Guidance and control considerations for advanced manned space missions.
Navigation, guidance and control developments for manned space missions, discussing earth orbital exploration bases
Gardiner, R. A.↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “NAVIGATION AND GUIDANCE”
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.
Historical Retrospective on Orion GNC Design
On November 16, 2022, Artemis I successfully launched and began a nearly 26-day journey returning a human-rated spacecraft to the Moon for the first time in fifty years. The mission was a huge success and once again the world's attention was focused on the Moon. This paper will take a step back in time over the seventeen-plus years of design and development of the Orion Guidance Navigation and Control (GNC) system that carried the spacecraft 1.4 million miles around the Moon and landed safely back on earth off the coast of San Diego California. Key design decisions (good and not so good) and "first-ever" capabilities will be chronicled. This paper will explore such things as the most advanced on-board targeting system ever flown on a spacecraft, never-been-done-before autonomous planetary Optical Navigation, and the first-ever truly skip entry guided to the desired target within a few miles.
Guidance Navigation and Control↗
Autonomous GN and C for Spacecraft Exploration of Comets and Asteroids
A spacecraft guidance, navigation, and control (GN&C) system is needed to enable a spacecraft to descend to a surface, take a sample using a touch-and-go (TAG) sampling approach, and then safely ascend. At the time of this reporting, a flyable GN&C system that can accomplish these goals is beyond state of the art. This article describes AutoGNC, which is a GN&C system capable of addressing these goals, which has recently been developed and demonstrated to a maturity TRL-5-plus. The AutoGNC solution matures and integrates two previously existing JPL capabilities into a single unified GN&C system. The two capabilities are AutoNAV and GREX. AutoNAV is JPL s current flight navigation system, and is fairly mature with respect to flybys and rendezvous with small bodies, but is lacking capability for close surface proximity operations, sampling, and contact. G-REX is a suite of low-TRL algorithms and capabilities that enables spacecraft operations in close surface proximity and for performing sampling/contact. The development and integration of AutoNAV and G-REX components into AutoGNC provides a single, unified GN&C capability for addressing the autonomy, close-proximity, and sampling/contact aspects of small-body sample return missions. AutoGNC is an integrated capability comprising elements that were developed separately. The main algorithms and component capabilities that have been matured and integrated are autonomy for near-surface operations, terrain-relative navigation (TRN), real-time image-based feedback guidance and control, and six degrees of freedom (6DOF) control of the TAG sampling event. Autonomy is achieved based on an AutoGNC Executive written in Virtual Machine Language (VML) incorporating high-level control, data management, and fault protection. In descending to the surface, the AutoGNC system uses camera images to determine its position and velocity relative to the terrain. This capability for TRN leverages native capabilities of the original AutoNAV system, but required advancements that integrate the separate capabilities for shape modeling, state estimation, image rendering, defining a database of onboard maps, and performing real-time landmark recognition against the stored maps. The ability to use images to guide the spacecraft requires the capability for image-based feedback control. In Auto- GNC, navigation estimates are fed into an onboard guidance and control system that keeps the spacecraft guided along a desired path, as it descends towards its targeted landing or sampling site. Once near the site, AutoGNC achieves a prescribed guidance condition for TAG sampling (position/orientation, velocity), and a prescribed force profile on the sampling end-effector. A dedicated 6DOF TAG control then implements the ascent burn while recovering from sampling disturbances and induced attitude rates. The control also minimizes structural interactions with flexible solar panels and disallows any part of the spacecraft from making contact with the ground (other than the intended end-effector).
Carson, John M.↗
Results of prototype software development for automation of shuttle proximity operations
The effort involves demonstration of expert system technology application to Shuttle rendezvous operations in a high-fidelity, real-time simulation environment. The JSC Systems Engineering Simulator (SES) served as the test bed for the demonstration. Rendezvous applications were focused on crew procedures and monitoring of sensor health and trajectory status. Proximity operations applications were focused on monitoring, crew advisory, and control of the approach trajectory. Guidance, Navigation, and Control areas of emphasis included the approach, transition and stationkeeping guidance, and laser docking sensor navigation. Operator interface displays for monitor and control functions were developed. A rule-based expert system was developed to manage the relative navigation system/sensors for nominal operations and simple failure contingencies. Testing resulted in the following findings; (1) the developed guidance is applicable for operations with LVLH stabilized targets; (2) closing rates less than 0.05 feet per second are difficult to maintain due to the Shuttle translational/rotational cross-coupling; (3) automated operations result in reduced propellant consumption and plume impingement effects on the target as compared to manual operations; and (4) braking gates are beneficial for trajectory management. A versatile guidance design was demonstrated. An accurate proximity operations sensor/navigation system to provide relative attitude information within 30 feet is required and redesign of the existing Shuttle digital autopilot should be considered to reduce the cross-coupling effects. This activity has demonstrated the feasibility of automated Shuttle proximity operations with the Space Station Freedom. Indications are that berthing operations as well as docking can be supported.
Hiers, Hal↗
Streamlining GNC Architecture Development and FSW Integration forthe Mars Ascent Vehicle
The Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) will be the first vehicle to perform an ascent from the surface ofanother atmospheric planetary body outside of the Earth-Moon system. Significant light-time delayrequires complete autonomy of flight throughout ascent, and naturally a high level of reliability isdesired in both MAV’s hardware and software subsystems. The MAV Guidance, Navigation and Controls(GNC) team and the MAV Flight Software (FSW) team have partnered together to improve the efficiencyof algorithm integration onto the MAV flight processor, and to increase confidence that said integrationis successful and without human error. An interface architecture is proposed for the GNC suite thatallows both the guidance and navigation subsystems to provide code algorithms directly in C++, and thecontrols subsystem to provide MATLAB Simulink auto-coded algorithms. Several continuous integration/deployment (CI/CD) methodologies have been considered for ease of transition of algorithm code fromthe GNC team to the FSW team. The GNC/FSW teams also worked together to develop a cFS-friendlywrapper which abstracts the integration of the GNC algorithm code into an interface-level API that iscompatible with cFS. Several iterations of vehicle GNC code have been produced between the GNC/FSWteam’s partnership, and this strong interface between these two teams have allowed the GNC/FSWteams to greatly increase confidence of efficient and error-free implementation of the GNC code ontoMAV for a successful flight.
GNC↗
Streamlining GNC Architecture Development and FSW Integration for the Mars Ascent Vehicle
The Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) will be the first vehicle to perform an ascent from the surface of another atmospheric planetary body outside of the Earth-Moon system. Significant light-time delay requires complete autonomy of flight throughout ascent, and naturally a high level of reliability is desired in both MAV’s hardware and software subsystems. The MAV Guidance, Navigation and Controls (GNC) team and the MAV Flight Software (FSW) team have partnered together to improve the efficiency of algorithm integration onto the MAV flight processor, and to increase confidence that said integration is successful and without human error. An interface architecture is proposed for the GNC suite that allows both the guidance and navigation subsystems to provide code algorithms directly in C++, and the controls subsystem to provide MATLAB Simulink auto-coded algorithms. Several continuous integration/deployment (CI/CD) methodologies have been considered for ease of transition of algorithm code from the GNC team to the FSW team. The GNC/FSW teams also worked together to develop a cFS-friendly wrapper which abstracts the integration of the GNC algorithm code into an interface-level API that is compatible with cFS. Several iterations of vehicle GNC code have been produced between the GNC/FSW team’s partnership, and this strong interface between these two teams have allowed the GNC/FSW teams to greatly increase confidence of efficient and error-free implementation of the GNC code onto MAV for a successful flight.
Engineering↗
Mars Ascent Vehicle GNC Targeting Routines with Considerations for Flight Software Development
The Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) will be the first vehicle to perform an ascent from the surface of another atmospheric planetary body outside of the Earth-Moon system. Significant light-time delay requires complete autonomy of flight throughout ascent, and naturally a high level of reliability is desired in both MAV’s hardware and software subsystems. The MAV Guidance, Navigation and Controls (GNC) team and the MAV Flight Software (FSW) team have partnered together to improve the efficiency of algorithm integration onto the MAV flight processor, and to increase confidence that said integration is successful and without human error. An interface architecture is proposed for the GNC suite that allows both the guidance and navigation subsystems to provide code algorithms directly in C++, and the controls subsystem to provide MATLAB Simulink auto-coded algorithms. Several continuous integration/deployment (CI/CD) methodologies have been considered for ease of transition of algorithm code from the GNC team to the FSW team. The GNC/FSW teams also worked together to develop a cFS-friendly wrapper which abstracts the integration of the GNC algorithm code into an interface-level API that is compatible with cFS. Several iterations of vehicle GNC code have been produced between the GNC/FSW team’s partnership, and this strong interface between these two teams have allowed the GNC/FSW teams to greatly increase confidence of efficient and error-free implementation of the GNC code onto MAV for a successful flight.
Jason Everett↗
Relative navigation for spacecraft formation flying
The Goddard Space Flight Center Guidance, Navigation, and Control Center (GNCC) is currently developing and implementing advanced satellite systems to provide autonomous control of formation flyers. The initial formation maintenance capability will be flight-demonstrated on the Earth-Orbiter-1 (EO-1) satellite, which is planned under the National Aeronautics and Space Administration New Millennium Program to be a coflight with the Landsat-7 (L-7) satellite. Formation flying imposes relative navigation accuracy requirements in addition to the orbit accuracy requirements for the individual satellites. In the case of EO-1 and L-7, the two satellites are in nearly coplanar orbits, with a small difference in the longitude of the ascending node to compensate for the Earth's rotation. The GNCC has performed trajectory error analysis for the relative navigation of the EO-1/L-7 formation, as well as for a more advanced tracking configuration using cross-link satellite communications. This paper discusses the orbit determination and prediction accuracy achievable for EO-1 and L-7 under various tracking and orbit determination scenarios and discusses the expected relative separation errors in their formation flying configuration.
Hartman, Kate R.↗
Relative Navigation for Spacecraft Formation Flying
The Goddard Space Flight Center Guidance, Navigation, and Control Center (GNCC) is currently developing and implementing advanced satellite systems to provide autonomous control of formation flyers. The initial formation maintenance capability will be flight-demonstrated on the Earth-Orbiter-1 (EO-l) satellite, which is planned under the National Aeronautics and Space Administration New Millennium Program to be a coflight with the Landsat-7 (L-7) satellite. Formation flying imposes relative navigation accuracy requirements in addition to the orbit accuracy requirements for the individual satellites. In the case of EO-1 and L-7, the two satellites are in nearly coplanar orbits, with a small difference in the longitude of the ascending node to compensate for the Earth's rotation. The GNCC has performed trajectory error analysis for the relative navigation of the EO-1/L-7 formation, as well as for a more advanced tracking configuration using cross- link satellite communications. This paper discusses the orbit determination and prediction accuracy achievable for EO-1 and L-7 under various tracking and orbit determination scenarios and discusses the expected relative separation errors in their formation flying configuration.
Hartman, Kate R.↗
Looking Back and Looking Forward: Reprising the Promise and Predicting the Future of Formation Flying and Spaceborne GPS Navigation Systems
A retrospective consideration of two 15-year old Guidance, Navigation and Control (GN&C) technology 'vision' predictions will be the focus of this paper. A look back analysis and critique of these late 1990s technology roadmaps out-lining the future vision, for two then nascent, but rapidly emerging, GN&C technologies will be performed. Specifically, these two GN&C technologies were: 1) multi-spacecraft formation flying and 2) the spaceborne use and exploitation of global positioning system (GPS) signals to enable formation flying. This paper reprises the promise of formation flying and spaceborne GPS as depicted in the cited 1999 and 1998 papers. It will discuss what happened to cause that promise to be mostly unfulfilled and the reasons why the envisioned formation flying dream has yet to become a reality. The recent technology trends over the past few years will then be identified and a renewed government interest in spacecraft formation flying/cluster flight will be highlighted. The authors will conclude with a reality-tempered perspective, 15 years after the initial technology roadmaps were published, predicting a promising future of spacecraft formation flying technology development over the next decade.
Bauer, Frank H.↗
Autonomous Nanosatellite Swarming (ANS) Using Radio Frequency and Optical Navigation
The Autonomous Nanosatellite Swarming (ANS) subsystem is a dynamics, guidance, navigation, and control software unit based on commercial-off-the-shelf avionics, which is distributed and deployed on a cluster of cooperative nanosatellites to enable future exploration missions to near-Earth objects (NEOs). ANS allows multiple nanosatellites to act together as a single large spacecraft through radio-frequency (RF) cross-links, optical navigation, and low-thrust control. In particular, ANS-equipped nanosatellites can utilize images of a NEO taken from multiple viewpoints to achieve stereo-vision capabilities and characterize the target body’s shape, gravity field, and dynamical properties. All this is enabled by the fusion of major advances to the state of the art in the astrodynamics of relative motion, RF and vision-based navigation, as well as low-thrust control.
Simone D'Amico↗
Historical Retrospective on Orion GNC Design
On November 16, 2022, Artemis I successfully launched and began a nearly 26-day journey returning a human-rated spacecraft to the Moon for the first time in fifty years. The mission was a huge success and once again the world's attention was focused on the Moon. This paper will take a step back in time over the seventeen-plus years of design and development of the Orion Guidance Navigation and Control (GNC) system that carried the spacecraft 1.4 million miles around the Moon and landed safely back on earth off the coast of San Diego California. Key design decisions (good and not so good) and "first-ever" capabilities will be chronicled. This paper will explore such things as the most advanced on-board targeting system ever flown on a spacecraft, never-been-done-before autonomous planetary Optical Navigation, and the first-ever truly skip entry guided to the desired target within a few miles.
Guidance Navigation and Control↗
An analysis of approach navigation accuracy and guidance requirements for the grand tour mission to the outer planets
The navigation and guidance process for the Jupiter, Saturn and Uranus planetary encounter phases of the 1977 Grand Tour interior mission was simulated. Reference approach navigation accuracies were defined and the relative information content of the various observation types were evaluated. Reference encounter guidance requirements were defined, sensitivities to assumed simulation model parameters were determined and the adequacy of the linear estimation theory was assessed. A linear sequential estimator was used to provide an estimate of the augmented state vector, consisting of the six state variables of position and velocity plus the three components of a planet position bias. The guidance process was simulated using a nonspherical model of the execution errors. Computation algorithms which simulate the navigation and guidance process were derived from theory and implemented into two research-oriented computer programs, written in FORTRAN.
Jones, D. W.↗
Application of Micro-Thruster Technology for Space Observatory Pointing Stability
This assessment was requested by the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C) Technical Discipline Team (TDT), which identified the topic as an unrecognized critical need for the Agency’s future space science observatory-class space platforms. An initial low-fidelity feasibility study of the use of cold-gas micro-thrusters as a replacement for reaction wheels was performed in 2017 as a GN&C TDT discretionary activity. The assessment documented in this final report was initiated in 2018 as a follow-on high-fidelity study.
Guidance↗
NASA Space Observatory Precision Pointing Benchmark Problem Development
An interagency workshop in May 2021 on guidance, navigation, and control (GNC) verification and validation (V&V) methods and techniques identified needs for the formulation and public release of relevant V&V benchmark problems as a practical way forward for the discipline. A decision was made by the NASA Technical Fellow for GNC and the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) GNC Technical Discipline Team (TDT) to produce a benchmark problem focusing on the problem of space observatory precision pointing. This report contains the results of the NESC assessment.
NASA Engineering and Safety Center↗
Flight demonstrations of curved, descending approaches and automatic landings using time referenced scanning beam guidance
The Terminal Configured Vehicle (TCV) program operates a Boeing 737 modified to include a second cockpit and a large amount of experimental navigation, guidance and control equipment for research on advanced avionics systems. Demonstration flights to include curved approaches and automatic landings were tracked by a phototheodolite system. For 50 approaches during the demonstration flights, the following results were obtained: the navigation system, using TRSB guidance, delivered the aircraft onto the 3 nautical mile final approach leg with an average overshoot of 25 feet past centerline, subjet to a 2-sigma dispersion of 90 feet. Lateral tracking data showed a mean error of 4.6 feet left of centerline at the category 1 decision height (200 feet) and 2.7 feet left of centerline at the category 2 decision height (100 feet). These values were subject to a sigma dispersion of about 10 feet. Finally, the glidepath tracking errors were 2.5 feet and 3.0 feet high at the category 1 and 2 decision heights, respectively, with a 2 sigma value of 6 feet.
White, W. F.↗
Spacecraft Line-of-Sight Jitter Management and Mitigation Lessons Learned and Engineering Best Practices
Predicting, managing, controlling, and testing spacecraft line-of-sight (LoS) jitter caused by micro-vibrations due to on-board internal disturbance sources is a formidable multidisciplinary engineering task. It is especially challenging for those missions hosting high-performance (e.g., nano-radian/milli-arcsecond class), vibration-sensitive optical sensor payloads with stringent pointing stability requirements. The Nation Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the European Space Agency (ESA) are planning technically aggressive spaceflight missions that include ultra-high-performance optical payloads with delicate, highly vibration-sensitive scientific and observational instruments. The guidance, navigation, and control community of practice will need to leverage collective experiences and document their best practices and lessons learned to address future micro-vibration challenges. To identify lessons learned and best practices the NASA Engineering & Safety Center sponsored a 2-day Spacecraft LoS Jitter Workshop in late 2019. The workshop’s goal was to provide a multidisciplinary forum to elicit deeper understanding of the issues related to addressing the spacecraft LoS jitter/micro-vibration problem. The primary objective was to identify, document, and share lessons learned, best practices, and preferred options for jitter-related analysis and test activities. Representatives from NASA, ESA, along with NASA’s industrial partners, independent consultant subject matter experts, and members of academia participated in the workshop. This paper describes the motivation for the workshop and summarize the identified findings and recommendations.
Lessons Learned↗
Global Precipitation Measurement Mission Launch and Commissioning
During launch and early operation of the Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM) Mission, the Guidance, Navigation and Control (GNC) analysis team encountered four main on orbit anomalies. These include: (1) unexpected shock from Solar Array deployment, (2) momentum buildup from the Magnetic Torquer Bars (MTBs) phasing errors, (3) transition into Safehold due to albedo-induced Course Sun Sensor (CSS) anomaly, and (4) a flight software error that could cause a Safehold transition due to a Star Tracker occultation. This paper will discuss ways GNC engineers identified and tracked down the root causes. Flight data and GNC on board models will be shown to illustrate how each of these anomalies were investigated and mitigated before causing any harm to the spacecraft. On May 29, 2014, GPM was handed over to the Mission Flight Operations Team after a successful commissioning period. Currently, GPM is operating nominally on orbit, collecting meaningful scientific data that will significantly improve our understanding of the Earth's climate and water cycle.
Guidance Navigation and Control↗