Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Error Vector Measurements”

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.

295 records · Page 17
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2002

The 1999 Hector Mine Earthquake, Southern California: Vector Near-Field Displacements from ERS InSAR

Two components of fault slip are uniquely determined from two line-of-sight (LOS) radar interferograms by assuming that the fault-normal component of displacement is zero. We use this approach with ascending and descending interferograms from the ERS satellites to estimate surface slip along the Hector Mine earthquake rupture. The LOS displacement is determined by visually counting fringes to within 1 km of the outboard ruptures. These LOS estimates and uncertainties are then transformed into strike- and dip-slip estimates and uncertainties; the transformation is singular for a N-S oriented fault and optimal for an E-W oriented fault. In contrast to our previous strike-slip estimates, which were based only on a descending interferogram, we now find good agreement with the geological measurements, except at the ends of the rupture. The ascending interferogram reveals significant west-sidedown dip-slip (approximately 1.0 m) which reduces the strike-slip estimates by 1 to 2 m, especially along the northern half of the rupture. A spike in the strike-slip displacement of 6 m is observed in central part of the rupture. This large offset is confirmed by subpixel cross correlation of features in the before and after amplitude images. In addition to strike slip and dip slip, we identify uplift and subsidence along the fault, related to the restraining and releasing bends in the fault trace, respectively. Our main conclusion is that at least two look directions are required for accurate estimates of surface slip even along a pure strike-slip fault. Models and results based only on a single look direction could have major errors. Our new estimates of strike slip and dip slip along the rupture provide a boundary condition for dislocation modeling. A simple model, which has uniform slip to a depth of 12 km, shows good agreement with the observed ascending and descending interferograms.

Sandwell, David T.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Early Information Parameter-Set Analysis for Satellite Close Approaches using Machine Learning

Understanding orbital mechanics is essential in space flight and navigation applications, and leveraging modern force models for flight path projection remains an important aspect in space mission design and operation. However, force models do not capture all the dynamics or perturbations in the space environment and thus are subject to errors in predicting the state vectors. The further out the predicted miss distance between spacecraft is from the time of closest approach (TCA), the larger the propagated errors in the predicted miss distance at TCA is. The dependency on these force models for spacecraft flight state prediction calls for a more reliable method that can quantify, or even reduce, these propagated errors. With recent advances in the field artificial intelligence, specifically in machine and deep learning algorithms, a model that implements these approaches can improve on the modern force model approach. The goal for this work is to provide an early-information decision-making threshold, in order to prioritize risk assessment implementation, given the ongoing increase of space objects. In analyzing the relationship of several parameters from conjunction data messages(CDMs) and solar information, early information becomes viable in miss distance prediction with unsupervised learning techniques, which learn the parameters that are linked together with miss distance and probability of collision (Pc) variables. Another approach implemented for identifying relationships within CDMs is supervised learning, in which a shallow neural network binary classifier learns to distinguish events with Pc values¡108. These parameters detected in the unsupervised process are then applied to a regression neural network, which predicts the miss distance at TCA for a specific event within a given uncertainty bound. For the regression neural network, a Long Short Term Memory (LSTM) neural network is implemented, which yields memory about each time step in an event. Using an LSTM network, the model learns to predict miss distance within 0.2km of the value measured at TCA. Although there is a limited amount of "close miss" data to train a network, the network learns to associate parameters, like large energy dissipation rates with the secondary object, with an elevated Pc

Brianna I. Robertson↗
NASA NTRS2011

Solar Dynamics Observatory Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Overview

The Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) was designed and built at the Goddard Space Flight Center, launched from Cape Canaveral on February 11, 2010, and reached its final geosynchronous science orbit on March 16, 2010. The purpose of SDO is to observe the Sun and continuously relay data to a dedicated ground station. SDO remains Sun-pointing throughout most of its mission for the instruments to take measurements of the Sun. The SDO attitude control system (ACS) is a single-fault tolerant design. Its fully redundant attitude sensor complement includes sixteen coarse Sun sensors (CSSs), a digital Sun sensor (DSS), three two-axis inertial reference units (IRUs), and two star trackers (STs). The ACS also makes use of the four guide telescopes included as a part of one of the science instruments. Attitude actuation is performed using four reaction wheels assemblies (RWAs) and eight thrusters, with a single main engine used to provide velocity-change thrust for orbit raising. The attitude control software has five nominal control modes, three wheel-based modes and two thruster-based modes. A wheel-based Safehold running in the attitude control electronics box improves the robustness of the system as a whole. All six modes are designed on the same basic proportional-integral-derivative attitude error structure, with more robust modes setting their integral gains to zero. This paper details the final overall design of the SDO guidance, navigation, and control (GN&C) system and how it was used in practice during SDO launch, commissioning, and nominal operations. This overview will include the ACS control modes, attitude determination and sensor calibration, the high gain antenna (HGA) calibration, and jitter mitigation operation. The Solar Dynamics Observatory mission is part of the NASA Living With a Star program, which seeks to understand the changing Sun and its effects on the Solar System, life, and society. To this end, the SDO spacecraft carries three Sun-observing instruments: Helioseismic and Magnetic Imager (HMI), led by Stanford University; Atmospheric Imaging Assembly (AIA), led by Lockheed Martin Space and Astrophysics Laboratory; and Extreme Ultraviolet Variability Experiment (EVE), led by the University of Colorado. The basic mission is to observe the Sun for a very high percentage of the 5-year mission (10-year goal) with long stretches of uninterrupted observations and with constant, high-data-rate transmission to a dedicated ground station to be located in White Sands, New Mexico. These goals guided the design of the spacecraft bus that will carry and service the three-instrument payload. Overarching design goals for the bus are geosynchronous orbit, near-constant Sun observations with the ability to fly through eclipses, and constant HGA contact with the dedicated ground station. A three-axis stabilized ACS is needed both to point at the Sun accurately and to keep the roll about the Sun vector correctly positioned with respect to the solar north pole. This roll control is especially important for the magnetic field imaging of HM I. The mission requirements have several general impacts on the ACS design. Both the AIA and HMI instruments are very sensitive to the blurring caused by jitter. Each has an image stabilization system (ISS) with some ability to filter out high frequency motion, but below the bandwidth of the ISS the control system must compensate for disturbances within the ACS bandwidth or avoid exciting jitter at higher frequencies. Within the ACS bandwidth, the control requirement imposed by AIA is to place the center of the solar disk no more than 2 arc sec, 3 , from a body-defined target based on one of the GTs that accompany the instrument. This body-defined target, called the science reference boresight (SRB), was determined from the postlaunch orientation of the GTs by averaging the bounding telescope boresights for pitch to get a pitch SRB coordinate, and by averaging the bounding boresights for yaw toet the yaw SRB coordinate. The location of this SRB in the 0.5-deg field-of-view for each GT then becomes the central target for each telescope; one GT is selected for use as the ACS controlling guide telescope (CGT) at any given time. Fine Sun-pointing is effected based on this SRB for all three instruments when the Sun is within the linear range of the CGT. In addition to limiting jitter, HMI science requires averaging several observations, making the instrument sensitive to low frequency motion that induces differential motion between each observation. This requires the spacecraft attitude to be stable about the roll axis to approximately 10 arcsec over a ten-minute period. Instrument calibrations require that the spacecraft point the SRB up to 2.5 degrees in pitch and yaw away from the center of the Sun, placing the Sun outside the field-of-view of the guide telescopes. In such instances, when the GTs cannot provide the definitive target for the ACS, on-board attitude determination combined with ephemeris prediction of the Sun direction must provide the definitive target. EVE is capable of observing the Sun with less dependence on attitude control. However, the ground data processing needs for calibrations result in the most strict attitude knowledge requirements for the mission: [35,70,70] arcsec, 3 , of knowledge with respect to the center of the solar disk. In addition to driving the ACS sensor selection, the knowledge requirements, which have their effect primarily during Inertial mode calibrations, drive the accuracy requirements for the solar ephemeris. The need to achieve and maintain geosynchronous orbit (GEO) drove the need for high-efficiency propulsive systems and appropriate attitude control. The main engine provided high specific impulse for the maneuvers to attain GEO, while the smaller ACS thrusters managed the disturbance torques of the larger engine and provided the capability for much smaller adjustment burns on orbit. SDO s large solar profile means that solar radiation pressure is a large torque disturbance, and the momentum buildup from this disturbance and the GEO altitude drives the ACS to use thrusters to manage vehicle momentum. The demanding data capture budget for the mission, however, requires SDO to avoid frequent thruster maneuvers, while concerns about on-orbit jitter restrict the maximum desired wheel speeds desired from the RWAs. The plan for on-orbit wheel speed and momentum management will be discussed as well as what is now being done in operation after the jitter environment was characterized. The SDO ACS hardware complement is single-fault tolerant. Two main processors carry virtually identical copies of the command and data handling and ACS software, and two identical attitude control electronics (ACE) boxes carry Coldfire processors with contingency ACS software and other hardware interface cards; the ACE structure allows reaction wheels to be commanded by the Sun-pointing Safehold independent of the Mil Std 1553 data bus. The sixteen Adcole CSSs are grouped into primary and backup sets of eight sensors, each set providing the ability to calculate a sun vector. Each set of eight eyes provides full 4 -steradian coverage. The Adcole DSS comprises an optics head and a separate electronics box providing a 1553 data interface. The electronics box is mounted inside the Faraday cage created by the spacecraft bus module. The DSS head with its 32- deg square FOV is mounted on the instrument module with its boresight along the spacecraft X axis, nearly aligned with the Sun during observations. Adcole has designed the DSS calibration parameters so that the accuracy is 0.24 arcminutes within 10 deg of the boresight, and diminishes to 3 arcminutes as the Sun moves towards the edges of its FOV . This DSS calibration scheme provides higher accuracy attitude determination over the range of the instrument calibration maneuvers.

Morgenstern, Wendy M.↗
NASA NTRS1996

The alpha Centauri Line of Sight: D/H Ratio, Physical Properties of Local Interstellar Gas, and Measurement of Heated Hydrogen (The 'Hydrogen Wall') Near the Heliopause

We analyze high-resolution spectra of the nearby (1.34 pc) stars alpha Cen A (G2 V) and alpha Cen B (K1 V), which were obtained with the Goddard High Resolution Spectrograph on the Hubble Space Telescope. The observations consist of echelle spectra of the Mg II 2800 A and Fe II 2599 A resonance lines and the Lyman-alpha lines of hydrogen and deuterium. The interstellar gas has a velocity (v = - 18.0 +/- 0.2 km/s) consistent with the local flow vector proposed for this line of sight by Lailement & Berlin (1992). The temperature and nonthermal velocity inferred from the Fe II, Mg II, and D I line profiles are T = 5400 +/- 500 K and xi = 1.20 +/- 0.25 km/s, respectively. However, single-component fits to the H I Lyman-alpha lines yield a Doppler parameter (b(sub HI) = 11.80 km/s) that implies a significantly warmer temperature of 8350 K, and the velocity of the H I absorption (v = - 15.8 +/- 0.2 km/s) is redshifted by about 2.2 km/s with respect to the Fe II, Mg II, and D I lines. The one-component model of the interstellar gas suggests natural logarithm N base HI = 18.03 +/- 0.01 and D/H = (5.7 +/- 0.2) x 10(exp -6) . These parameters lead to a good fit to the observed spectra, but this model does not explain the higher temperature and redshift of H I relative to the other interstellar lines. The most sensible way to resolve the discrepancy between H(I) and the other lines is to add a second absorption component to the H(I) lines. This second component is hotter (T approx. equals 30,000 K), is redshifted relative to the primary component by 2-4 km/s, and has a column density too low to be detected in the Fe(II), Mg(II), and D(I) lines. We propose that the gas responsible for this component is located near the heliopause, consisting of the heated H I gas from the interstellar medium that is compressed by the solar wind. This so-called 'hydrogen wall' is predicted by recent multifluid gasdynamical models of the interstellar gas and solar wind interaction. Our data provide the first measurements of the temperature and column density of H(I) in the hydrogen wall. After considering the effects that a corresponding hydrogen wall around alpha Cen would have on our analysis, our best estimates for the parameters of the solar hydrogen wall are natural log N(sup (2))(H(I)) = 14.74 +/- 0.24, b(sup (2))(H(I)) = 21.9 +/- 1.7 km/s (corresponding to T = 29,000 +/- 5000 K), and v(sup (2))(H(I)) greater than -16km/s. Unfortunately, the existence of this heated H(I) reduces our ability to compute the H(I) column density of the interstellar medium accurately because, with slight alterations to our assumed stellar Lyman-alpha profiles, we discovered that acceptable two-component fits also exist with natural log N(H(I))approx. 17.6. We, therefore, quote large error bars for the H I column density along the alpha Cen line of sight, natural log N(H(I)) = 17.80 +/- 0.30. For this range in N(H(I)), n(H(I)) = 0.15 /cu.cm (+/- a factor of 2) and D/H = (0.5-1.9) x 10(exp -5). This is the first direct measurement of the H(I) density in a local cloud and allows us to predict the distance from the Sun to the edge of the local cloud along various lines of sight. This range in D/H is consistent with the value D/H = 1.6 x 10(exp -5) previously derived for the Capella and Procyon lines of sight. We cannot tell whether D/H ratio varies or is constant in the local interstellar medium, but we do find that the D(I)/Mg(II) ratio for the alpha Cen line of sight is about 4 times smaller than for the Capella and Procyon lines of sight. Therefore, either D/H or the Mg depletion varies significantly over distance scales of only a few parsecs.

Linsky, Jeffrey L.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Understanding and Utilizing PBL Height Data from Multiple Observing Systems in the GEOS System

The accuracy of PBL height simulation is a key issue in many applications including forecasting near surface meteorology and air quality, however, it is a very challenging problem due to the lack of not only comprehensive, global Planetary Boundary Layer (PBL) observations but also a strategy and infrastructure to utilize PBL height data from a variety of sensors. Following the designation of PBL as an incubation class observable in the 2017 Decadal Survey, the PBL Incubation Study Team Report [14] made clear that “a future global PBL observing system requires modeling and data assimilation as essential components.” There is an urgent need for global modeling development in order to utilize Program of Record (POR) observations, assess their impacts, and identify gaps to be filled by future PBL missions. Our overall objective is to develop PBL data assimilation capabilities in the NASA Global Earth Observing System (GEOS), focusing on PBL height from multiple observing systems, to support the assessment and use of future PBL observations. The NASA GEOS system is composed of the GEOS global atmospheric general circulation model (AGCM) and the atmospheric data assimilation system (ADAS). The PBL parameterizations include the “Lock” K-profile scheme driven by surface and cloud-top buoyancy fluxes ([4]), and the “Louis” local scheme for stable conditions based on the Richardson number ([5]). Above the mixed layer defined by the Lock surface plume, shallow cumulus convection is represented by the mass flux scheme of [9]. Additional parameterizations are summarized in [1]. The ADAS employs the hybrid 4D Ensemble- Variational (EnVar) configuration ([15]), with the ensemble providing flow-dependent background error covariance information. The resultant analysis increments are fed back to the forecast model through the 4D incremental analysis update (IAU) approach ([11]). In this study, PBL height data are being or have been generated from radiosondes, GNSS RO, satellite (CATS, CALIPSO and ICESat-2) and ground-based (MPLNET) lidars, and wind profiler. Investigations have been conducted to specify quality marks for PBL height retrievals for the data assimilation purpose. These PBL height data have different strengths and weaknesses ([2], [3], [6], [7], [8], [10]), and the satellite PBL height data provide better global coverage and complement in-situ PBL height data. Radiosondes offer high accuracy and in situ measurement of temperature and humidity profiles, but with poor spatio-temporal sampling. The in-situ observing systems like MPLNET and wind profiler provide long history of PBL height records at each station. The GNSS RO based PBL height is retrieved based on the sharp gradients in refractivity profile that represent the fine vertical structure of temperature and moisture changes above the PBL. However, not all RO refractivity profiles reach the surface depending on location and regime, and RO refractivity retrievals can be negatively biased below 2km. The PBL height data from satellite lidars provide high resolution along track PBL height retrievals, but over land they are affected by previous day convective PBL aerosol and strongly associated with mixing layer and retrievals cannot be made below thick, attenuating clouds. A successful assimilation of PBL height data requires a thorough understanding of the observing method and the retrieval algorithm for each observing system in order to use the PBL height data from multiple observing systems properly. Due to the sensitivity of PBL height data to the observing method and choice of algorithm, it is important to use a model definition appropriate for each observation type to compute differences between PBL height data and model PBL height (OmFs). The GEOS model currently includes two PBL height definitions suitable for direct comparison with observed PBL height, and additional definitions are being added in this study. Evaluation of different model PBL height definitions is underway. Meanwhile, efforts have been made in the GEOS data assimilation system to develop PBL height data assimilation capability. PBL height data can be assimilated using two different approaches. The traditional approach is to construct an observation operator and its tangent linear and adjoint, which link control variables to PBL height data from each observing system. This observation operator can be very complicated, e.g., the lidar-based PBL height observation operator includes the backscatter lidar forward observation operator, the algorithm to derive PBL height from attenuated total backscatter, interpolation, and calculations handling the mismatch between observed and model scales. The other approach is to augment PBL height to the control variable vector, and it is adopted in this study. The latter approach was also used in previous studies, e.g., the assimilation of PBL height data from radiosonde and aircraft in the Real Time Mesoscale Analysis (RTMA) system for a dispersion modelling study ([13]); the PBL height assimilation study using lidar PBL height data at Greensburg, Kansas for a field campaign ([12]). The PBL height assimilation from multiple observing systems in this study allows us to take advantage of the diverse PBL height data that provide much better global coverage collectively under different meteorological conditions and with different temporal and spatial scales. As all the PBL heights are tightly coupled with the PBL thermodynamic variables, the strong correlations, which are provided by the 4D ensemble forecast, enable PBL height data from various sources to interact and combine coherently and provide additional information for PBL temperature and moisture fields. The results of comparisons among PBL height data from different sources and the evaluation of the model PBL height definitions with the PBL height data will be presented, and the PBL height data synergy strategies and preliminary results will also be discussed at the conference.

Y. Zhu↗
NASA NTRS2015

A Vehicle Management End-to-End Testing and Analysis Platform for Validation of Mission and Fault Management Algorithms to Reduce Risk for NASA's Space Launch System

The engineering development of the new Space Launch System (SLS) launch vehicle requires cross discipline teams with extensive knowledge of launch vehicle subsystems, information theory, and autonomous algorithms dealing with all operations from pre-launch through on orbit operations. The characteristics of these spacecraft systems must be matched with the autonomous algorithm monitoring and mitigation capabilities for accurate control and response to abnormal conditions throughout all vehicle mission flight phases, including precipitating safing actions and crew aborts. This presents a large and complex system engineering challenge, which is being addressed in part by focusing on the specific subsystems involved in the handling of off-nominal mission and fault tolerance with response management. Using traditional model based system and software engineering design principles from the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Systems Modeling Language (SysML), the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms for the vehicle are crafted and vetted in specialized Integrated Development Teams (IDTs) composed of multiple development disciplines such as Systems Engineering (SE), Flight Software (FSW), Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) and the major subsystems and vehicle elements such as Main Propulsion Systems (MPS), boosters, avionics, Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC), Thrust Vector Control (TVC), and liquid engines. These model based algorithms and their development lifecycle from inception through Flight Software certification are an important focus of this development effort to further insure reliable detection and response to off-nominal vehicle states during all phases of vehicle operation from pre-launch through end of flight. NASA formed a dedicated M&FM team for addressing fault management early in the development lifecycle for the SLS initiative. As part of the development of the M&FM capabilities, this team has developed a dedicated testbed that integrates specific M&FM algorithms, specialized nominal and off-nominal test cases, and vendor-supplied physics-based launch vehicle subsystem models. Additionally, the team has developed processes for implementing and validating these algorithms for concept validation and risk reduction for the SLS program. The flexibility of the Vehicle Management End-to-end Testbed (VMET) enables thorough testing of the M&FM algorithms by providing configurable suites of both nominal and off-nominal test cases to validate the developed algorithms utilizing actual subsystem models such as MPS. The intent of VMET is to validate the M&FM algorithms and substantiate them with performance baselines for each of the target vehicle subsystems in an independent platform exterior to the flight software development infrastructure and its related testing entities. In any software development process there is inherent risk in the interpretation and implementation of concepts into software through requirements and test cases into flight software compounded with potential human errors throughout the development lifecycle. Risk reduction is addressed by the M&FM analysis group working with other organizations such as S&MA, Structures and Environments, GNC, Orion, the Crew Office, Flight Operations, and Ground Operations by assessing performance of the M&FM algorithms in terms of their ability to reduce Loss of Mission and Loss of Crew probabilities. In addition, through state machine and diagnostic modeling, analysis efforts investigate a broader suite of failure effects and associated detection and responses that can be tested in VMET to ensure that failures can be detected, and confirm that responses do not create additional risks or cause undesired states through interactive dynamic effects with other algorithms and systems. VMET further contributes to risk reduction by prototyping and exercising the M&FM algorithms early in their implementation and without any inherent hindrances such as meeting FSW processor scheduling constraints due to their target platform - ARINC 653 partitioned OS, resource limitations, and other factors related to integration with other subsystems not directly involved with M&FM such as telemetry packing and processing. The baseline plan for use of VMET encompasses testing the original M&FM algorithms coded in the same C++ language and state machine architectural concepts as that used by Flight Software. This enables the development of performance standards and test cases to characterize the M&FM algorithms and sets a benchmark from which to measure the effectiveness of M&FM algorithms performance in the FSW development and test processes.

Trevino, Luis↗
NASA NTRS2015

A Vehicle Management End-to-End Testing and Analysis Platform for Validation of Mission and Fault Management Algorithms to Reduce Risk for NASAs Space Launch System

The engineering development of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) new Space Launch System (SLS) requires cross discipline teams with extensive knowledge of launch vehicle subsystems, information theory, and autonomous algorithms dealing with all operations from pre-launch through on orbit operations. The nominal and off-nominal characteristics of SLS's elements and subsystems must be understood and matched with the autonomous algorithm monitoring and mitigation capabilities for accurate control and response to abnormal conditions throughout all vehicle mission flight phases, including precipitating safing actions and crew aborts. This presents a large and complex systems engineering challenge, which is being addressed in part by focusing on the specific subsystems involved in the handling of off-nominal mission and fault tolerance with response management. Using traditional model-based system and software engineering design principles from the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Systems Modeling Language (SysML), the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms for the vehicle are crafted and vetted in Integrated Development Teams (IDTs) composed of multiple development disciplines such as Systems Engineering (SE), Flight Software (FSW), Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) and the major subsystems and vehicle elements such as Main Propulsion Systems (MPS), boosters, avionics, Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC), Thrust Vector Control (TVC), and liquid engines. These model-based algorithms and their development lifecycle from inception through FSW certification are an important focus of SLS's development effort to further ensure reliable detection and response to off-nominal vehicle states during all phases of vehicle operation from pre-launch through end of flight. To test and validate these M&FM algorithms a dedicated test-bed was developed for full Vehicle Management End-to-End Testing (VMET). For addressing fault management (FM) early in the development lifecycle for the SLS program, NASA formed the M&FM team as part of the Integrated Systems Health Management and Automation Branch under the Spacecraft Vehicle Systems Department at the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). To support the development of the FM algorithms, the VMET developed by the M&FM team provides the ability to integrate the algorithms, perform test cases, and integrate vendor-supplied physics-based launch vehicle (LV) subsystem models. Additionally, the team has developed processes for implementing and validating the M&FM algorithms for concept validation and risk reduction. The flexibility of the VMET capabilities enables thorough testing of the M&FM algorithms by providing configurable suites of both nominal and off-nominal test cases to validate the developed algorithms utilizing actual subsystem models such as MPS, GNC, and others. One of the principal functions of VMET is to validate the M&FM algorithms and substantiate them with performance baselines for each of the target vehicle subsystems in an independent platform exterior to the flight software test and validation processes. In any software development process there is inherent risk in the interpretation and implementation of concepts from requirements and test cases into flight software compounded with potential human errors throughout the development and regression testing lifecycle. Risk reduction is addressed by the M&FM group but in particular by the Analysis Team working with other organizations such as S&MA, Structures and Environments, GNC, Orion, Crew Office, Flight Operations, and Ground Operations by assessing performance of the M&FM algorithms in terms of their ability to reduce Loss of Mission (LOM) and Loss of Crew (LOC) probabilities. In addition, through state machine and diagnostic modeling, analysis efforts investigate a broader suite of failure effects and associated detection and responses to be tested in VMET to ensure reliable failure detection, and confirm responses do not create additional risks or cause undesired states through interactive dynamic effects with other algorithms and systems. VMET further contributes to risk reduction by prototyping and exercising the M&FM algorithms early in their implementation and without any inherent hindrances such as meeting FSW processor scheduling constraints due to their target platform - the ARINC 6535-partitioned Operating System, resource limitations, and other factors related to integration with other subsystems not directly involved with M&FM such as telemetry packing and processing. The baseline plan for use of VMET encompasses testing the original M&FM algorithms coded in the same C++ language and state machine architectural concepts as that used by FSW. This enables the development of performance standards and test cases to characterize the M&FM algorithms and sets a benchmark from which to measure their effectiveness and performance in the exterior FSW development and test processes. This paper is outlined in a systematic fashion analogous to a lifecycle process flow for engineering development of algorithms into software and testing. Section I describes the NASA SLS M&FM context, presenting the current infrastructure, leading principles, methods, and participants. Section II defines the testing philosophy of the M&FM algorithms as related to VMET followed by section III, which presents the modeling methods of the algorithms to be tested and validated in VMET. Its details are then further presented in section IV followed by Section V presenting integration, test status, and state analysis. Finally, section VI addresses the summary and forward directions followed by the appendices presenting relevant information on terminology and documentation.

Trevino, Luis↗