phases. Cost premiums for QA activities also accumulate when they are treated as mandatory (due to schedule drag) or are performed later than their assigned phase.This paper describes the modeling of development phase -dependencies in the conduct of typical customer-executed quality assurance activities. Our initial modeling encompasses:• Distinct phases of the production lifecycle• Multiple kinds of Defects, each with some a-priori likelihood of being present• Each defect’s impact on performance Objectives for a type of hardware• The cost and efficacy of assurance techniques at detecting such Defects• The costs of fixing those Defects detected in a given phase of the production lifecycleThe model captures assurance activities’ abilities to Detect defects. Upon detection it is assumed that the Defect is immediately fixed. Defects that “escape” detection by some activity may thereafter be detected by a later activity, but by then the cost of fixing the Defect may have escalated. Defects are related to the performance Objectives they would detract from, were those Defects to remain present in the operating system.We have constructed and are exploring, a model that relates the importance of hardware system elements to mission objectives, the impact of types of Defects on those hardware types, the cost of customer-executed assurance activities (i.e., supplier controls) and their effectiveness towards reducing an impactful quality escape, and the cost of Defect correction across production phase. We describe the approach taken to select the key model aspects, why they are relevant to our NASA mission, and our efforts to populate it with relevant and contemporary data. We use a notional example to illustrate model design and function.

Plante, Jeannette↗

NASA NTRS1989

Space Shuttle to deploy Magellan planetary science mission

The objectives of Space Shuttle Mission STS-30 are described along with major flight activities, prelaunch and launch operations, trajectory sequence of events, and landing and post-landing operations. The primary objective of STS-30 is to successfully deploy the Magellan spacecraft into low earth orbit. Following deployment, Magellan will be propelled to its Venus trajectory by an Inertial Upper Stage booster. The objectives of the Magellan mission are to obtain radar images of more than 70 percent of Venus' surface, a near-global topographic map, and near-global gravity field data. Secondary STS-30 payloads include the Fluids Experiment Apparatus (FEA) and the Mesoscale Lightning Experiment (MLE).

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1975

Apollo Soyuz Mission: 5-Day Report

The Apollo Soyuz Test Project mission objectives and technical investigations are summarized. Topics discussed include: spacecraft and crew systems performance; joint flight activities; scientific and applications experiments; in-flight demonstrations; biomedical considerations; and mission support performance.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2004

Autonomous and Autonomic Systems: A Paradigm for Future Space Exploration Missions

NASA increasingly will rely on autonomous systems concepts, not only in the mission control centers on the ground, but also on spacecraft and on rovers and other assets on extraterrestrial bodies. Automomy enables not only reduced operations costs, But also adaptable goal-driven functionality of mission systems. Space missions lacking autonomy will be unable to achieve the full range of advanced mission objectives, given that human control under dynamic environmental conditions will not be feasible due, in part, to the unavoidably high signal propagation latency and constrained data rates of mission communications links. While autonomy cost-effectively supports accomplishment of mission goals, autonomicity supports survivability of remote mission assets, especially when human tending is not feasible. Autonomic system properties (which ensure self-configuring, self-optimizing self-healing, and self-protecting behavior) conceptually may enable space missions of a higher order into any previously flown. Analysis of two NASA agent-based systems previously prototyped, and of a proposed future mission involving numerous cooperating spacecraft, illustrates how autonomous and autonomic system concepts may be brought to bear on future space missions.

Truszkowski, Walter F.↗

NASA NTRS2011

Space Shuttle Ascent Flight Design Process: Evolution and Lessons Learned

The Space Shuttle Ascent Flight Design team is responsible for defining a launch to orbit trajectory profile that satisfies all programmatic mission objectives and defines the ground and onboard reconfiguration requirements for this high-speed and demanding flight phase. This design, verification and reconfiguration process ensures that all applicable mission scenarios are enveloped within integrated vehicle and spacecraft certification constraints and criteria, and includes the design of the nominal ascent profile and trajectory profiles for both uphill and ground-to-ground aborts. The team also develops a wide array of associated training, avionics flight software verification, onboard crew and operations facility products. These key ground and onboard products provide the ultimate users and operators the necessary insight and situational awareness for trajectory dynamics, performance and event sequences, abort mode boundaries and moding, flight performance and impact predictions for launch vehicle stages for use in range safety, and flight software performance. These products also provide the necessary insight to or reconfiguration of communications and tracking systems, launch collision avoidance requirements, and day of launch crew targeting and onboard guidance, navigation and flight control updates that incorporate the final vehicle configuration and environment conditions for the mission. Over the course of the Space Shuttle Program, ascent trajectory design and mission planning has evolved in order to improve program flexibility and reduce cost, while maintaining outstanding data quality. Along the way, the team has implemented innovative solutions and technologies in order to overcome significant challenges. A number of these solutions may have applicability to future human spaceflight programs.

Picka, Bret A.↗

NASA NTRS2017

A Case Study of Productivity Challenges in Mars Science Laboratory Operations

Achieving consistently high levels of productivity has been a challenge for Mars surface missions. While the rovers have made major discoveries and dramatically increased our understanding of Mars, they often require a great deal of effort from the operations teams and achieving mission objectives can take longer than anticipated. We conducted an in-depth case study of Mars Science Laboratory operations in order to identify the productivity challenges facing surface missions. In this paper, we describe how we performed the case study and analyzed the data. We present and discuss the significant productivity challenges we identified during the study. In addition to informing future surface exploration missions, the study is relevant for a wide range of applications in which operators must interact with a robotic system with limited communication opportunities.

Gaines, Daniel↗

NASA NTRS2014

AztechSat-1, a First Collaborative CubeSat Between NASA and Mexico

An international collaboration program for capacity building in space technology is being established between NASA and the Mexican Space Agency (AEM). Its objective is to develop a series of CubeSats collaboratively in a way that benefits both agencies. For AEM, this experience will support the development of human capital required for its space program. This project provides an opportunity for NASA future missions to benefit from commercially available technologies demonstrated in space. AEM was recently created by the Mexican Government to use and develop space technology in Mexico. Current AEM plans call for having the capability of developing its own communication satellites by 2030, so the need for having a Mexican cadre of space experts is mandatory. The program will start with the development and launching of AztechSat-1, the first AEM CubeSat project to be deployed from the International Space Station (ISS). Several public Mexican universities will participate in this project to demonstrate GlobalStar, a satellite communications provider using a constellation of LEO satellites, as an option for small satellite missions. AztechSat-1 mission objectives are:(1) Develop a flight ready CubeSat for deployment from the ISS; (2) Demonstrate GlobalStar´s Network as a method to advance communications in CubeSat missions. AztechSat-1 is envisioned as a 1U CubeSat and will be designed and constructed by Mexican graduate students from two major universities in Mexico: UNAM and IPN. The students will be mentored and supervised by researchers from NASA Ames Research Center (NARC). Flight acceptance tests are going to be done both at Mexican university labs as well as at NARC. Funding for the project will be provided concurrently by AEM, the Mexican participating universities, and other Mexican entities. The development of AztechSat-1 will emphasize the transfer of knowledge in space mission analysis and design, flight acceptance testing and other areas of space technology which are not well developed in Mexico yet. Mexican students will benefit from their mentoring from NASA researchers and will provide a multiplier effect in the development of the next generation of Mexican aerospace engineers. AztechSat-1 will be developed in a period of twelve months and will be launched by late 2015. AztechSat´s success will define the future of collaboration between NASA and AEM in capacity building. A plan for developing a series of AztechSat’s in a one per year basis, with increasing capabilities and complexity is currently being negotiated between NASA an AEM.

Martinez, Andres↗

NASA NTRS1983

Preliminary scientific results from the first six months of the infrared astronomy satellite (IRAS)

The Infrared Astronomy Satellite (IRAS) was successfully launched on 25 January 1983. The goals of this joint U.S., Dutch, and British project were twofold. The first, and most important, goal was to perform an unbiased all-sky survey at wavelengths of 12, 25, 60, and 100 microns to establish the importance of infrared emission in the energy balance of the universe, to map the diffuse emission from the Galaxy and the material in the solar system, and to obtain low resolution spectra of the brightest sources identified at 12 and 25 microns. A second mission objective was to study specific known astronomical objects in more detail to gain higher sensitivity or higher spatial resolution than that achievable by normal survey observations. The satellite is now seven months into its one year mission life, and survey operations are exceeding prelaunch expectations. The initial all-sky survey was completed on 26 August 1983. In the last four months of the mission a second all-sky survey will be conducted to enhance the survey completeness. A previous paper in the proceedings of this conference (Low et al., 1983) has described the design and performance of the satellite. In this paper a description is provided of some of the early scientific results from the IRAS mission.

Soifer, B. T.↗

NASA NTRS2007

Propulsion Technology Needs for Exploration

The objectives of currently planned exploration efforts, as well as those further in the future, require significant advancements in propulsion technologies. The current Lunar exploration architecture has set goals and mission objectives that necessitate the use of new systems and the extension of existing technologies beyond present applications. In the near term, the majority of these technologies are the result of a need to apply high performing cryogenic propulsion systems to long duration in-space applications. Advancement of cryogenic propulsion to these applications is crucial to provide higher performing propulsion systems that reduce the vehicle masses; enhance the safety of vehicle systems and ground operations; and provide a path for In-situ Resource Utilization (ISRU).Use of a LOX/LH2 main propulsion system for Lunar Lander Descent is a top priority because more conventional storable propellants are far from meeting the performance needs of the current architecture. While LOX/LH2 pump feed engines have been used in flight applications for many years, these engines have limited throttle capabilities. Engines that are capable of much greater throttling while still meeting high performance goals are a necessity to achieving exploration goals. Applications of LOX/CH4 propulsion to Lander ascent propulsion systems and reaction control systems are also if interest because of desirable performance and operations improvements over conventional storable systems while being more suitable for use of in-situ produced propellants. Within the current lunar architecture, use of cryogenic propulsion for the Earth Departure Stage and Lunar Lander elements also necessitate the need for advanced Cryogenic Fluid Management technologies. These technologies include long duration propellant storage/distribution, low-gravity propellant management, cryogenic couplings and disconnects, light weight composite tanks and support structure, and subsystem integration. In addition to the propulsive and fluid management system technologies described, many component level technologies are also required to enable to the success if the integrated systems. The components include, but are not limited to, variable/throttling valves, variable position actuators, leak detectors, light weight cryogenic fluid pumps, sensor technology and others. NASA, partnering with the Aerospace Industry must endeavor to develop these, and other promising propulsion technologies, to enable the implements of the country's goals in exploration of the Moon, Mars and beyond.

Brown, Thomas↗

NASA NTRS2024

Assessing the Number of Crew for Mars Against Trade Space Parameters

Missions to Mars will differ from all previous human spaceflight missions in that the onboard crew of astronauts will be required to operate in an Earth-independent manner given the long communication delays on Mars missions. Without a systematic, repeatable process to determine the number and composition of crew necessary to successfully accomplish these missions, NASA increases the risk in that crew sizes may be too small to meet primary mission objectives under nominal conditions and, more consequentially, the crewmembers may not have the expertise needed to successfully respond to unforeseen failures without the real-time expertise in the Mission Control Central (MCC) team on which NASA has come to rely. We present a framework for trade space analysis along with results from human-performance models developed in IMPRINT. We discuss the implications of model results on the trade space for number of crew for missions to Mars. This work was funded by the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) with support from NASA’s Human Research Program (HRP).

Donna Dempsey↗