Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Automation and Autonomy”

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 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2012

Onboard Autonomy and Ground Operations Automation for the Intelligent Payload Experiment (IPEX) CubeSat Mission

The Intelligent Payload Experiment (IPEX) is a cubesat manifested for launch in October 2013 that will flight validate autonomous operations for onboard instrument processing and product generation for the Intelligent Payload Module (IPM) of the Hyperspectral Infra-red Imager (HyspIRI) mission concept. We first describe the ground and flight operations concept for HyspIRI IPM operations. We then describe the ground and flight operations concept for the IPEX mission and how that will validate HyspIRI IPM operations. We then detail the current status of the mission and outline the schedule for future development.

project data planning↗
NASA NTRS2017

Developing a General Framework for Human Autonomy Teaming

Automation has entered nearly every aspect of our lives, but it often remains hard to understand. Why is this? Automation is often brittle, requiring constant human oversight to assure it operates as intended. This oversight has become harder as automation has become more complicated. To resolve this problem, Human-Autonomy Teaming (HAT) has been proposed. HAT looks to make automation act as more of a teammate, by having it communicate with human operators in a more human, goal-directed, manner which provides transparency into the reasoning behind automated recommendations and actions. This, in turn, permits more trust in the automation when it is appropriate, and less when it is not, allowing a more targeted supervision of automated functions. This paper proposes a framework for HAT, incorporating two key tenets: bi-directional communication, and operator directed authority. We have successfully applied these tenets to integrating the autonomous constrained flight planner (an aide for planning diverts) into a dispatch station. We propose the development of general design patterns that may allow these results to be generalized to domains such as photography and automotive navigation. While these domains are very different, we find application of our HAT tenets provides a number of opportunities for improving interaction between human operators and automation.

human factors↗
NASA NTRS1988

The Systems Autonomy Demonstration Project - Catalyst for Space Station advanced automation

The Systems Autonomy Demonstration Project (SADP) was initiated by NASA to address the advanced automation needs for the Space Station program. The application of advanced automation to the Space Station's operations management system (OMS) is discussed. The SADP's future goals and objectives are discussed with respect to OMS functional requirements, design, and desired evolutionary capabilities. Major technical challenges facing the designers, developers, and users of the OMS are identified in order to guide the definition of objectives, plans, and scenarios for future SADP demonstrations, and to focus the efforts on the supporting research.

Healey, Kathleen J.↗
NASA NTRS1990

NASA systems autonomy demonstration project: Advanced automation demonstration of Space Station Freedom thermal control system

The NASA Systems Autonomy Demonstration Project (SADP) was initiated in response to Congressional interest in Space station automation technology demonstration. The SADP is a joint cooperative effort between Ames Research Center (ARC) and Johnson Space Center (JSC) to demonstrate advanced automation technology feasibility using the Space Station Freedom Thermal Control System (TCS) test bed. A model-based expert system and its operator interface were developed by knowledge engineers, AI researchers, and human factors researchers at ARC working with the domain experts and system integration engineers at JSC. Its target application is a prototype heat acquisition and transport subsystem of a space station TCS. The demonstration is scheduled to be conducted at JSC in August, 1989. The demonstration will consist of a detailed test of the ability of the Thermal Expert System to conduct real time normal operations (start-up, set point changes, shut-down) and to conduct fault detection, isolation, and recovery (FDIR) on the test article. The FDIR will be conducted by injecting ten component level failures that will manifest themselves as seven different system level faults. Here, the SADP goals, are described as well as the Thermal Control Expert System that has been developed for demonstration.

Dominick, Jeffrey↗
NASA NTRS2018

Contingency Management with Human Autonomy Teaming

Automation is playing an increasingly important role in many operations. It is often cheaper faster and more precise than human operators. However, automation is not perfect. There are many situations in which a human operator must step in. We refer to these instances as contingencies and the act of stepping in contingency management. Here we propose coupling Human Autonomy Teaming (HAT) with contingency management. We describe two aspects to HAT, bi-directional communication, and working agreements (or plays). Bi-directional communication like Crew Resource Management in traditional aviation, allows all parties to contribute to a decision. Working agreements specify roles and responsibilities. Importantly working agreements allow for the possibility of roles and responsibilities changing depending on environmental factors (e.g., situations the automation was not designed for, workload, risk, or trust). This allows for the automation to "automatically" become more autonomous as it becomes more trusted and/or it is updated to deal with a more complete set of possible situations. We present a concrete example using a prototype contingency management station one might find in a future airline operations center. Automation proposes reroutes for aircraft that encounter bad weather or are forced to divert for environmental or systems reasons. If specific conditions are met, these recommendations may be autonomously datalinked to the affected aircraft.

dispatch↗
NASA NTRS2017

Predicting the Operational Acceptability of Route Advisories

NASA envisions a future Air Traffic Management system that allows safe, efficient growth in global operations, enabled by increasing levels of automation and autonomy. In a safety-critical system, the introduction of increasing automation and autonomy has to be done in stages, making human-system integrated concepts critical in the foreseeable future. One example where this is relevant is for tools that generate more efficient flight routings or reroute advisories. If these routes are not operationally acceptable, they will be rejected by human operators, and the associated benefits will not be realized. Operational acceptance is therefore required to enable the increased efficiency and reduced workload benefits associated with these tools. In this paper, the authors develop a predictor of operational acceptability for reroute advisories. Such a capability has applications in tools that identify more efficient routings around weather and congestion and that better meet airline preferences. The capability is based on applying data mining techniques to flight plan amendment data reported by the Federal Aviation Administration and data on requested reroutes collected from a field trial of the NASA developed Dynamic Weather Routes tool, which advised efficient route changes to American Airlines dispatchers in 2014. 10-Fold cross validation was used for feature, model and parameter selection, while nested cross validation was used to validate the model. The model performed well in predicting controller acceptance or rejection of a route change as indicated by chosen performance metrics. Features identified as relevant to controller acceptance included the historical usage of the advised route, the location of the maneuver start point relative to the boundaries of the airspace sector containing the maneuver start (the maneuver start sector), the reroute deviation from the original flight plan, and the demand level in the maneuver start sector. A random forest with forty trees was the best performing of the five models evaluated in this paper.

route advisories↗
NASA NTRS2017

Predicting the Operational Acceptability of Route Advisories

NASA envisions a future Air Traffic Management system that allows safe, efficient growth in global operations, enabled by increasing levels of automation and autonomy. In a safety-critical system, the introduction of increasing automation and autonomy has to be done in stages, making human-system integrated concepts critical in the foreseeable future. One example where this is relevant is for tools that generate more efficient flight routings or reroute advisories. If these routes are not operationally acceptable, they will be rejected by human operators, and the associated benefits will not be realized. Operational acceptance is therefore required to enable the increased efficiency and reduced workload benefits associated with these tools. In this paper, the authors develop a predictor of operational acceptability for reroute advisories. Such a capability has applications in tools that identify more efficient routings around weather and congestion and that better meet airline preferences. The capability is based on applying data mining techniques to flight plan amendment data reported by the Federal Aviation Administration and data on requested reroutes collected from a field trial of the NASA developed Dynamic Weather Routes tool, which advised efficient route changes to American Airlines dispatchers in 2014. 10-Fold cross validation was used for feature, model and parameter selection, while nested cross validation was used to validate the model. The model performed well in predicting controller acceptance or rejection of a route change as indicated by chosen performance metrics. Features identified as relevant to controller acceptance included the historical usage of the advised route, the location of the maneuver start point relative to the boundaries of the airspace sector containing the maneuver start (the maneuver start sector), the reroute deviation from the original flight plan, and the demand level in the maneuver start sector. A random forest with forty trees was the best performing of the five models evaluated in this paper.

operational acceptability↗
NASA NTRS1984

Progressive autonomy

The present investigation is concerned with the evolution of a space station in terms of the progression of autonomy, as systems perspectives and architectural concepts permit. The distinction between automation and autonomy is considered along with the evolution of autonomy, and the evolution of automation in station operations. Attention is given to the startup of a complex technological system, aspects of station control, questions of crew operational support, factors regarding the habitability of a space station, system design philosophy for autonomy, evolvability, latent capability, stage commonality, and multiple modularity. It is concluded that an evolutionary space station operating over a period of 10-20 years with a great increase in capability over that time will require a design philosophy which is more flexible and open-ended than for previous space systems.

Anderson, J. L.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Uncrewed Lunar Surface Operations and Support Activities

Sustained human presence on the surface of the Moon and future missions to Mars require increased independence from surface crews and Earth-based mission control to operate efficiently, safely, and reliably. The time for surface crews to perform tasks will be limited. Extravehicular activities by surface personnel are burdensome and time-consuming, even when a continuous human presence on the surface occurs. Identifying and balancing human/automation roles and tasks and infusing automation and autonomy practices early in a system’s lifecycle will be essential to achieve mission objectives. Among these objectives are attaining a sustained human presence, improving performance and mission effectiveness, reducing operations and maintenance (O&M) costs, and ensuring operations that are robust to communication delays. To achieve these objectives, an operational shift toward increased automation and autonomy with less reliance on humans is needed. Uncrewed lunar surface operations and support activities occur when surface crews are not present or are independent of surface crew timeline activities requiring no surface crew oversight or intervention. These uncrewed surface opportunities can also be planned to minimize crew workload that avoids routine maintenance and support tasks, thus maximizing crew exploration time. Uncrewed preparations such as staging and prepositioning equipment and materials before the crew arrives could improve crew task efficiency. Additional opportunities exist to conduct uncrewed science, exploration, and utilization. Uncrewed surface architecture functions can include science and exploration; habitation; launch and landing support; surface communication and navigation; surface power generation and distribution; human surface mobility; lifting, handling, manipulating; excavation, construction, and site preparation; logistics management; maintenance and repair; surface resource utilization; integrated site operations and shared support services (e.g., site scheduling/prioritization, dust mitigation/contamination control, and surface safety). Early robotic lunar surface campaigns will provide information on the availability of resources, such as oxygen and water, and demonstrate surface-based technologies. After the Artemis III human lunar return mission, a series of landers will deliver surface systems, cargo, supplies, science packages, spare parts, and commodities. A balance of crewed and uncrewed surface operations will enable a sustained lunar surface presence at the South Pole of the Moon at a site that will be known as the Artemis Base Camp (ABC). It is envisioned that base camp operations on and around the Moon will then help prepare for the mission durations and activities needed to support the first human mission to Mars. Before long-duration crew missions to the base camp can occur, the necessary surface infrastructure will be pre-deployed and verified operational. Surface assets will be teleoperated and remotely managed from Earth. Additionally, robotic and short-duration crewed missions to the ABC will ensure the site’s merit to achieve long-term science objectives, availability of usable resources, and that terrain, seasonal variations, and illumination conditions are acceptable. ABC will consist of different areas where specific functions and services are rendered, including: • Launch and Landing Area • Habitation Area • Power Production Area • Resource Areas Launch and Landing Area—The launch and landing area will support associated functions for the arrival and departure of vehicles, such as crewed landing and ascent and uncrewed cargo deliveries and offloading. It will evolve from an unimproved site at the beginning of the exploration campaign to a more sustainable landing and launch area that can support repeated arrivals and departures. Initial uncrewed Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) surface operations may include emplacement of navigation beacons and communication equipment, real-time video and photography of landing/liftoff events, and element repositioning, such as portable utility power (PUP) (applicable for other landed assets at other areas). Site preparations, such as surface leveling, soil compaction, and berm/path construction, may be needed for a more sustainable launch and landing area capable of accommodating vehicles that are increasingly more reusable and reduce the effects of plume surface interactions and ejecta impacts on nearby surface assets. During the ABC missions, cargo and logistics will be delivered to the lunar surface via robotic cargo landers before the crew arrives. These shipments, which can arrive in pressurized logistics carriers, will deliver the logistics necessary to support a crewed mission and include items such as food, water, equipment spares, etc. Providing the capability to retrieve, offload, and transport the logistics closer to the ABC site before the arrival of the crew will increase the overall efficiency of crew operations once they arrive. In the sustained phase of exploration, other supporting services may be needed, such as lander propellant servicing, surface power services, commodity refreshes, and additional inspection, maintenance, and repair capabilities, to sustain a cadence of extended personnel stays and cargo arrivals and departures. Habitation Area—Uncrewed support to surface habitation could involve supporting activation and pre-entry operations of the habitat while the crew is in orbit at the Gateway outpost preparing for a surface landing. Surface Habitat (SH) uncrewed operations may include bringing the cabin environment to a habitable temperature and air mix and activating other critical crew support systems. Potential crop production uncrewed tasks in the SH could also include autonomous watering and tending. Additionally, when the crew departs, the SH enters dormancy for the long period of uncrewed operation. A logistical staging area could also be collocated near the SH. If so, staging operations for crew supplies, waste re-location, and recycling operations may be opportunities for uncrewed operations. Power Production Area—The Fission Surface Power (FSP) element and its supporting distribution equipment provide power to surface elements as needed across the ABC to supplement day-to-day operations and survive lunar nights. Uncrewed support of this power system includes any initial LTV-assisted deployments of cables and other distributed equipment, associated electrical connections, and system testing and activation operations. Robotically performing some inspections, maintenance, or repair tasks on the power distribution equipment could reduce the surface crew workload. Resource Area— Uncrewed resource prospecting, mapping, and characterizing possible resource sites is likely to be time-consuming and represents an opportunity for uncrewed operations between crewed missions. Uncrewed mobile equipment operations will be needed in the extreme environments of permanently shadowed locations where resource extractions occur. As In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) pilot plant operations begin, uncrewed surface support activities with available mobile and portable assets (LTV, PUP, etc.) will better support these operations. Any produced commodities can be stored at a centralized storage location for future use. Also associated with these operations is the use of mobile robotic excavators for resource acquisition and robotic/autonomous regolith processing. The waste tailings generated during excavation and regolith processing would also need to be transported and deposited at a dedicated location. Surface assets will continue operating between crew visits to maintain surface capabilities, conduct lunar surface science, technology demonstrations, and public outreach opportunities. Additionally, certain sustaining tasks that would consume valuable crew time could be performed before crew arrival, or after their departure. This capability may offer more affordable options to construct, activate, test, and maintain a broad set of surface assets. Telerobotically operated human surface mobility systems, such as the LTV and Pressurized Rover (PR), can be utilized for various tasks. Surface environmental conditions pose a distinct challenge for all these activities. Surface illumination and localized shadows are one such factor. Night-survival operations could consist of thermal management, battery pre-charging, and load shedding. Some surface systems may hibernate through the night and then awake and continue nominal operations. Uncrewed mobile assets may use a more adaptive approach to optimize their power and operations; one method is to follow the sunlight. Night-survival operations may be initiated remotely by teleoperation, automated, or accomplished by supervised autonomous operation. The ability to pre-deploy and control remote assets in orbit or on Mars before the arrival of the mission crew is a key capability that can be simulated on the moon. The base camp provides a venue where these advanced operational concepts, technologies, and autonomous methods and techniques, including the incorporation of time delays to simulate Earth-Mars latency can be replicated to help buy down future Mars mission risks. This paper will examine the evolution of uncrewed lunar surface operations and support activities. It will also discuss the lunar surface environmental conditions (thermal, lighting, terrain, topography, communications) along with the challenges they pose on uncrewed surface operations, and the performance of these activities with limited to minimal human interaction and/or teleoperation. Since lunar missions include Mars mission analogs, such investigation provides the framework for future uncrewed Mars mission support.

Mark E Lewis↗
NASA NTRS2001

Challenges and Lessons Learned in the Application of Autonomy to Space Operations

NASA's Space Operations Management Office (SOMO) is working toward a goal of providing an integrated infrastructure of mission and data services for space missions undertaken by NASA enterprises. A significant portion of this effort is focused on reducing the cost of these services. We are interested in the potential of autonomy to reduce operations costs. SOMO services support space missions, but are not part of the mission objectives; therefore the level of acceptable risk is very low. In fact, SOMO could be effective ly prevented from applying autonomy if customers merely perceive it as adding risk to their mission(s). We are interested in this workshop from the standpoint of understanding what can be done to realize the potential cost savings due to autonomy while maintaining acceptable risk and serving the needs of our customers. We would like to present our lessons learned so far in adopting autonomy and automation, which we think will contribute to clarifying the challenges facing the use of such technology. SOMO provides services to a diverse and ambitious set of mission customers. Many of these missions are groundbreaking missions for which communications, data, and other operations requirements sometimes cannot be clearly articulated early in the program. This motivates a need for systems that are robust in the face of unanticipated situations so that customer missions are not unreasonably constrained or impacted by "shortcomings" in SOMO services. One of SOMO's primary goals is to realize a paradigm in which SOMO acts as a service provider to organizations that fly space missions for NASA, other government agencies, and even the commercial sector. These organizations purchase SOMO services "by the pound" as customers. We have to provide systems that are not experiments themselves, but rather stable bases from which to do bold experiments. To this end, SOMO also seeks to work closely with industry to see that robust autonomy technology gets infused into products and services for the space industry and beyond. The potential for application of these technologies spans space-based communications networks (e.g. TDRSS) and ground-based assets including communication and tracking antenna systems, data networks, and control centers. There are several problems that are candidates for the application of autonomy, if it can be made reliable enough, including: antenna control, antenna scheduling, communication link scheduling and operation, navigation, attitude determination, fault detection, isolation, and reconfiguration (for spacecraft or ground assets), and mission-level planning and scheduling. Some attempts have been made to apply autonomy and automation in these areas in the past with varying degrees of success. We will present relevant case histories and the lessons inferred from them. Combining this past experience with anticipated future needs, we can clarify the challenges that must be met in order to realize the benefits of autonomy.

Forrest, David J.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human Systems Integration Approach in Implementing Voice-Control of Future Spacecraft Systems

Crewed spacecraft and habitats of the future will require more automation and autonomy to support complex missions. However, these complex systems require a more efficient command and control input method. Speech recognition along with visual or auditory feedback is an alternative, providing an extra pair of hands and eyes for the crew. Yet, speech recognition demands a highly integrated development approach to ensure a successful system implementation. To ensure the voice control application is developed correctly will require a Human Systems Integration (HSI) approach. This paper provides an insight into the development of a speech/voice control application of a spacecraft system that encompasses automation and autonomy through an HSI approach. Results of the voice control experiment of the Space Shuttle camera system are provided as lessons learned about voice control on a spacecraft. Limitations and challenges of the technology are addressed as well as how HSI can help develop these types of voice control command and control systems.

Voice control↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Applying NASA’s Human Systems Integration Methodology in Implementing Voice-Control of Future Spacecraft Systems

Through the NASA Artemis program, a new era of space exploration will serve to lead humanity towards sustained lunar exploration in preparation for the next giant leap-human exploration of Mars. These crewed spacecraft and habitats will require more automation and autonomy to support these complex missions. Crew size will be small and therefore a more efficient command and control input method is desired. Speech recognition along with visual or auditory feedback is an alternative, providing an extra pair of hands and eyes for the crew. Yet, speech recognition demands a highly integrated development approach to ensure a successful system implementation. To ensure the voice control application is developed correctly will require a Human Systems Integration (HSI) approach. This paper provides an insight into the development of a speech/voice control application for a spacecraft system that encompasses automation and autonomy through an HSI approach. Results of the voice control experiment of the Space Shuttle camera system are provided as lessons learned about using voice control on a spacecraft. Limitations and challenges of the technology are addressed as well as how HSI along with Human Readiness Level can help successfully develop voice control command and control systems.

Systems Engineering↗
NASA NTRS1986

Artificial intelligence for Space Station automation: Crew safety, productivity, autonomy, augmented capability

Artificial intelligence (AI) R&D projects for the successful and efficient operation of the Space Station are described. The book explores the most advanced AI-based technologies, reviews the results of concept design studies to determine required AI capabilities, details demonstrations that would indicate the existence of these capabilities, and develops an R&D plan leading to such demonstrations. Particular attention is given to teleoperation and robotics, sensors, expert systems, computers, planning, and man-machine interface.

Firschein, O.↗
NASA NTRS2006

Enhancing Science and Automating Operations using Onboard Autonomy

In this paper, we will describe the evolution of the software from prototype to full time operation onboard Earth Observing One (EO-1). We will quantify the increase in science, decrease in operations cost, and streamlining of operations procedures. Included will be a description of how this software was adapted post-launch to the EO-1 mission, which had very limited computing resources which constrained the autonomy flight software. We will discuss ongoing deployments of this software to the Mars Exploration Rovers and Mars Odyssey Missions as well as a discussion of lessons learned during this project. Finally, we will discuss how the onboard autonomy has been used in conjunction with other satellites and ground sensors to form an autonomous sensor-web to study volcanoes, floods, sea-ice topography, and wild fires. As demonstrated on EO-1, onboard autonomy is a revolutionary advance that will change the operations approach on future NASA missions...

Earth Observing One (EO-1)↗
NASA NTRS1996

Human-Centered Aviation Automation: Principles and Guidelines

This document presents principles and guidelines for human-centered automation in aircraft and in the aviation system. Drawing upon operational experience with highly automated aircraft, it describes classes of problems that have occurred in these vehicles, the effects of advanced automation on the human operators of the aviation system, and ways in which these problems may be avoided in the design of future aircraft and air traffic management automation. Many incidents and a few serious accidents suggest that these problems are related to automation complexity, autonomy, coupling, and opacity, or inadequate feedback to operators. An automation philosophy that emphasizes improved communication, coordination and cooperation between the human and machine elements of this complex, distributed system is required to improve the safety and efficiency of aviation operations in the future.

Billings, Charles E.↗