Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “NASA Gateway 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.

29 records · Page 2

Advanced Multimodal Solutions for Information Presentation

High-workload, fast-paced, and degraded sensory environments are the likeliest candidates to benefit from multimodal information presentation. For example, during extra-vehicular activity (EVA) and telerobotic operations, the sensory restrictions associated with such a hostile environment provide a major challenge to maintaining the situation awareness (SA) required for safe operations. In particular, orientation, navigation, and collision avoidance are critical aspects of EVA tasks that need to be addressed to ensure the safety of the crew and the success of the mission. Multimodal displays hold promise to enhance situation awareness and task performance by utilizing different sensory modalities and maximizing their effectiveness based on appropriate interaction between modalities. Multimodal displays will also play an important role for long-duration information systems and will likely begin to be developed in the early phases of cislunar Gateway, and later lunar or Mars transit missions. Information systems are envisioned for LDEMs that require spacecraft with greater crew autonomy and increased dependence on computer-provided information needed to perform routine tasks, as well as time- and safety critical tasks. Such a system will require a single, common interface that is easy to learn and use and accesses key information from all relevant vehicle/habitat systems to enable task performance in both nominal and emergency conditions. Understanding of multimodal display technologies and their interactions will help to inform interface guidelines for LDEMs. The scope of the current report is an analysis of potential multimodal display technologies for long duration missions and, in particular, will focus on their potential role in EVA activities. The review will address multimodal (combined visual, auditory and/or tactile) displays investigated by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), industry, and Department of Defense (DoD). It also considers the need for adaptive information systems to accommodate a variety of operational contexts such as crew status (e.g., fatigue, workload level) and task environment (e.g., EVA, habitat, rover, spacecraft). Current approaches to guidelines and best practices for combining modalities for the most effective information displays are also reviewed. Potential issues in developing interface guidelines for LDEMs are briefly considered.

multimodal displays↗

Integrating Planning, Diagnosis and Execution for Vehicle Systems Management

We describe a prototype Vehicle System Manager (VSM) for NASA’s Gateway, a human-capable spacecraft that will also be capable of autonomous operations. The VSM consists of an execution system, planner, and fault management system, integrated via an over-arching mission management compo- nent. We describe the VSM architecture and each of its com- ponents. We describe a series of use cases, centered on a spacecraft propulsive operation that can fail at different times, for different reasons, and how the VSM detects and responds to these failures. We show the VSM is capable of detecting faults and loss of capability, and subsequently replanning, in the presence of each failure scenario.

Planning↗

An Autonomous Power Controller for the NASA Human Deep Space Gateway

Autonomous control of a spacecraft is an enabling technology that must be developed for deep space human exploration. NASA's current long term human space platform, the International Space Station which is in Low Earth Orbit, is in almost continuous communication with ground based mission control. This allows near real-time control of all the vehicle core systems, including power, to be controlled by the ground. As the focus shifts from Low Earth Orbit, communication time-lag and bandwidth limitations beyond geosynchronous orbit does not permit this type of ground based operation. This paper presents the ongoing work at NASA to develop an architecture for autonomous power control system and a vehicle manager which monitors, coordinates, and delegates all the onboard subsystems to enable autonomous control of the complete spacecraft.

power control↗

NASA’s Human Landing System: The Strategy for the 2024 Mission and Future Sustainability

In response to the 2018 White House Space Policy Directive- sustainable lunar exploration, and to the Vice President’s March 2019 direction to do so by 2024, NASA is working to establish humanity's presence on and around the Moon by: 1) sending payloads to its surface, 2) assembling the Gateway outpost in orbit and 3) demonstrating the first human lunar landings since 1972. NASA’s Artemis program is implementing a multi-faceted and coordinated agency-wide approach with a focus on the lunar South Pole. The Artemis missions will demonstrate new technologies, capabilities and business approaches needed for future exploration, including Mars. Assessing options to accelerate development of required systems, NASA is utilizing public-private engagements through the Human Exploration and Operations (HEO) Mission Directorate’s NextSTEP Broad Agency Announcements. The design, development and demonstration of the Human Landing System (HLS) is expected to be led by commercial partners. Utilizing efforts across mission directorates, the Artemis effort will benefit from programs from the Science Mission Directorate (SMD) and Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD). SMD’s Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) initiative will procure commercial robotic lunar delivery services and the development of science instruments and technology demonstration payloads. The Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) portfolio of technology advancements relative to HLS include lunar lander components and technologies for pointing, navigation and tracking, fuel storage and transfer, autonomy and mobility, communications, propulsion and power. In addition to describing the objectives and requirements of the 2024 Artemis mission, this paper will present NASA’s approach to accessing the lunar surface with an affordable human-rated landing system, current status and the role o a sustainable lunar presence.

Chavers, Greg↗

Enabling Autonomous On-Board Trouble-Shooting

As NASA missions reach deeper into space, a few crew members will need to do the work of 10s-100s of Ground Controllers, most significantly, in critical areas such as trouble-shooting anomalies that could result in loss of crew or loss of mission. Understanding what the risk is of these sorts of events based on the history of the International Space Station allows us to anticipate how critical this challenge will be for future crewed missions, and allowing us to define the research that must be carried out in order to establish Standards, Guidelines and Requirements for on-board intelligent technologies that can assist crew as needed.

autonomy↗

Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) System Options for Mars Transit and Mars Surface Missions

The NASA led Artemis campaign will take humanity back to the Moon and serve as an analog for continued deep space exploration to Mars. Artemis utilizes crewed vehicles and habitats on both the Lunar surface and in Lunar orbit. The exploration of the Lunar surface and buildup of a basecamp is meant to be a “Mars forward” approach to testing and refining new technologies and techniques for living and working far outside of Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and preparing for future Mars missions. The Lunar Surface Habitat is planned as a primary element for long duration crew habitation on the Moon and will be the primary testbed for ECLS system hardware in a partial gravity environment. The Mars Transit Habitat will be the crew vehicle for the roundtrip from Earth to Mars and spend a significant amount of time docked to the Gateway outfitting and testing its systems prior to making the first Mars mission transit. The Mars Transit Habitat will utilize closed loop ECLS system technologies while a Mars Surface Habitat could use either open loop, closed loop, or a mix of both. Better understanding the needs of both these system architectures operating for extended periods in the Lunar environment and outside LEO will help to establish the ECLS system architecture for the future Mars surface mission. There are many aspects to consider such as length of crew stay, level of autonomy and dormancy between crewed missions, power requirements, system mass, and overall system reliability and maintainability. Other considerations will include Mars gravity vs. Lunar gravity, Mars atmospheric pressure vs. hard vacuum, and possible use of in-situ resource utilization.

ECLSS↗

Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) System Options for Mars Transit and Mars Surface Missions

The NASA led Artemis campaign will take humanity back to the Moon and serve as an analog for continued deep space exploration to Mars. Artemis utilizes crewed vehicles and habitats on both the Lunar surface and in Lunar orbit. The exploration of the Lunar surface and buildup of a basecamp is meant to be a “Mars forward” approach to testing and refining new technologies and techniques for living and working far outside of Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and preparing for future Mars missions. The Lunar Surface Habitat is planned as a primary element for long duration crew habitation on the Moon and will be the primary testbed for ECLS system hardware in a partial gravity environment. The Mars Transit Habitat will be the crew vehicle for the roundtrip from Earth to Mars and spend a significant amount of time docked to the Gateway outfitting and testing its systems prior to making the first Mars mission transit. The Mars Transit Habitat will utilize closed loop ECLS system technologies while a Mars Surface Habitat could use either open loop, closed loop, or a mix of both. Better understanding the needs of both these system architectures operating for extended periods in the Lunar environment and outside LEO will help to establish the ECLS system architecture for the future Mars surface mission. There are many aspects to consider such as length of crew stay, level of autonomy and dormancy between crewed missions, power requirements, system mass, and overall system reliability and maintainability. Other considerations will include Mars gravity vs. Lunar gravity, Mars atmospheric pressure vs. hard vacuum, and possible use of in-situ resource utilization.

ECLSS↗

Development of a Ground Test and Analysis Protocol for NASA's NextSTEP Phase 2 Habitation Concepts

The NASA Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) program is a public-private partnership model that seeks commercial development of deep space exploration capabilities to support human spaceflight missions around and beyond cislunar space. NASA first issued the Phase 1 NextSTEP Broad Agency Announcement to U.S. industries in 2014, which called for innovative cislunar habitation concepts that leveraged commercialization plans for low-Earth orbit. These habitats will be part of the Deep Space Gateway (DSG), the cislunar space station planned by NASA for construction in the 2020s. In 2016, Phase 2 of the NextSTEP program selected five commercial partners to develop ground prototypes. A team of NASA research engineers and subject matter experts (SMEs) have been tasked with developing the ground-test protocol that will serve as the primary means by which these Phase 2 prototypes will be evaluated. Since 2008, this core test team has successfully conducted multiple spaceflight analog mission evaluations utilizing a consistent set of operational tools, methods, and metrics to enable the iterative development, testing, analysis, and validation of evolving exploration architectures, operations concepts, and vehicle designs. The purpose of implementing a similar evaluation process for the Phase 2 Habitation Concepts is to consistently evaluate different commercial partner ground prototypes to provide data-driven, actionable recommendations for Phase 3. This paper describes the process by which the ground test protocol was developed and the objectives, methods, and metrics by which the NextSTEP Phase 2 Habitation Concepts will be rigorously and systematically evaluated. The protocol has been developed using both a top-down and bottom-up approach. Top-down development began with the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD) exploration objectives and ISS Exploration Capability Study Team (IECST) candidate flight objectives. Strategic questions and associated rationales, derived from these candidate architectural objectives, provide the framework by which the ground-test protocol will address the DSG stack elements and configurations, systems and subsystems, and habitation, science, and EVA functions. From these strategic questions, high-level functional requirements for the DSG were drafted and associated ground-test objectives and analysis protocols were established. Bottom-up development incorporated objectives from NASA SMEs in autonomy, avionics and software, communication, environmental control and life support systems, exercise, extravehicular activity, exploration medical operations, guidance navigation and control, human factors and behavioral performance, human factors and habitability, logistics, Mission Control Center operations, power, radiation, robotics, safety and mission assurance, science, simulation, structures, thermal, trash management, and vehicle health. Top-down and bottom-up objectives were integrated to form overall functional requirements - ground-test objectives and analysis mapping. From this mapping, ground-test objectives were organized into those that will be evaluated through inspection, demonstration, analysis, subsystem standalone testing, and human-in-the-loop (HITL) testing. For the HITL tests, mission-like timelines, procedures, and flight rules have been developed to directly meet ground test objectives and evaluate specific functional requirements. Data collected from these assessments will be analyzed to determine the acceptability of habitation element configurations and the combinations of capabilities that will result in the best habitation platform to be recommended by the test team for Phase 3.

Gernhardt, Michael L.↗

Future Homes in Space: Development of Concepts for Exploration Space Habitats

NASA’s Artemis campaign seeks to return humans to the moon and establish a sustained presence on the lunar surface. This session will emphasize how habitation capabilities on the moon and in cislunar space can potentially contribute to the sustainability objectives of Artemis. Habitable elements represent opportunities to enable longer duration stays, increase the number of crew members present, enhance science and utilization activities, drive technology development for future Mars exploration, perform analog missions, and fuel economic opportunities for US industry. Panelists include Paul Kessler (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, deputy lead for lunar surface habitation); Andrew Choate (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Mars habitation lead); Krystofer Dudzinski (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, a space architect within the MSFC Advanced Concepts Office); and Larry Toups (retired from NASA Johnson Space Center, currently an adjunct professor at University of Houston in space architecture). The panel is moderated by Tracie Prater (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Habitation Systems Development Office). The panel will begin with an overview of the history of habitation concepts and an academic perspective on general considerations in space habitat design (Larry Toups). Paul Kessler and Andrew Choate will introduce NASA’s principle of “architecting from the right” to help define objectives for Artemis missions, needs/characteristics, use cases, and functions (as published in the agency’s Architecture Definition Document) and provide perspective on how this principle informs habitation concept development work. NASA panelists will discuss key engineering challenges identified for developing, deploying, and operating habitable assets on the lunar surface and/or in deep space. These may include dust mitigation, outfitting of inflatable softgoods (for concepts which may use softgoods as a primary structural material), survival in lunar darkness, human health and performance considerations, maintenance/repair/sparing, and autonomy. These identified challenges represent risks for habitation systems development and relate closely to capability gaps identified by the agency. While the work of NASA Marshall Space Flight Center’s habitation development office is primarily focused on habitats which are launched from earth pre-integrated (referred to as Class I in the framework previously developed by NASA space architects Kennedy/Cohen) or launched from earth and deployed at the point of use (Class II), there is also extensive work in NASA, academia, and companies on constructed habitats, which would be built on a planetary surface using indigenous resources (Class III habitats). Panelist Krystopher Dudzinski will discuss potential evolutionary pathways from Class I and Class II habitats to Class III habitats, unique and common architectural challenges within each habitat class, and key gaps in implementing Class III habitats from an architectural perspective. NASA panelists and the moderator will also provide an overview of partnership opportunities and avenues for further engagement to advance habitation systems for the SpaceCom audience. NASA is currently developing notional concepts for a lunar surface habitat and Mars transit habitat, which will be discussed during this panel session and used as examples. These concepts represent options for habitation system design and are a point of departure. They do not represent a final plan or formal recommendation on the part of the agency. Based on the most recent analysis cycle, NASA’s lunar surface habitat (SH) concept nominally supports two crew members for 30 days, with the capacity to support four crew during a surge period where crew will swap between the SH and another surface asset, such as a pressurized rover. This example design has a metallic airlock for ingress/egress and the upper portion is an inflatable material system which serves as the habitation module. The notional interior of the habitat is a three-deck layout/configuration which supports all crew mission functions, including exercise, stowage, extravehicular activity (EVA), sleep, hygiene waste collection, maintenance and repair, and meal preparation. Under analysis assumptions for habitation, the Mars Transit Habitat (TH) concept would support four crew on an up to 1,200 day Mars mission. One option for the concept is to initially dock Transit Habitat at Gateway, where it can be used to increase the duration of crew stays in cislunar space and perform shakedown and analog missions prior to a Mars departure. One challenge in longer duration missions which involve both surface exploration and transit is understanding crew adaptation when transitioning between partial gravity and microgravity environments. TH at Gateway offers an opportunity to study this transition and in doing so reduce risks associated with future Mars exploration. Like lunar SH, the most recent analysis cycle concept of a Mars TH is a hybrid structure design, with a metallic section supporting EVAs, axial/radial docking, and Safe Haven capabilities, and an inflatable softgoods structure for the primary habitation function. Interior layouts to optimize crew usability and livability are currently under trade. The panel will include presentation material, but also seeks to engage the audience in a highly interactive conversation regarding the potential role for habitation in future exploration initiatives. Potential topics for discussion include the influence of the crew experience on habitation systems design and livability/usability considerations, the benefits of space habitation development in terrestrial applications, and challenges and opportunities in “feeding forward” lunar surface habitation systems development to Mars exploration.

space habitats↗

Enabling a Voice Management System for Space Applications

The sustainable missions beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO) envisioned for NASA’s Artemis program will require autonomous capabilities. Moreover, Artemis mission crews will need a means to efficiently interact with a spacecraft’s autonomous systems. This interaction can be facilitated by voice and speech communications because voice-based controls enable users to interact hands- and eyes-free, allowing the user to better focus on critical tasks. The goal of our project was to explore the knowledge and technology needed to successfully design effective Voice User Interfaces (VUIs) for autonomous systems utilizing Human Centered Design (HCD) principles. The focus of the human factors’ aspect of engineering, pays close attention to psychological and physiological principles in the development of autonomous crew operation systems. A main objective was to understand how a crew member, through voice interaction, could efficiently and intuitively communicate with a notional autonomous vehicle system manager. This project was a part of the NASA Moon to Mars eXploration Systems and Habitation (M2M X-Hab) 2020 Academic Innovation Challenge. The work from the BLiSS Team, at the University of Michigan, resulted in the design of a system persona, Diego, to which an astronaut may quickly build trust with autonomous systems, to alleviate known stressors on mental health expected during long duration space missions. Optimal software to facilitate integration of the system persona into a reference Lunar orbiting Gateway station was defined. Additionally, a Speech to Text (STT) system and a Graphical User Interface (GUI) that could be implemented in future missions was developed on an Internet of Things (IOT) platform. The Voice User Interface (VUI) design for the M2M X-Hab 2020 project leveraged previous technology developed by the BLiSS team to incorporate a voice-based interface into NASA’s Platform for Autonomous Systems (NPAS) software. This required technologies to convert voice to text, conduct semantic interpretations, and convert responses from the autonomous system to text and to speech; additionally, the spacecraft background noise environment was assessed, a noise mitigation technique was developed, and a relatable personality for the autonomous system was developed in order to facilitate human-like conversations. The success of our effort was largely due to the diversity of the team that included expertise in Space Systems Engineering, Human Computer Interaction, Aerospace Engineering, Computer Science, Biomedical Engineering, and Applied Physics. The diverse perspectives fostered elaborate discussions, resulting in the conception of three main subsystems: (1) User-System, (2) NPAS-System, and (3) Environment-System. The VUI was unique and had to be efficient and intuitive. For this project, 5 subteams were formed, each with a separate objective, Voice Design team, Background Noise Mitigation team, Software Integration team and Graphical User Interface team. The BLiSS team crafted a personality for the VUI to enable human-like conversation and drive user adoption and trust. User surveys were completed and used to help determine the required VUI system personality traits by capturing perspectives and expectations of prospective “Artemis Generation Astronauts”. To further simulate human-like conversations, the system had to be able to quickly interpret user speech and be able to integrate with NASA’s NPAS platform for quick and reliable information transfer. The outcomes of our research were: (1) a working prototype user interface, that is compatible with NASA’s NPAS platform; (2) software that demonstrates the ability of the VUI system to interpret user requests and respond appropriately; (3) the capability to implement fully expanded conversations between user and system using intuitive communication in four request categories; and (4) software and hardware recommendations that optimize the system’s ability to operate in a noisy environment. Our research has laid the foundation for the development of VUI’s for autonomy, and provides a baseline for future VUI developments.

Voice user interface↗

Localization of Ad-Hoc Lunar Constellations in Communication Failure Modes for Distributed Spacecraft Autonomy

As lunar missions increase in complexity inspired by NASA’s Artemis Program, they will require reliable and sufficient capability of the Position, Navigation, and Timing (PNT) system to support their scientific objectives. In addition, NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) program initiates the proliferation of public and private exploration partnerships using small satellites from commercial and private organizations, expanding traditionally confined low Earth orbit to be used for missions beyond geosynchronous orbit (Zucherman et al., 2022). Therefore, the Lunar PNT system is also required to provide navigation services compatible with the smaller platforms being sent by the public and private sectors, like CubeSats. However, traditional approaches to deep space missions’ navigation based on ground radio facilities have difficulties in providing sufficient support for the increasing number of users and communication at a distance from the Earth (Kaplev et al., 2022). In particular, the existing Lunar navigation technologies such as weak signal global positioning system (GPS) and deep space network (DSN) are not able to ensure operations of the upcoming small-scale Lunar missions due to their limitations in localization performance as well as capacity aspects. Another way to provide Lunar PNT service is to create a dedicated Lunar global navigation satellite system (GNSS) constellation, like GNSS systems on Earth. Space agencies like NASA, ESA, and JAXA are now developing the lunar communications relay and navigation systems (LCRNS) and Lunar navigation satellite systems (LNSS). In their systems, satellites will be deployed in moon orbits to provide the communication, positioning, navigation, and timing (CPNT) service at the lunar south pole region where the Artemis base camp will be expected (Murata et al., 2022). Meanwhile, common challenges considered in lunar PNT research arise from poor geometry of the terrestrial GNSS satellites when seen from the lunar user, highly perturbed lunar orbits, and limitations in power, size, and cost of the equipment on lunar satellites (Iiyama et al., 2023). It is also not clear if there will be enough Lunar users to support the cost and resources this would require as the Low-cost surface missions may not be able to support the large power, mass, and weight requirements that these navigation solutions entail (Niemoeller et al., 2022). As an alternative, existing Lunar science and exploration assets could be used to create a low-cost, autonomous, ad-hoc, and on-demand mission-centric Lunar PNT swarm capable of providing PNT services to these low-cost lunar missions (Hagenau et al., 2021). Introducing the non-dedicated and ad-hoc Lunar navigation constellation gives a way to provide PNT services on-demand. The non-dedicated swarm assets of Lunar constellations are designed to localize themselves with minimal interaction with Earth by adding cooperative autonomous localization to lunar missions, freeing up valuable bandwidth and ground segment resources. An autonomous localization of Lunar constellations is based on the concept of the decentralized PNT system with a distributed extended Kalman filter (DEKF) approach to state estimation for minimal onboard operating costs. In the distributed data processing algorithm, computation is broken down and assigned to each satellite, resulting in a considerably decreased computational amount while maintaining the accuracy of the orbit ephemeris and clock offsets as the result of centralized data processing (Wen et al., 2019). The DEKF requires spacecraft to perform two-way ranging operations with each other to communicate simultaneously, leveraging neighbor two-way intersatellite link (ISL) measurements such as pseudoranges to, and relative velocities between, visible satellites as sensor values (Frank et al., 2021). The Lunar autonomous PNT simulation (LAPS) demonstrated the feasibility of orbital asset localization among ad-hoc Lunar small-sat constellations based on the DEKF in Hagenau et al. (2021) and evaluated the matching algorithm proposed by Frank et al. (2021) in scheduling position estimation updates. In previous papers, all assets and measurements are assumed to be always available without consideration of the impact of intermittent and permanent communication failure. This study presents localization performance with increasing levels of network degradation for swarm assets and users to demonstrate the robustness of the decentralized Lunar PNT service in more realistic scenarios. Main issues arising from communication failure include spacecraft permanent or transient loss, antenna failures, message delays, etc. We tested four possible reasons for network degradation for 7 days in 21 satellites frozen with an altitude of 5500 km, evenly spaced around 3 circular, 40 inclination orbital planes where each spacecraft has two directional antennas. As anchor nodes with an independent estimate of their position are required in the DEKF approach, two ground nodes in each pole and one node in the gateway were implemented in the simulation. First, the most probable failure scenario involves the loss of a single spacecraft due to solar interference and technical malfunctions of the assets. Losing the availability of a single spacecraft means losing the two-way ISL measurement of the asset in the DEKF update. In order to provide the best possible quality of PNT service with limited time and resources, the distributed Lunar constellations must schedule the communication activities. The scheduler leverages mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) for the coordination and scheduling of the desired “as-needed” localization service (Niemoeller et al., 2022). We assume the scheduler has completely excluded the spacecraft information before the DEKF update in the failure scenario. When a random spacecraft has been turned off at a specific time, the robustness of the autonomous Lunar PNT system is evaluated. The simulation results give an 11.5% degradation in median position accuracy compared to the idealized performance excluding the asset loss. Second, a large number of assets may vanish due to major hardware problems or meteor strikes around the moon. A multiple spacecraft loss can degrade the localization performance very fast by losing the communication ability to do cross-plane measurements and in-plane measurements in a 3-plane constellation. When the matching-based scheduler is aware of ISL availability, we investigate a large number of in-plane and cross-plane asset vanishments both in close proximity and equally spaced throughout the orbital plane. According to the simulations, the loss of in-plane measurements gives 40.2% degradation while cross-plane measurements degrade 50.5% of asset localization performance among available assets. Therefore, it is concluded that cross-plane measurements are more important in improving the position estimation accuracy. Third, spacecraft failure information can be lost due to the internal message delay, resulting in the DEKF update scheduler to solve the matching problem with unavailable assets. The DEKF update cycle is comprised of network setup, communication, and computations where a global broadcast network and a 2-way ISL network setup take 6 minutes in total (Frank et al., 2021). Once the broadcast network successfully transmits and receives information, a random spacecraft may lose its availability right before solving the matching problem. This means the matching solution is no longer optimal, resulting in degradation in the localization performance. A numerical assessment shows the matching-based scheduler with knowing failure holds 11.5% of position accuracy degradation, whereas the scheduler without knowing failure gives 34% degraded localization performance without asset loss. Fourth, a transient loss of a single or multiple spacecraft may occur due to their antenna outages. After losing the two-way ISL availability for a few DEKF update cycles, the availability of spacecraft can easily be recovered as their states have been independently updated using measurements from anchor nodes. It is likely that the longer failure will result in worse localization performance. We have tested the transient failure of a random single asset for 30 min in the simulation, which is losing 3 update cycles in the DEKF system. From the simulation results, the position accuracy has been degraded to 4.84% which is better than the degraded localization performance of 11.5% from the permanent loss scenario among available assets. In conclusion, the autonomous Lunar PNT system based on the DEKF approach shows the ability to maintain resilience and robustness in the possible communication failure scenarios, ensuring that localization accuracy is preserved across various network degradation and outages. Future studies on investigating user localization performance near the South Pole and the broadcast network system will be continued in the following months.

Yeji Kim↗