Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Mission Control”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

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

At least 325 records · Page 18
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Operating a Crewed Spacecraft in the Age of Commercial Space Using Private/Government Partnership

Fifty years after humans completed a large-scale United States government-funded and government-engineered effort of landing humans on the moon, human spaceflight has entered a new paradigm. Private companies are now investing their own money and taking on an ever-increasing role in human spaceflight, in partnership with the U.S. government. This paper will describe the development of one of these partnerships through the lens of its mission operations team. As part of the Commercial Crew Program (CCP), NASA selected Boeing’s CST-100 Starliner as one of the next generation of crewed vehicles. Boeing opted to partner with the US Government for their Starliner operations by contracting with NASA’s Mission Control teams in the Flight Operations Directorate (FOD) at the Johnson Space Center to create its own Mission Operations (MO) flight controllers. Partnering with FOD provided benefits to both Boeing and NASA while also creating new challenges. MO brought over 60 years of crewed spaceflight experience and infrastructure to Boeing’s new program. Within certain legal constraints, MO was able to work closely and efficiently with their FOD counterparts who were performing both integration duties and, under the auspices of the CCP, insight of the contractors, in this case Boeing. Involvement of NASA as the Boeing operations agent did lead to what management deemed a ‘healthy tension’ within FOD, challenging old processes and often creating better, more robust teamwork. Successful development of the framework and boundaries of both the legal aspects and the oversight tensions has been one of the keys to developing a successful corporate/government partnership. Due to the highly automated nature of the Starliner, the MO organization was designed to be much smaller than previous NASA’s flight control teams for past programs. NASA has learned through the decades that spacecraft design and operations need to be as flexible and forgiving as possible. NASA’s Commercial Crew Program was established to sponsor corporate development of economical vehicles that could get humans to and from low Earth orbit. These companies, of course, need to meet contractual obligations in providing a safe means of transporting astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS), but also need to do so in a manner that leads to the venture resulting in a profit at the same time. Through MO’s involvement in the development of this spaceflight paradigm shift, there are ample lessons to be conveyed to future teams and programs working to develop similar missions.

Robert C. Dempsey↗
NASA NTRS2016

Modeling in the State Flow Environment to Support Launch Vehicle Verification Testing for Mission and Fault Management Algorithms in the NASA Space Launch System

Analysis methods and testing processes are essential activities in the engineering development and verification of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) new Space Launch System (SLS). Central to mission success is reliable verification of the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms for the SLS launch vehicle (LV) flight software. This is particularly difficult because M&FM algorithms integrate and operate LV subsystems, which consist of diverse forms of hardware and software themselves, with equally diverse integration from the engineering disciplines of LV subsystems. M&FM operation of SLS requires a changing mix of LV automation. During pre-launch the LV is primarily operated by the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) organization with some LV automation of time-critical functions, and much more autonomous LV operations during ascent that have crucial interactions with the Orion crew capsule, its astronauts, and with mission controllers at the Johnson Space Center. M&FM algorithms must perform all nominal mission commanding via the flight computer to control LV states from pre-launch through disposal and also address failure conditions by initiating autonomous or commanded aborts (crew capsule escape from the failing LV), redundancy management of failing subsystems and components, and safing actions to reduce or prevent threats to ground systems and crew. To address the criticality of the verification testing of these algorithms, the NASA M&FM team has utilized the State Flow environment6 (SFE) with its existing Vehicle Management End-to-End Testbed (VMET) platform which also hosts vendor-supplied physics-based LV subsystem models. The human-derived M&FM algorithms are designed and vetted in Integrated Development Teams composed of design and development disciplines such as Systems Engineering, Flight Software (FSW), Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) and major subsystems and vehicle elements such as Main Propulsion Systems (MPS), boosters, avionics, Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C), Thrust Vector Control (TVC), liquid engines, and the astronaut crew office. Since the algorithms are realized using model-based engineering (MBE) methods from a hybrid of the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Systems Modeling Language (SysML), SFE methods are a natural fit to provide an in depth analysis of the interactive behavior of these algorithms with the SLS LV subsystem models. For this, the M&FM algorithms and the SLS LV subsystem models are modeled using constructs provided by Matlab which also enables modeling of the accompanying interfaces providing greater flexibility for integrated testing and analysis, which helps forecast expected behavior in forward VMET integrated testing activities. In VMET, the M&FM algorithms are prototyped and implemented using the same C++ programming language and similar state machine architectural concepts used by the FSW group. Due to the interactive complexity of the algorithms, VMET testing thus far has verified all the individual M&FM subsystem algorithms with select subsystem vendor models but is steadily progressing to assessing the interactive behavior of these algorithms with LV subsystems, as represented by subsystem models. The novel SFE applications has proven to be useful for quick look analysis into early integrated system behavior and assessment of the M&FM algorithms with the modeled LV subsystems. This early MBE analysis generates vital insight into the integrated system behaviors, algorithm sensitivities, design issues, and has aided in the debugging of the M&FM algorithms well before full testing can begin in more expensive, higher fidelity but more arduous environments such as VMET, FSW testing, and the Systems Integration Lab7 (SIL). SFE has exhibited both expected and unexpected behaviors in nominal and off nominal test cases prior to full VMET testing. In many findings, these behavioral characteristics were used to correct the M&FM algorithms, enable better test coverage, and develop more effective test cases for each of the LV subsystems. This has improved the fidelity of testing and planning for the next generation of M&FM algorithms as the SLS program evolves from non-crewed to crewed flight, impacting subsystem configurations and the M&FM algorithms that control them. SFE analysis has improved robustness and reliability of the M&FM algorithms by revealing implementation errors and documentation inconsistencies. It is also improving planning efficiency for future VMET testing of the M&FM algorithms hosted in the LV flight computers, further reducing risk for the SLS launch infrastructure, the SLS LV, and most importantly the crew.

Trevino, Luis↗
NASA NTRS2008

Inductive System Monitors Tasks

The Inductive Monitoring System (IMS) software developed at Ames Research Center uses artificial intelligence and data mining techniques to build system-monitoring knowledge bases from archived or simulated sensor data. This information is then used to detect unusual or anomalous behavior that may indicate an impending system failure. Currently helping analyze data from systems that help fly and maintain the space shuttle and the International Space Station (ISS), the IMS has also been employed by data classes are then used to build a monitoring knowledge base. In real time, IMS performs monitoring functions: determining and displaying the degree of deviation from nominal performance. IMS trend analyses can detect conditions that may indicate a failure or required system maintenance. The development of IMS was motivated by the difficulty of producing detailed diagnostic models of some system components due to complexity or unavailability of design information. Successful applications have ranged from real-time monitoring of aircraft engine and control systems to anomaly detection in space shuttle and ISS data. IMS was used on shuttle missions STS-121, STS-115, and STS-116 to search the Wing Leading Edge Impact Detection System (WLEIDS) data for signs of possible damaging impacts during launch. It independently verified findings of the WLEIDS Mission Evaluation Room (MER) analysts and indicated additional points of interest that were subsequently investigated by the MER team. In support of the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate, IMS is being deployed as an anomaly detection tool on ISS mission control consoles in the Johnson Space Center Mission Operations Directorate. IMS has been trained to detect faults in the ISS Control Moment Gyroscope (CMG) systems. In laboratory tests, it has already detected several minor anomalies in real-time CMG data. When tested on archived data, IMS was able to detect precursors of the CMG1 failure nearly 15 hours in advance of the actual failure event. In the Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate, IMS successfully performed real-time engine health analysis. IMS was able to detect simulated failures and actual engine anomalies in an F/A-18 aircraft during the course of 25 test flights. IMS is also being used in colla

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2015

Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration into the National Airspace System Visual-Line-of-Sight Human-in-the-Loop Experiment

As part of the Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in the National Airspace System (NAS) project, research on integrating small UAS (sUAS) into the NAS was underway by a human-systems integration (HSI) team at the NASA Langley Research Center. Minimal to no research has been conducted on the safe, effective, and efficient manner in which to integrate these aircraft into the NAS. sUAS are defined as aircraft weighing 55 pounds or less. The objective of this human system integration team was to build a UAS Ground Control Station (GCS) and to develop a research test-bed and database that provides data, proof of concept, and human factors guidelines for GCS operations in the NAS. The objectives of this experiment were to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of flying sUAS in Class D and Class G airspace utilizing manual control inputs and voice radio communications between the pilot, mission control, and air traffic control. The design of the experiment included three sets of GCS display configurations, in addition to a hand-held control unit. The three different display configurations were VLOS, VLOS + Primary Flight Display (PFD), and VLOS + PFD + Moving Map (Map). Test subject pilots had better situation awareness of their vehicle position, altitude, airspeed, location over the ground, and mission track using the Map display configuration. This configuration allowed the pilots to complete the mission objectives with less workload, at the expense of having better situation awareness of other aircraft. The subjects were better able to see other aircraft when using the VLOS display configuration. However, their mission performance, as well as their ability to aviate and navigate, was reduced compared to runs that included the PFD and Map displays.

Trujillo, Anna C.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Thermal Control Coating Charging Tests for the Europa Clipper Mission

Thermal control coatings are an essential part of spacecraft systems. Typically, these coatings are directly exposed to the space environment, which means they must be designed and applied in a manner that can withstand exposure to radiation, ultra-violet light, thermal cycles, etc. In the case of the Europa Clipper mission, the thermal control coatings must also have relatively low resistivity in order to minimize electrostatic charging (and discharging) due to the abundant low-energy plasma populations in the Jovian environment. This paper will present the results of a test campaign led by NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) to find thermal control coating solutions that minimized the occurrence of electrostatic discharges – even at cryogenic temperature conditions. The customized laboratory test system at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center will be described, along with the test requirements and conditions. Finally, a summary of the coatings with the best electrostatic characteristics will be provided.

Thermal Control Coatings↗
NASA NTRS2002

The Aircraft Simulation Role in Improving Flight Safety Through Control Room Training

NASA Dryden Flight Research Center uses its six-degrees-of-freedom (6-DOF) fixed-base simulations for mission control room training to improve flight safety and operations. This concept is applied to numerous flight projects such as the F-18 High Alpha Research Vehicle (HARV), the F-15 Intelligent Flight Control System (IFCS), the X-38 Actuator Control Test (XACT), and X-43A (Hyper-X). The Dryden 6-DOF simulations are typically used through various stages of a project, from design to ground tests. The roles of these simulations have expanded to support control room training, reinforcing flight safety by building control room staff proficiency. Real-time telemetry, radar, and video data are generated from flight vehicle simulation models. These data are used to drive the control room displays. Nominal static values are used to complete information where appropriate. Audio communication is also an integral part of training sessions. This simulation capability is used to train control room personnel and flight crew for nominal missions and emergency situations. Such training sessions are also opportunities to refine flight cards and control room display pages, exercise emergency procedures, and practice control room setup for the day of flight. This paper describes this technology as it is used in the X-43A and F-15 IFCS and XACT projects.

Shy, Karla S.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Evaluation of Crew-Centric Onboard Mission Operations Planning and Execution Tool: Year 2

Currently, mission planning for the International Space Station (ISS) is largely affected by ground operators in mission control. The task of creating a week-long mission plan for ISS crew takes dozens of people multiple days to complete, and is often created far in advance of its execution. As such, re-planning or adapting to changing real-time constraints or emergent issues is similarly taxing. As we design for future mission operations concepts to other planets or areas with limited connectivity to Earth, more of these ground-based tasks will need to be handled autonomously by the crew onboard.There is a need for a highly usable (including low training time) tool that enables efficient self-scheduling and execution within a single package. The ISS Program has identified Playbook as a potential option. It already has high crew acceptance as a plan viewer from previous analogs and can now support a crew self-scheduling assessment on ISS or on another mission. The goals of this work, a collaboration between the Human Research Program and the ISS Program, are to inform the design of systems for more autonomous crew operations and provide a platform for research on crew autonomy for future deep space missions. Our second year of the research effort have included new insights on the crew self-scheduling sessions performed by the crew through use on the HERA (Human Exploration Research Analog) and NEEMO (NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations) analogs. Use on the NEEMO analog involved two self-scheduling strategies where the crew planned and executed two days of EVAs (Extra-Vehicular Activities). On HERA year two represented the first HERA campaign where we were able to perform research tasks. This involved selected flexible activities that the crew could schedule, mock timelines where the crew completed more complex planning exercises, usability evaluation of the crew self-scheduling features, and more insights into the limit of plan complexity that the crew could effectively self-schedule. In parallel we have added in new features and functionality in the Playbook tool based off of our insights from crew self-scheduling in the NASA analogs. In particular this year we have added in the ability for the crew to add, edit, and remove their own activities in the Playbook tool, expanding the type of planning and re-planning possible in the tool and opening up the ability for more free form plan creation. The ability to group and manipulate groups of activities from the plan task list was also added, allowing crew members to add predefined sets of activities onto their mission timeline. In addition we also added a way for crew members to roll back changes in their plan, in order to allow an undo like capability. These features expand and complement the initial self-scheduling features added in year one with the goal of making crew autonomous planning more efficient. As part of this work we have also finished developing the first version of our Playbook Data Analysis Tool, a research tool built to interpret and analyze the unobtrusively collected data obtained during the NASA analog missions through Playbook. This data which includes user click interaction as well as plan change information, through the Playbook Data Analysis Tool, allows us to playback this information as if a video camera was mounted over the crewmember's tablet. While the primary purpose of this tool is to allow usability analysis of crew self-scheduling sessions used on the NASA analog, since the data collected is structured, the tool can automatically derive metrics that would be traditionally tedious to achieve without manual analysis of video playback. We will demonstrate and discuss the ability for future derived metrics to be added to the tool. In addition to the current data and results gathered in year two we will also discuss the preparation and goals of our International Space Station (ISS) onboard technology demonstration with Playbook. This technology demonstration will be preformed as part of the CAST payload starting in late 2016.

onboard planning↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Root Cause Analysis of the Data Refinement Process – Medical Conditions Capability Resource Tables

The medical system for spaceflight thus far has been designed to support missions in low earth orbit (LEO). Crew capabilities are limited and heavily dependent on the team of medical support staff at Mission Control Center (MCC) to guide diagnosis and management. However, missions to the Moon and Mars will suffer from several constraints that will make this ground support focused approach to care ineffective. In order to update and modify medical system design, NASA has relied on Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) modeling to mitigate medical risk through trade space analysis. Specifically, capability resource tables (CRT’s) were developed to create a dataset of resources required to manage a list of accepted medical conditions significant in exploration spaceflight. With 120 conditions, this dataset contained hundreds of capabilities and thousands of resources with tens of thousands of cells of data. Initially these tables were built in excel for high throughput during development, but ultimately had to be transferred, managed, and modified into the Evidence Library database for modeling purposes. The process of collating and reviewing the Evidence Library revealed numerous errors in the dataset that had to be corrected through iterative changes. Several error types emerged during this process and can be broken into specific classifications defined as “input”, “transcription”, “structural”, “branching”, and “information”. In reviewing these error types through the root cause analysis (RCA) approach, we were able to identify the contributors to these errors which included single data review points, changing product end goals, limited software selection, time constraints and several others. By reviewing and evaluating the underlying causes we can provide possible system improvements that can be implemented for current and future data management in PRA model inputs.

A. Anderson↗
NASA NTRS1991

Space station control center architecture

The Space Station control center (SSCC) is under the cognizance of the Johnson Space Center and is located adjacent to the Shuttle's mission control center. Responsibility for design, development, and operations of the control center is the responsibility of the mission operations directorate at JSC. Space Station Ground Systems Division is responsible for design and development of the control center systems which is currently in process under the mission support contractor team led by Loral Space Information Systems. It is early in the life cycle of the SSCC project. System functional design review was completed. Subsystem requirements are now being developed and reviewed. A new facility will be available for development activities.

Schmalz, Karen↗
NASA NTRS1996

An Architecture to Promote the Commercialization of Space Mission Command and Control

This paper describes a command and control architecture that encompasses space mission operations centers, ground terminals, and spacecraft. This architecture is intended to promote the growth of a lucrative space mission operations command and control market through a set of open standards used by both gevernment and profit-making space mission operators.

cost efficient operations standardisation money ca↗
NASA NTRS2014

Overview of Intelligent Power Controller Development for Human Deep Space Exploration

Intelligent or autonomous control of an entire spacecraft is a major technology that must be developed to enable NASA to meet its human exploration goals. NASAs current long term human space platform, the International Space Station, is in low earth orbit with almost continuous communication with the ground based mission control. This permits the near real-time control by the ground of all of the core systems including power. As NASA moves beyond Low Earth Orbit, the issues of communication time-lag and lack of communication bandwidth beyond geosynchronous orbit does not permit this type of operation. This paper presents the work currently ongoing at NASA to develop an architecture for an autonomous power control system as well as the effort to assemble that controller into the framework of the vehicle mission manager and other subsystem controllers to enable autonomous control of the complete spacecraft. Due to the common problems faced in both space power systems and terrestrial power system, the potential for spin-off applications of this technology for use in micro-grids located at the edge or user end of terrestrial power grids for peak power accommodation and reliability are described.

Space Flight↗
NASA NTRS2014

Overview of Intelligent Power Controller Development for Human Deep Space Exploration

Intelligent or autonomous control of an entire spacecraft is a major technology that must be developed to enable NASA to meet its human exploration goals. NASA's current long term human space platform, the International Space Station, is in low earth orbit with almost continuous communication with the ground based mission control. This permits the near real-time control by the ground of all of the core systems including power. As NASA moves beyond Low Earth Orbit, the issues of communication time-lag and lack of communication bandwidth beyond geosynchronous orbit does not permit this type of operation. This paper presents the work currently ongoing at NASA to develop an architecture for an autonomous power control system as well as the effort to assemble that controller into the framework of the vehicle mission manager and other subsystem controllers to enable autonomous control of the complete spacecraft. Due to the common problems faced in both space power systems and terrestrial power system, the potential for spin-off applications of this technology for use in micro-grids located at the edge or user end of terrestrial power grids for peak power accommodation and reliability are described.

Space Flight↗
NASA NTRS2014

Overview of Intelligent Power Controller Development for Human Deep Space Exploration

Intelligent or autonomous control of an entire spacecraft is a major technology that must be developed to enable NASA to meet its human exploration goals. NASA's current long term human space platform, the International Space Station, is in low Earth orbit with almost continuous communication with the ground based mission control. This permits the near real-time control by the ground of all of the core systems including power. As NASA moves beyond low Earth orbit, the issues of communication time-lag and lack of communication bandwidth beyond geosynchronous orbit does not permit this type of operation. This paper presents the work currently ongoing at NASA to develop an architecture for an autonomous power control system as well as the effort to assemble that controller into the framework of the vehicle mission manager and other subsystem controllers to enable autonomous control of the complete spacecraft. Due to the common problems faced in both space power systems and terrestrial power system, the potential for spin-off applications of this technology for use in micro-grids located at the edge or user end of terrestrial power grids for peak power accommodation and reliability are described.

Space Flight↗
NASA NTRS2007

NASA's Software Safety Standard

NASA relies more and more on software to control, monitor, and verify its safety critical systems, facilities and operations. Since the 1960's there has hardly been a spacecraft launched that does not have a computer on board that will provide command and control services. There have been recent incidents where software has played a role in high-profile mission failures and hazardous incidents. For example, the Mars Orbiter, Mars Polar Lander, the DART (Demonstration of Autonomous Rendezvous Technology), and MER (Mars Exploration Rover) Spirit anomalies were all caused or contributed to by software. The Mission Control Centers for the Shuttle, ISS, and unmanned programs are highly dependant on software for data displays, analysis, and mission planning. Despite this growing dependence on software control and monitoring, there has been little to no consistent application of software safety practices and methodology to NASA's projects with safety critical software. Meanwhile, academia and private industry have been stepping forward with procedures and standards for safety critical systems and software, for example Dr. Nancy Leveson's book Safeware: System Safety and Computers. The NASA Software Safety Standard, originally published in 1997, was widely ignored due to its complexity and poor organization. It also focused on concepts rather than definite procedural requirements organized around a software project lifecycle. Led by NASA Headquarters Office of Safety and Mission Assurance, the NASA Software Safety Standard has recently undergone a significant update. This new standard provides the procedures and guidelines for evaluating a project for safety criticality and then lays out the minimum project lifecycle requirements to assure the software is created, operated, and maintained in the safest possible manner. This update of the standard clearly delineates the minimum set of software safety requirements for a project without detailing the implementation for those requirements. This allows the projects leeway to meet these requirements in many forms that best suit a particular project's needs and safety risk. In other words, it tells the project what to do, not how to do it. This update also incorporated advances in the state of the practice of software safety from academia and private industry. It addresses some of the more common issues now facing software developers in the NASA environment such as the use of Commercial-Off-the-Shelf Software (COTS), Modified OTS (MOTS), Government OTS (GOTS), and reused software. A team from across NASA developed the update and it has had both NASA-wide internal reviews by software engineering, quality, safety, and project management. It has also had expert external review. This presentation and paper will discuss the new NASA Software Safety Standard, its organization, and key features. It will start with a brief discussion of some NASA mission failures and incidents that had software as one of their root causes. It will then give a brief overview of the NASA Software Safety Process. This will include an overview of the key personnel responsibilities and functions that must be performed for safety-critical software.

Ramsay, Christopher M.↗
NASA NTRS2016

NASA Advanced Explorations Systems: Advancements in Life Support Systems

The NASA Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) Life Support Systems (LSS) project strives to develop reliable, energy-efficient, and low-mass spacecraft systems to provide environmental control and life support systems (ECLSS) critical to enabling long duration human missions beyond low Earth orbit (LEO). Highly reliable, closed-loop life support systems are among the capabilities required for the longer duration human space exploration missions assessed by NASA's Habitability Architecture Team (HAT). The LSS project is focused on four areas: architecture and systems engineering for life support systems, environmental monitoring, air revitalization, and wastewater processing and water management. Starting with the international space station (ISS) LSS systems as a point of departure (where applicable), the mission of the LSS project is three-fold: 1. Address discrete LSS technology gaps 2. Improve the reliability of LSS systems 3. Advance LSS systems towards integrated testing on the ISS. This paper summarized the work being done in the four areas listed above to meet these objectives. Details will be given on the following focus areas: Systems Engineering and Architecture- With so many complex systems comprising life support in space, it is important to understand the overall system requirements to define life support system architectures for different space mission classes, ensure that all the components integrate well together and verify that testing is as representative of destination environments as possible. Environmental Monitoring- In an enclosed spacecraft that is constantly operating complex machinery for its own basic functionality as well as science experiments and technology demonstrations, it's possible for the environment to become compromised. While current environmental monitors aboard the ISS will alert crew members and mission control if there is an emergency, long-duration environmental monitoring cannot be done in-orbit as current methodologies rely largely on sending environmental samples back to Earth. The LSS project is developing onboard analysis capabilities that will replace the need to return air and water samples from space for ground analysis. Air Revitalization- The air revitalization task is comprised of work in carbon dioxide removal, oxygen generation and recovery and trace contamination and particulate control. The CO2 Removal and associated air drying development efforts under the LSS project are focused both on improving the current SOA technology on the ISS and assessing and examining the viability of other sorbents and technologies available in academia and industry. The Oxygen Generation and Recovery technology development area encompasses several sub-tasks in an effort to supply O2 to the crew at the required conditions, to recover O2 from metabolic CO2, and to recycle recovered O2 back to the cabin environment. Current state-of-the-art oxygen generation systems aboard space station are capable of generating or recovering approximately 40% of required oxygen; for exploration missions this percentage needs to be greatly increased. A spacecraft cabin trace contaminant and particulate control system serves to keep the environment below the spacecraft maximum allowable concentration (SMAC) for chemicals and particulates. Both passive (filters) and active (scrubbers) methods contribute to the overall TC & PC design. Work in the area of trace contamination and particulate control under the LSS project is focused on making improvements to the SOA TC & PC systems on ISS to improve performance and reduce consumables. Wastewater Processing and Water Management- A major goal of the LSS project is the development of water recovery systems to support long duration human exploration beyond LEO. Current space station wastewater processing and water management systems distill urine and wastewater to recover water from urine and humidity condensate in the spacecraft at a approximately 74% recovery rate. For longer, farther missions into deep space, that recovery rate must be greatly increased so that astronauts can journey for months without resupply cargo ships from Earth.

Shull, Sarah A.↗
NASA NTRS1989

Ground data systems resource allocation process

The Ground Data Systems Resource Allocation Process at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory provides medium- and long-range planning for the use of Deep Space Network and Mission Control and Computing Center resources in support of NASA's deep space missions and Earth-based science. Resources consist of radio antenna complexes and associated data processing and control computer networks. A semi-automated system was developed that allows operations personnel to interactively generate, edit, and revise allocation plans spanning periods of up to ten years (as opposed to only two or three weeks under the manual system) based on the relative merit of mission events. It also enhances scientific data return. A software system known as the Resource Allocation and Planning Helper (RALPH) merges the conventional methods of operations research, rule-based knowledge engineering, and advanced data base structures. RALPH employs a generic, highly modular architecture capable of solving a wide variety of scheduling and resource sequencing problems. The rule-based RALPH system has saved significant labor in resource allocation. Its successful use affirms the importance of establishing and applying event priorities based on scientific merit, and the benefit of continuity in planning provided by knowledge-based engineering. The RALPH system exhibits a strong potential for minimizing development cycles of resource and payload planning systems throughout NASA and the private sector.

Berner, Carol A.↗
NASA NTRS1976

Spacelab Mission Simulation-II

The NASA Johnson Space Center conducted the second in a series of Spacelab mission simulations during the week of January 26-February 1, 1976. The facilities that supported the Spacelab Mission Simulation-II (SMS-II) included mock-ups of Spacelab, the Orbiter mid-deck and aft flight deck areas, and support areas simulating a mission control area and a payload operation control area. The SMS-II encompassed presently identified Spacelab mission requirements including experiment solicitation, evaluation, selection, and prioritization; crew selection and training; experiment hardware development, integration, and evaluation. The payload chosen included a cosmic ray physics experiment which was located on a pallet aft of the Spacelab and 20 biomedical experiments which were performed in the Spacelab. This paper will summarize simulation experience to date and list areas requiring substantial evaluation in the future.

Sawin, C. F.↗