SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “multi mission”

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 325 records · Page 18

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2018

Plans and Concepts for a New Generation of RTGs for Planetary Science Missions

Of the six types of radioisotope thermoelectric generators NASA has flown in space, only the Multi-Mission Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator (MMRTG) is currently available for spaceflight, and it relies on technology first used for RTGs in the 1970s. The MMRTG is a rugged power system capable of delivering 110W at launch. NASA is considering future missions with higher power demands however, and sponsored a study to identify concepts and plans to address those needs. The Director of NASA’s Planetary Sciences Division was briefed on a potential enhancement to the MMRTG in late-2012, just a couple of days after the landing of the Mars Science Laboratory rover, Curiosity, on Mars. NASA subsequently funded system-level engineering and technology maturation tasks for a proposed enhanced MMRTG, or eMMRTG, in fiscal year 2013. There was no plan to build a complete generator, rather the engineering of one, and the transfer of technology from laboratories at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory to industry were begun. NASA has now formed a Project to take the eMMRTG from technology to a qualification unit. This would form the first of a new generation of RTGs in 50 years. NASA has also formed a Project for a Next-Generation RTG concept based upon a study led by this author and a large team. NASA’s Radioisotope Power Systems (RPS) Program set the objective for the study to explore what possible options NASA has for Next-Generation-RTGs. The scope and breadth of the study included many possible destinations within the solar system, and traded a variety of RTG conceptual designs, and risk rated a variety of thermoelectric materials and couple configurations. Requirements were defined for the RTG concepts, a variety of thermoelectric materials were evaluated to find the most mature candidates, and performance was estimated for each RTG concept that could use the most mature of these new thermoelectric materials. The study relied upon mission concepts outlined in the latest Planetary Science Decadal Survey (2011), other more recent mission studies completed throughout the agency, and recent analyses of potential missions to ocean worlds to identify requirements that were not applied to previous RTGs but might prove valuable to these NG-RTGs. RTG concepts with maximal potential utility were identified as being modular and ranging in power output from 50 to 500W. A variety of RTG design concepts with several distinguishing characteristics were formulated. The plans and concepts for a new generation of RTGs (the eMMRTG and NG-RTG) will be discussed.

Woerner, David F.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Modeling Systems-Of-Systems Interfaces with SysML

Space data systems are inherently complex. They are systems-of-systems, typically composed of spacecraft and mission operations systems (MOS) belonging to one (or more) organizations, and multi-mission communication assets belonging to other organizations. In many cases, the spacecraft contain sub-systems and instruments provided by different organizations, and MOS systems that may be developed and operated by other organizations. The point of greatest leverage in system architecting is at the interfaces. We have developed a set of methods for using SysML to model systems-of-systems and their interfaces. This paper describes how to apply this method to space data systems at a variety of levels of detail, from abstract systems and subsystems down to hardware and software components, including the details of their interfaces and protocol designs.

Shames, Peter M.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Using XML Configuration-Driven Development to Create a Customizable Ground Data System

The Mission data Processing and Control Subsystem (MPCS) is being developed as a multi-mission Ground Data System with the Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) as the first fully supported mission. MPCS is a fully featured, Java-based Ground Data System (GDS) for telecommand and telemetry processing based on Configuration-Driven Development (CDD). The eXtensible Markup Language (XML) is the ideal language for CDD because it is easily readable and editable by all levels of users and is also backed by a World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) standard and numerous powerful processing tools that make it uniquely flexible. The CDD approach adopted by MPCS minimizes changes to compiled code by using XML to create a series of configuration files that provide both coarse and fine grained control over all aspects of GDS operation.

Nash, Brent↗

NASA NTRS2011

CO2 Insulation for Thermal Control of the Mars Science Laboratory

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is sending a large (>850 kg) rover as part of the Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) mission to Mars in 2011. The rover's primary power source is a Multi-Mission Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator (MMRTG) that generates roughly 2000 W of heat, which is converted to approximately 110 W of electrical power for use by the rover electronics, science instruments, and mechanism-actuators. The large rover size and extreme thermal environments (cold and hot) for which the rover is designed for led to a sophisticated thermal control system to keep it within allowable temperature limits. The pre-existing Martian atmosphere of low thermal conductivity CO2 gas (8 Torr) is used to thermally protect the rover and its components from the extremely cold Martian environment (temperatures as low as -130 deg C). Conventional vacuum based insulation like Multi Layer Insulation (MLI) is not effective in a gaseous atmosphere, so engineered gaps between the warm rover internal components and the cold rover external structure were employed to implement this thermal isolation. Large gaps would lead to more thermal isolation, but would also require more of the precious volume available within the rover. Therefore, a balance of the degree of thermal isolation achieved vs. the volume of rover utilized is required to reach an acceptable design. The temperature differences between the controlled components and the rover structure vary from location to location so each gap has to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis to arrive at an optimal thickness. For every configuration and temperature difference, there is a critical thickness below which the heat transfer mechanism is dominated by simple gaseous thermal conduction. For larger gaps, the mechanism is dominated by natural convection. In general, convection leads to a poorer level of thermal isolation as compared to conduction. All these considerations play important roles in the optimization process. A three-step process was utilized to design this insulation. The first step is to come up with a simple, textbook based, closed-form equation assessment of gap thickness vs. resultant thermal isolation achieved. The second step is a more sophisticated numerical assessment using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) software to investigate the effect of complicated geometries and temperature contours along them to arrive at the effective thermal isolation in a CO2 atmosphere. The third step is to test samples of representative geometries in a CO2 filled chamber to measure the thermal isolation achieved. The results of these assessments along with the consistency checks across these methods leads to the formulation of design-guidelines for gap implementation within the rover geometry. Finally, based on the geometric and functional constraints within the real rover system, a detailed design that accommodates all these factors is arrived at. This paper will describe in detail this entire process, the results of these assessments and the final design that was implemented.

CO2↗

NASA NTRS2011

Deep Space Habitat Team: HEFT Phase 2 Effects

HEFT was a NASA-wide team that performed analyses of architectures for human exploration beyond LEO, evaluating technical, programmatic, and budgetary issues to support decisions at the highest level of the agency in HSF planning. HEFT Phase I (April - September, 2010) and Phase II (September - December, 2010) examined a broad set of Human Exploration of Near Earth Objects (NEOs) Design Reference Missions (DRMs), evaluating such factors as elements, performance, technologies, schedule, and cost. At end of HEFT Phase 1, an architecture concept known as DRM 4a represented the best available option for a full capability NEO mission. Within DRM4a, the habitation system was provided by Deep Space Habitat (DSH), Multi-Mission Space Exploration Vehicle (MMSEV), and Crew Transfer Vehicle (CTV) pressurized elements. HEFT Phase 2 extended DRM4a, resulting in DRM4b. Scrubbed element-level functionality assumptions and mission Concepts of Operations. Habitation Team developed more detailed concepts of the DSH and the DSH/MMSEV/CTV Conops, including functionality and accommodations, mass & volume estimates, technology requirements, and DDT&E costs. DRM 5 represented an effort to reduce cost by scaling back on technologies and eliminating the need for the development of an MMSEV.

Toups, Larry D.↗

NASA NTRS2012

NASA In-Space Propulsion Technologies and Their Infusion Potential

The In-Space Propulsion Technology (ISPT) program has been developing in-space propulsion technologies that will enable or enhance NASA robotic science missions. The ISPT program is currently developing technology in four areas that include Propulsion System Technologies (Electric and Chemical), Entry Vehicle Technologies (Aerocapture and Earth entry vehicles), Spacecraft Bus and Sample Return Propulsion Technologies (components and ascent vehicles), and Systems/Mission Analysis. Three technologies are ready for flight infusion: 1) the high-temperature Advanced Material Bipropellant Rocket (AMBR) engine providing higher performance; 2) NASA s Evolutionary Xenon Thruster (NEXT) ion propulsion system, a 0.6-7 kW throttle-able gridded ion system; and 3) Aerocapture technology development with investments in a family of thermal protection system (TPS) materials and structures; guidance, navigation, and control (GN&C) models of blunt-body rigid aeroshells; and aerothermal effect models. Two component technologies that will be ready for flight infusion in the near future will be Advanced Xenon Flow Control System, and ultra-lightweight propellant tank technologies. Future focuses for ISPT are sample return missions and other spacecraft bus technologies like: 1) Mars Ascent Vehicles (MAV); 2) multi-mission technologies for Earth Entry Vehicles (MMEEV) for sample return missions; and 3) electric propulsion for sample return and low cost missions. These technologies are more vehicle-focused, and present a different set of technology infusion challenges. While the Systems/Mission Analysis area is focused on developing tools and assessing the application of propulsion technologies to a wide variety of mission concepts. These in-space propulsion technologies are applicable, and potentially enabling for future NASA Discovery, New Frontiers, and sample return missions currently under consideration, as well as having broad applicability to potential Flagship missions. This paper provides a brief overview of the ISPT program, describing the development status and technology infusion readiness of in-space propulsion technologies in the areas of electric propulsion, aerocapture, Earth entry vehicles, propulsion components, Mars ascent vehicle, and mission/systems analysis.

Anderson, David↗

NASA NTRS2012

NASA In-Space Propulsion Technologies and Their Infusion Potential

Anderson, David J.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Science Instrument Sensitivities to Radioisotope Power System Environment

Radioisotope Power Systems (RPS) have been and will be enabling or significantly enhancing for many missions, including several concepts identified in the 2011 Planetary Science Decadal Survey. Some mission planners and science investigators might have concerns about possible impacts from RPS-induced conditions upon the scientific capabilities of their mission concepts. To alleviate these concerns, this paper looks at existing and potential future RPS designs, and examines their potential radiation, thermal, vibration, electromagnetic interference (EMI), and magnetic fields impacts on representative science instruments and science measurements. Radiation impacts from RPS on science instruments are of potential concern for instruments with optical detectors and instruments with high-voltage electronics. The two main areas of concern are noise effects on the instrument measurements, and long-term effects of instrument damage. While RPS by their nature will contribute to total radiation dose, their addition for most missions should be relatively small. For example, the gamma dose rate from one Multi-Mission Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator (MMRTG) would be an order of magnitude lower than the environmental dose rate at Mars, and would have a correspondingly lower contribution to instrument noise and to any permanent damage to payload sensors. Increasing the number of General Purpose Heat Source (GPHS) modules used in an RPS would be expected to increase the generated radiation proportionally; however, the effect of more GPHS modules is mitigated from a strictly linear relationship by self-shielding effects. The radiation field of an RPS is anisotropic due to the deviation of the modules from a point-source-geometry. For particularly sensitive instruments the total radiation dose could be mitigated with separation or application of spot shielding. Though a new, higher-power RPS could generate more heat per unit than current designs, thermal impact to the flight system could be mitigated with shading and pointing if required by the mission. Alternatively, excess heat could prove beneficial in providing needed heat to spacecraft components and instruments in some thermal environments. Vibration for a new higher-power Stirling Radioisotope Generator (SRG) would be expected to be similar to the recent Advanced Stirling Radioisotope Generator (ASRG) design. While vibration should be low, it must be considered and addressed during spacecraft and instrument design. EMI and magnetic fields for new RPS concepts are expected to be low as for the current RPS, but must be considered and addressed if the mission includes sensitive instruments such as magnetometers. The assessment conducted for this paper focused on orbiter instrument payloads for two representative mission concepts- a Titan Saturn System Mission (TSSM) and a Uranus Orbiter and Probe (UOP)-since both of these Decadal Survey concepts would include many diverse instruments on board. Quick-look design studies using notional new RPS concepts were carried out for these two mission concepts, and their specific instrument packages were analyzed for their interactions with new RPS designs. The original Decadal Survey TSSM and UOP concepts did not have complete instrument performance requirements so typical measurement requirements were used where needed. Then, the general RPS environments were evaluated for impacts to various types of instruments. This paper describes how the potential impacts of the RPS on science instruments and measurements were assessed, which impacts were addressed, proposed mitigation strategies against those impacts, and provides an overview of future work.

RPS↗

NASA NTRS2017

Next-Generation RTGs for NASA

NASA has used Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators (RTGs) for nearly five decades to power planetary science missions where solar arrays or other power systems were impractical or ineffective. The Multi-Mission RTG (MMRTG) is the only type of RTG available for spaceflight today and it relies on technology used for the Pioneer and Viking missions of the 1970s. The MMRTG’s distant-relative, the General-Purpose Heat Source-RTG (GPHS-RTG), went out of production shortly after the turn of the twenty-first century. The thermoelectric technology it relied upon is several decades old and was first flown on the Voyager missions in 1977. While the GPHS-RTG could theoretically be brought out of mothballs, many advances have been made in thermoelectric materials, advances that warranted a clear-eyed review and study of the optimal properties of a “next-generation” RTG. This paper summarily describes the outcome of the study.

Woerner, David F.↗

NASA NTRS2013

The Status of Spacecraft Bus and Platform Technology Development under the NASA ISPT Program

The In-Space Propulsion Technology (ISPT) program is developing spacecraft bus and platform technologies that will enable or enhance NASA robotic science missions. The ISPT program is currently developing technology in four areas that include Propulsion System Technologies (electric and chemical), Entry Vehicle Technologies (aerocapture and Earth entry vehicles), Spacecraft Bus and Sample Return Propulsion Technologies (components and ascent vehicles), and Systems/Mission Analysis. Three technologies are ready for near-term flight infusion: 1) the high-temperature Advanced Material Bipropellant Rocket (AMBR) engine providing higher performance; 2) NASA s Evolutionary Xenon Thruster (NEXT) ion propulsion system, a 0.6-7 kW throttle-able gridded ion system; and 3) Aerocapture technology development with investments in a family of thermal protection system (TPS) materials and structures; guidance, navigation, and control (GN&C) models of blunt-body rigid aeroshells; and aerothermal effect models. Two component technologies being developed with flight infusion in mind are the Advanced Xenon Flow Control System and ultralightweight propellant tank technologies. Future directions for ISPT are technologies that relate to sample return missions and other spacecraft bus technology needs like: 1) Mars Ascent Vehicles (MAV); 2) multi-mission technologies for Earth Entry Vehicles (MMEEV); and 3) electric propulsion. These technologies are more vehicles and mission-focused, and present a different set of technology development and infusion steps beyond those previously implemented. The Systems/Mission Analysis area is focused on developing tools and assessing the application of propulsion and spacecraft bus technologies to a wide variety of mission concepts. These inspace propulsion technologies are applicable, and potentially enabling for future NASA Discovery, New Frontiers, and sample return missions currently under consideration, as well as having broad applicability to potential Flagship missions. This paper provides a brief overview of the ISPT program, describing the development status and technology infusion readiness of in-space propulsion technologies in the areas of electric propulsion, Aerocapture, Earth entry vehicles, propulsion components, Mars ascent vehicle, and mission/systems analysis.

Anderson, David J.↗

NASA NTRS2013

The Status of Spacecraft Bus and Platform Technology Development Under the NASA ISPT Program

The In-Space Propulsion Technology (ISPT) program is developing spacecraft bus and platform technologies that will enable or enhance NASA robotic science missions. The ISPT program is currently developing technology in four areas that include Propulsion System Technologies (electric and chemical), Entry Vehicle Technologies (aerocapture and Earth entry vehicles), Spacecraft Bus and Sample Return Propulsion Technologies (components and ascent vehicles), and Systems/Mission Analysis. Three technologies are ready for near-term flight infusion: 1) the high-temperature Advanced Material Bipropellant Rocket (AMBR) engine providing higher performance 2) NASAs Evolutionary Xenon Thruster (NEXT) ion propulsion system, a 0.6-7 kW throttle-able gridded ion system and 3) Aerocapture technology development with investments in a family of thermal protection system (TPS) materials and structures guidance, navigation, and control (GN&C) models of blunt-body rigid aeroshells and aerothermal effect models. Two component technologies being developed with flight infusion in mind are the Advanced Xenon Flow Control System, and ultra-lightweight propellant tank technologies. Future direction for ISPT are technologies that relate to sample return missions and other spacecraft bus technology needs like: 1) Mars Ascent Vehicles (MAV) 2) multi-mission technologies for Earth Entry Vehicles (MMEEV) and 3) electric propulsion. These technologies are more vehicle and mission-focused, and present a different set of technology development and infusion steps beyond those previously implemented. The Systems/Mission Analysis area is focused on developing tools and assessing the application of propulsion and spacecraft bus technologies to a wide variety of mission concepts. These in-space propulsion technologies are applicable, and potentially enabling for future NASA Discovery, New Frontiers, and sample return missions currently under consideration, as well as having broad applicability to potential Flagship missions. This paper provides a brief overview of the ISPT program, describing the development status and technology infusion readiness of in-space propulsion technologies in the areas of electric propulsion, Aerocapture, Earth entry vehicles, propulsion components, Mars ascent vehicle, and mission/systems analysis.

Anderson, David J.↗

NASA NTRS2013

Spacecraft Bus and Platform Technology Development under the NASA ISPT Program

The In-Space Propulsion Technology (ISPT) program is developing spacecraft bus and platform technologies that will enable or enhance NASA robotic science missions. The ISPT program is currently developing technology in four areas that include Propulsion System Technologies (electric and chemical), Entry Vehicle Technologies (aerocapture and Earth entry vehicles), Spacecraft Bus and Sample Return Propulsion Technologies (components and ascent vehicles), and Systems/Mission Analysis. Three technologies are ready for near-term flight infusion: 1) the high-temperature Advanced Material Bipropellant Rocket (AMBR) engine providing higher performance; 2) NASA s Evolutionary Xenon Thruster (NEXT) ion propulsion system, a 0.6-7 kW throttle-able gridded ion system; and 3) Aerocapture technology development with investments in a family of thermal protection system (TPS) materials and structures; guidance, navigation, and control (GN&C) models of blunt-body rigid aeroshells; and aerothermal effect models. Two component technologies being developed with flight infusion in mind are the Advanced Xenon Flow Control System, and ultra-lightweight propellant tank technologies. Future direction for ISPT are technologies that relate to sample return missions and other spacecraft bus technology needs like: 1) Mars Ascent Vehicles (MAV); 2) multi-mission technologies for Earth Entry Vehicles (MMEEV) for sample return missions; and 3) electric propulsion for sample return and low cost missions. These technologies are more vehicle and mission-focused, and present a different set of technology development and infusion steps beyond those previously implemented. The Systems/Mission Analysis area is focused on developing tools and assessing the application of propulsion and spacecraft bus technologies to a wide variety of mission concepts. These in-space propulsion technologies are applicable, and potentially enabling for future NASA Discovery, New Frontiers, and sample return missions currently under consideration, as well as having broad applicability to potential Flagship missions. This paper provides a brief overview of the ISPT program, describing the development status and technology infusion readiness of in-space propulsion technologies in the areas of electric propulsion, Aerocapture, Earth entry vehicles, propulsion components, Mars ascent vehicle, and mission/systems analysis.

Anderson, David J.↗

NASA NTRS2013

Spacecraft Bus and Platform Technology Development under the NASA ISPT Program

The In-Space Propulsion Technology (ISPT) program is developing spacecraft bus and platform technologies that will enable or enhance NASA robotic science missions. The ISPT program is currently developing technology in four areas that include Propulsion System Technologies (electric and chemical), Entry Vehicle Technologies (aerocapture and Earth entry vehicles), Spacecraft Bus and Sample Return Propulsion Technologies (components and ascent vehicles), and Systems/Mission Analysis. Three technologies are ready for near-term flight infusion: 1) the high-temperature Advanced Material Bipropellant Rocket (AMBR) engine providing higher performance 2) NASAs Evolutionary Xenon Thruster (NEXT) ion propulsion system, a 0.6-7 kW throttle-able gridded ion system and 3) Aerocapture technology development with investments in a family of thermal protection system (TPS) materials and structures guidance, navigation, and control (GN&C) models of blunt-body rigid aeroshells and aerothermal effect models. Two component technologies being developed with flight infusion in mind are the Advanced Xenon Flow Control System, and ultra-lightweight propellant tank technologies. Future direction for ISPT are technologies that relate to sample return missions and other spacecraft bus technology needs like: 1) Mars Ascent Vehicles (MAV) 2) multi-mission technologies for Earth Entry Vehicles (MMEEV) for sample return missions and 3) electric propulsion for sample return and low cost missions. These technologies are more vehicle and mission-focused, and present a different set of technology development and infusion steps beyond those previously implemented. The Systems/Mission Analysis area is focused on developing tools and assessing the application of propulsion and spacecraft bus technologies to a wide variety of mission concepts. These in-space propulsion technologies are applicable, and potentially enabling for future NASA Discovery, New Frontiers, and sample return missions currently under consideration, as well as having broad applicability to potential Flagship missions. This paper provides a brief overview of the ISPT program, describing the development status and technology infusion readiness of in-space propulsion technologies in the areas of electric propulsion, Aerocapture, Earth entry vehicles, propulsion components, Mars ascent vehicle, and mission/systems analysis.

Anderson, David J.↗

NASA NTRS2014

Addressing the Hard Factors for Command File Errors by Probabilistic Reasoning

Command File Errors (CFE) are managed using standard risk management approaches at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Over the last few years, more emphasis has been made on the collection, organization, and analysis of these errors for the purpose of reducing the CFE rates. More recently, probabilistic modeling techniques have been used for more in depth analysis of the perceived error rates of the DAWN mission and for managing the soft factors in the upcoming phases of the mission. We broadly classify the factors that can lead to CFE's as soft factors, which relate to the cognition of the operators and hard factors which relate to the Mission System which is composed of the hardware, software and procedures used for the generation, verification & validation and execution of commands. The focus of this paper is to use probabilistic models that represent multiple missions at JPL to determine the root cause and sensitivities of the various components of the mission system and develop recommendations and techniques for addressing them. The customization of these multi-mission models to a sample interplanetary spacecraft is done for this purpose.

Meshkat, Leila↗

NASA NTRS2019

EDOS Initiatives to Decrease Latency of NRT Data for LANCE

NASA's EOS Data and Operations System (EDOS) is the primary supplier of NRT (near real-time) data to the NASA NRT user community known as the Land, Atmosphere NRT Capability for EOS (LANCE). EDOS provides NRT data for various instruments on the EOS missions Terra, Aqua, Aura, as well as for the NOAA missions Suomi NPP and NOAA-20. This poster describes an overview of the EDOS multi-mission system with emphasis on the NRT products distributed for LANCE elements: AIRS, MISR, MLS, MODIS, MOPITT, OMPS, OMI and VIIRS. Remote EDOS high-rate data capture systems are deployed at NASA ground stations which provide data-driven capture of high-rate science for EOS missions. The remote EDOS components transfer the science data via high-rate WANs to the centralized EDOS Level-zero processing systems located at Goddard Space Flight Center. EDOS produces session-based data sets especially for LANCE NRT use from a single ground station contact; this data is sent to dual LANCE destinations as part of the standard redundancy requirement for LANCE elements. EDOS has implemented various latency improvements with the ultimate goal to have EDOS processing of NRT data keep up with the spacecraft data downlink. EDOS enhancements have included implementation of priority-based QoS, expanded network architecture to include open networks, and use of a delay-tolerant protocol. EDOS has streamlined its systems and infrastructure to minimize latency for NRT data delivery for LANCE. EDOS begins to transfer the NRT data to the LANCE elements within minutes of the end of the contact session with an average packet latency from instrument observation to Level 0 product delivery to each LANCE element of just over one hour.

Michael, Karen↗

NASA NTRS2021

High Performance, Web-Based, Real-Time Telemetry Visualization for Deep Space Mission Support and Operations

The Jet Propulsion Laboratory’s Mission ControlSystems Section and Mobility and Robotic Systems Section havepartnered to developed a high-performance telemetry visualizationsystem, based on our mature, web-based, 3D visualizationsoftware technology, that provides mission trajectory designers,operations personnel and reconstruction analysts with a highlyaccurate, re-usable, multi-mission solution to interactively visualizeresults from Entry, Descent and Landing (EDL) simulations,real-time mission test beds, live telemetry streams during criticalmission events, such as landing, as well as post-event reconstructionanalysis. This work builds on previous mission visualizationsystems that we have deployed for a variety of flight missions andJPL organizations including NASA’s Mars Science Laboratory(MSL), NASA’S Low Density Supersonic Decelerator (LDSD),NASA’s Soil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP), JPL’s MoonRiseLunar sample return proposal. JPL’s mission design teams, JPL’sOffice of Naval Research tasks, and JPL’s Education and PublicOutreach Office.

Wenzel, Sean↗

NASA NTRS2016

Open Source Next Generation Visualization Software for Interplanetary Missions

Mission control is evolving quickly, driven by the requirements of new missions, and enabled by modern computing capabilities. Distributed operations, access to data anywhere, data visualization for spacecraft analysis that spans multiple data sources, flexible reconfiguration to support multiple missions, and operator use cases, are driving the need for new capabilities. NASA's Advanced Multi-Mission Operations System (AMMOS), Ames Research Center (ARC) and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) are collaborating to build a new generation of mission operations software for visualization, to enable mission control anywhere, on the desktop, tablet and phone. The software is built on an open source platform that is open for contributions (http://nasa.github.io/openmct).

software engineering↗

NASA NTRS2019

Computing observation geometry for small satellites

Most solar system science missions need a variety of observation geometry–quantities such as position and velocity, range and altitude, viewing latitude and longitude, and lighting angles– to support mission engineering, science planning, and science data analysis activities. NASA's "SPICE" system offers one popular, multi-mission means for doing just that. SPICE comprises both data files, called kernels, and a SPICE software Toolkit that is available in many popular languages. A mission operations center produces the SPICE kernel files. Scientists and engineers write their own applications programs to address some need, and they include a few SPICE subroutines within that code to do the needed geometry computations. The SPICE system has been in use throughout NASA’s planetary science mission domain since 1991, and it has slowly spread to most major space agencies around the globe since then. The SPICE software is available in most popular languages, and for most popular platforms. The code is thoroughly tested before being released, and new versions of the Toolkit are always backwards compatible. The SPICE components are freely offered to everyone, and have no export, licensing or similar restrictions. Maybe using SPICE would work for your CubeSat or SmallSat mission?

Acton, Charles H.↗