Search NASASearch

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “multiple rovers continuous planning”

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.

27 records · Page 2

Autonomous Ocean World Exploration: Advancement of a Virtual Testbed

The search for life (extinct or extant) and potentially habitable bodies in our solar system and beyond is one of the 12 priority science questions outlined in the National Acadamies’ 2022 decadal survey [5]. Extraterrestrial destinations containing liquid water present an opportunity to search for life as we know it, and in recent years an increasing number of such locations have been discovered within our solar system. Several Jovian moons—Europa, Ganymede, and Callisto [10]—and the Saturnian moons Enceladus [8] and Titan [9] are known or suspected to harbor massive subsurface oceans. Of these "ocean worlds", Europa is the focus of at least one planned NASA orbiter mission, Europa Clipper [4], and an early lander mission concept, the Europa Lander [2, 3]. Whereas most robotic missions to the Moon and Mars (e.g. orbiters, rovers, landers) to date have had ground controllers on Earth tightly involved in mission operations, missions to more distant worlds will require a high degree of onboard autonomy due to long communication lags and blackouts, harsh environments (radiation, cold), and more limited battery and hardware life. The past decade has seen great advances in both AI technologies and computing scalability and performance that offer promising solutions for spacecraft autonomy and motivate the software system and research programs described in this paper. The Ocean Worlds Autonomy Testbed for Exploration, Research, and Simulation (OceanWATERS) [1], which has been in development at the NASA Ames Research Center since 2018, is a virtual environment for testing lander autonomy solutions. It is built on the Robot Operating System (ROS), runs on consumer-grade Linux workstations, and was released as open source in 2020. OceanWATERS provides a physical and visual simulation of a prototypical lander in a Europa-like environment (Figure 1). The lander was modeled after requirements and specifications made in JPL’s Europa Lander Study of 2016 [3]. Simulated lander systems include stereo cameras and spotlights mounted on an antenna mast that pans and tilts, a 6 degrees of freedom (DoF) robotic arm with a force-torque sensor and two interchangeable end effectors, and a battery pack power system. The environment consists of multiple terrain models including a highly detailed model sourced from the FROST dataset [11], simulation of surrounding planetary bodies based on an ephemeris model, and lighting from the sun with associated surface illumination, reflectance, and shadows. Operations supported by OceanWATERS include panoramic and directed imaging of the environment and lander workspace, Cartesian and joint-level arm commanding, grinding of the terrain surface (e.g. digging a trench), and scooping of ground material (Figure 2) which can be discarded or collected as science samples in a receptacle that can be emptied (science operations themselves are not simulated). These operations are realized as ROS Actions and are complimented by a wide selection of telemetry that is continually produced by each lander subsystem. The power system model is driven by the open-source Generic Software Architecture for Prognostics (GSAP) [11] that predicts the battery’s remaining useful life and other characteristics. As a testbed for high-level autonomy, OceanWATERS provides an execution framework based on PLEXIL [12], an open-source plan specification language and execution engine developed largely at Ames. NASA's initial development of OceanWATERS, as well the Ocean Worlds Lander Autonomy Testbed (OWLAT) [6], a complimentary physical testbed developed at JPL, was the first step in a plan for realizing candidate onboard autonomy solutions for such planetary landers. In 2020 NASA solicited applications for its Autonomous Robotics Research for Ocean Worlds (ARROW) program, and in 2021 the similar Concepts for Ocean worlds Life Detection Technology (COLDTech) program. Collectively six research teams, based in universities and companies across the United States, were awarded grants to develop and demonstrate autonomy solutions on OceanWATERS and OWLAT. These 1–2-year projects have now finished or are nearing completion, and a wide variety of autonomy challenges in ocean world surface missions were addressed. Prototyped and demonstrated solutions have included autonomous discovery, response and adaptation to system faults and unexpected environmental events, world model synthesis through perception, plan synthesis using learned models, methods to optimize sample target selection and prioritize science data transmission, extension of PLEXIL for stochastic decision-making, and an integration of a model of JPL’s mission-ready COLDArm [7]. Technologies used in these projects include many forms of machine learning, causal reasoning, automated planning, Markov decision processes, formal methods, and other advanced techniques. A more detailed summary of the ARROW and COLDTech projects is given herein. OceanWATERS has had significant enhancements since its open-source release in 2020. Many of its new features were driven or shaped by feedback from the ARROW and COLDTech teams and requirements of their projects. In support of enabling autonomous adaptation to spacecraft faults (a specific capability solicited by both programs), a fault injection and detection framework was developed that supports a wide and growing range of fault types such as locked joints, image loss, and battery failures. The power system model was completed and integrated into the simulator, starting as a single-cell battery model and later upgraded to a multi-cell model with associated faults such as cell disconnection. Arm/terrain interaction was improved by adding a force-torque sensor and associated faults, and an analytic dig force model based on the Balovnev bucket force equations. Environment fidelity was increased by modeling terrain deformation resulting from digging and scooping; visual improvements were made in textures, lighting, and shadows. To facilitate interoperation with OWLAT, a unified command and telemetry interface between the testbeds was developed at the ROS level, along with a PLEXIL interface. The number of lander operations was greatly expanded (e.g. with Cartesian-based arm and antenna movement), and a framework was designed for users to build their own lander actions. A GUI for PLEXIL plan selection was created (Figure 3), and an expansive set of plans were added, such as those that illustrate patterns for fault handling. This paper provides a self-contained high-level description of OceanWATERS, focusing on more detailed coverage of the aforementioned enhancements. It provides a high-level summary of the projects undertaken by participants in the ARROW and COLDTech programs and how these efforts have helped shape OceanWATERS. Finally, potential future work and directions for the testbed are listed, as likely informed by the recent planetary science decadal survey [5].

K Michael Dalal

Assessing Relay Communications for Mars Sample Return Surface Mission Concepts

The Mars Sample Return (MSR) Campaign would be a 3-mission campaign concept supported by NASA and ESA to return samples from the Mars surface. MSR would, for the first time ever, present a need to communicate with multiple surface assets that are co-located on Mars in a coordinated effort to accomplish the unified objective of fetching, transporting, and returning samples from Mars. Currently, Mars surface assets relay data to and from Earth using a number of orbiters in what’s known as the Mars Relay Network (MRN). This network is characterized by a small number of surface assets distributed across the Martian globe and a larger number of orbiters to provide relay services. As of June 2020, there are two surface assets for which five orbiters are providing relay. During the MSR Campaign, there would be two rovers and a lander that all would require relay communication from a small number of Mars orbiters to meet the aggressive MSR timeline. The inversion of the current MRN paradigm, a system of many surface assets requiring relay and few orbiters to provide relay, necessitates the unique challenge of optimally allocating relay passes to maximize the operational capability of all assets. The allocation must consider a large number of trade variables including Mars asset operational requirements and Earth ground system constraints, including staffing schedules, operations planning across time zones, and more. To address these telecommunication challenges, the Mars Asset Relay Mission Link Allocation Design Environment (MARMLADE) tool was developed. It is a MATLAB-based tool to assign orbiter passes or Direct-From-Earth (DFE) links to each of the three surface assets and quantify the operational efficiency of each surface asset.MARMLADE uses a data set of simulated Mars relay orbiter geometry and telecommunication capabilities provided by JPL’s Telecom Orbit Analysis and Simulation Tool (TOAST) software to compute which asset should get each pass based on a series of heuristics and predictions of all assets’ states. Within MARMLADE, the user can provide inputs including the option for time-based pass splitting, fixed FWD data rate capabilities, DFE communication capabilities, and link parameters allowing for the assessment of complex operations and hardware trades using surface mission operational efficiency as a primary figure of merit. As the MSR mission concepts continue to mature, MARMLADE is being used to assess ability of all MSR elements to meet the surface mission timeline requirements and to provide relay link allocations to each of the MSR surface assets.This paper will describe the motivation and design of the MARMLADE tool and how it is being used to perform campaign and mission level trades, generate requirements, and support development of the MSR surface mission scenarios.

Lee, Charles

A Crew Seat for Human Exploration in Multiple Gravity Environments

This work attempts to develop a single crew seating solution that is applicable across a range of gravity environments encountered by spacecraft proposed in several conceptual spacecraft architectures. All of these spacecraft will need to provide some sort of stationary accommodation for the crew for performing various activities such as work in science laboratories, maintenance and repair facilities, medical care facilities, and spacecraft operations centers, as well as for basic habitation in crew quarters, entertainment / relaxation facilities, and crew dining facilities. Depending on the spacecraft or architecture, this stationary accommodation may be experienced continuously in microgravity, such as would be the case for the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle. Alternately, it could be in continuous lunar or Martian gravity, such as the Common Habitat base camps. It could experience fractional gravity, such as a Pressurized Rover for In-Space Missions at a Near Earth Asteroid or one of the Martian moons. It could alternate between artificial gravity and microgravity, such as the Nautilus-X. It could alternate between microgravity and lunar or Martian gravity, such as the SpaceX Starship Human Landing System or the Blue Origin Blue Moon Block 2 Human Landing System. Or it could be in continuous Earth gravity, such as ground trainer systems. Prior human spaceflight systems for stationary accommodation have been focused on microgravity applications. These systems have their own limitations and cannot be used in a gravity environment. A public crowdsourcing campaign generated dozens of ideas, which ultimately generated a Gecko Mobility Aids system for crew translation and the Multi-Gravity Crew Seat (MGCS) for stationary accommodation. The MGCS functions in gravity as a traditional terrestrial seat, performing functions of load for the overall body and forearms, as well as head and neck load relief while positioning the body within range of an intended task. In microgravity, the MGCS functions as a body restraint, securing the body against inadvertent drifting by applying a restraining pressure at the front and back of the thighs, shoulders, and back. The initial MGCS concept was developed in a NASA hackathon and was refined through a review of dozens of terrestrial seating styles. Additionally, a review of anthropometry and biomechanics data related to the neutral body posture was conducted to help inform the microgravity configuration of the MGCS. A series of CAD models were iteratively developed, with subject matter expert reviews leading to design improvements. A scale model was constructed and used with a humanoid model to demonstrate MGCS accommodation of a human-like body in both gravity and microgravity modes. Work to develop a full-scale protype of the MGCS is discussed, including design and fabrication of the headrest, arm rest, seat back, seat pan, seat base, and the conversion mechanisms. A 1-g human-in-the-loop evaluation of the prototype assessed the acceptability of performing seated activities in the MGCS, collecting data on the usability, comfort, and ease of ingress/egress. Based on the evaluation results, design modifications needed for reduced gravity testing are documented and initial work is indicated for a reduced gravity test plan.

Restraints and Mobility Aids

NASA Multidimensional Stirling Convertor Code Developed

A high-efficiency Stirling Radioisotope Generator (SRG) for use on potential NASA Space Science missions is being developed by the Department of Energy, Lockheed Martin, Stirling Technology Company, and the NASA Glenn Research Center. These missions may include providing spacecraft onboard electric power for deep space missions or power for unmanned Mars rovers. Glenn is also developing advanced technology for Stirling convertors, aimed at substantially improving the specific power and efficiency of the convertor and the overall power system. Performance and mass improvement goals have been established for second- and third-generation Stirling radioisotope power systems. Multiple efforts are underway to achieve these goals, both in house at Glenn and under various grants and contracts. These efforts include the development of a multidimensional Stirling computational fluid dynamics code, high-temperature materials, advanced controllers, an end-to-end system dynamics model, low-vibration techniques, advanced regenerators, and a lightweight convertor. Under a NASA grant, Cleveland State University (CSU) and its subcontractors, the University of Minnesota (UMN) and Gedeon Associates, have developed a twodimensional computer simulation of a CSUmod Stirling convertor. The CFD-ACE commercial software developed by CFD Research Corp. of Huntsville, Alabama, is being used. The CSUmod is a scaled version of the Stirling Technology Demonstrator Convertor (TDC), which was designed and fabricated by the Stirling Technology Company and is being tested by NASA. The schematic illustrates the structure of this model. Modeled are the fluid-flow and heat-transfer phenomena that occur in the expansion space, the heater, the regenerator, the cooler, the compression space, the surrounding walls, and the moving piston and displacer. In addition, the overall heat transfer, the indicated power, and the efficiency can be calculated. The CSUmod model is being converted to a two-dimensional model of the TDC at NASA Glenn. Validation of the multidimensional Stirling code is an important part of the grant effort. UMN has been generating data in an oscillating-flow test facility using two different test sections: a 90 turn and a cooler/regenerator/heater test section. CSU has created computational fluid dynamics models of both these test sections and has been making comparisons with the data, then improving their models to improve the agreement with the test data. CSU has also been using data available in the literature for code validation. UMN is now preparing to begin fabrication of a new 180 turn test section that will be more representative of certain portions of the Stirling engine geometry. Simulations to almost periodic steady state with the two-dimensional CSUmod model indicate that, to reach periodic steady state on a single 2-GHz desktop computer, 75 to 100 complete simulation cycles would be required and between 1 and 2 months of computer time. Therefore, Glenn has purchased the first 8 computers, of a 64-computer cluster, to be run in parallel to accelerate the simulation. On the basis of CFD Research Corp.'s experience with running the parallelized version of CFD-ACE on their clusters, we estimate that the complete 64-computer cluster will reduce simulation computing time by a factor of about 40. Plans are to continue development of these multidimensional Stirling codes and to use them to study the fluid-flow and heat-transfer phenomena that occur inside Stirling convertors. This is expected to lead to improved thermodynamic loss understanding, onedimensional design and performance codes, and engine performance.

Tew, Roy C.

“Just Do It” Mission Operations Training in a COVID World

“No”- “not”- “can’t do it” – these words don’t fly in M2020 Mission Operations. The M2020 Surface Mission Operations Team trained for landing the Perseverance Rover under COVID-19 remote work/mandatory stay-at-home conditions. Training activities included presenting Flight Schools to the team via video conferencing, training COVID personal safety requirements to on-premises staff, and constantly updating and communicating COVID restrictions to the team as safety requirements changed. This paper explores the impact of COVID on the Mission System Training for M2020 Mission Operations. The layers of COVID, aptly named the “COVID Tax” by team management, affected project roles, communications, personnel interactions, operations facility usage and training exercises practiced by the team. Flight Schools and Operational Readiness Tests (ORTs) are driving forces behind the surface mission operations training. These activities work hand-in-hand to prepare the team for landing day, surface operations that transition from cruise to nominal operations, and nominal operations. Under normal training conditions, Flight Schools and ORTs are only concerned with tactical operations for the Uplink (Command) Downlink (Analysis) and Campaign Implementation (Planning) Teams of scientists and system engineers. Due to COVID, and the necessity to maintain physical distance between people, training for the landing team needed to include the new category of COVID personal safety. COVID also necessitated remote teams and video conferencing of the entirety of Flight Schools. This reliance on distance learning had not been done on previous missions. We will explore the advantages and disadvantages of video conferencing as a training platform; training effectiveness in communicating and practicing the multiple changes to the COVID safety protocols; and the timing in which we received and responded to COVID directives. Additionally, this paper will review the practical measures taken by the on-premises team and how the team adapted during the readiness tests, landing, and early mission operations, as well as how the team responded to the post-vaccine ramping down of COVID Protocols. The M2020 Surface Mission Operations Team responded very well to the challenges of COVID. All pre-landing operational and COVID-related training was completed. Post-landing COVID Training was provided as needed to new on-premises personnel. Training presented on COVID for the first operational readiness test (ORT) consisted of 2.5 hours of training. Each ORT had COVID Training. A person who had participated in all of the ORTs from September 2020 – February 2021 would have received over 7 hours of COVID Training. By ORT-12 (approximately 8 weeks after the first ORT), the Training team consolidated the original COVID training to a one-hour COVID Basic Training course, with additional recommended training. The Basic training course was updated after landing, as vaccines became available. COVID Training had multiple Flight Schools in the self-directed Blackboard Learning system, as well as a Quick Reference Wiki for Onboarding of new on-premises personnel and keeping on-premises personnel up-to-date. COVID Training covered many topics including practical methods of 6-foot distancing, how to interact with an IT professional when help was needed at a workstation, and challenging indoor meal-eating protocols. COVID Training continued to be updated, as the lab and the project respond to the virus variants and federal, state and local ordinances.

Rosette, Theresa

NASA’s Moon Trek Portal: New Capabilities Supporting Mission Planning and Engagement

Introduction: NASA’s Moon Trek (https://trek.nasa.gov/moon/) is one of a growing number of interactive, browser-based, online portals for planetary data visualization and analysis produced by NASA’s Solar System Treks Project (SSTP). Moon Trek continues to be enhanced with new data and new capabilities enabling it to facilitate the planning and conducting of upcoming lunar missions by NASA, its commercial partners, and its international partners, as well as advancing its role as a valuable outreach tool. A Comprehensive Online Web Portal: Developed at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and managed as a project of NASA’s Solar System Exploration Research Virtual Institute (SSERVI) at NASA Ames Research Center, Moon Trek is a browser-based web portal. The portal provides easy-to-use tools for browsing, data layering, data product blending, and feature search among thousands of data products covering topography, mineralogy, elemental abundance, geology, and much more. Visualizations are provided in var-ious map projections, interactive 3D viewing, and in virtual reality. Using an in-house stereo workflow, SSTP is able to produce new NAC-based high-resolution mosaics and DEMs. Diverse Applications for Lunar Exploration: Baseline analytic tools available to all users include dis-tance measurement, elevation profiling, sun angle calculation, and 3D print file generation. More advanced account-level tools allow users to perform more computationally intensive analyses. These include ray-traced lighting analysis for user-specified areas over user-specified time/date ranges and time intervals, electro-static surface potential analysis, subsetting of large data products, slope analysis, and Lunar Laser Ranging geometry calculation. Artificial intelligence (AI) and ma-chine learning (ML) based tools have been implemented for crater detection and hazard analysis, boulder detection and hazard analysis, and rockfall detection. New Tools Facilitating Exploration: Additional, new tools have recently been added and others are in development, offering even greater functionality in con-ducting analyses of potential landing sites and areas of surface operations. The new Line-of-Sight tool facilitates communications planning between locations on the lunar surface, between any given site on the lunar surface and a specified ground station on the Earth, and between a site on the lunar surface and a relay asset in lunar orbit, all taking into account local lunar topography. The new Data Plotter tool provides both tabular and graphical representations of pixel values along a user specified path for a growing number of data products. The new NAC Finder tool will identify and pro-vide access to NAC images that intersect a user-defined path or bounded area. The SSTP development team is looking to leverage the capabilities of its existing AI and ML crater, boulder, and rockfall detection and analysis tools, and extend that technology to a generalized feature detector that can be trained on instances of specific types of landforms and then search the lunar surface for more examples of such features. New traverse planning tools are being developed with use cases in generalized concept studies and specific mission planning in mind. These will facilitate finding optimal traverse paths based on constraints such as slope, lighting, hazard avoidance, and communications. These will be complemented by new traverse visualization capabilities. Users will be able to interactively ride along with a rover, examining 3D views of the terrain while adjusting camera height and viewing angle along with selecting different data layer overlays to drape across the terrain. Engaging the Public: The capabilities being developed for mission planning are being leveraged to further enhance Moon Trek’s proven utility as a valuable public outreach resource. This includes providing multiple lev-els of engagement with different points of entry. At its simplest level, promoting understanding through visualization, media and the public will be able to easily visualize and conduct their own exploration of lunar sites targeted by NASA and its partners. For a more in-depth experience, we are working with our stakeholders to promote understanding through interaction by extend-ing our current landing site and traverse analysis capabilities, making simplified access to these tools available to those who want to explore more deeply key factors in planning a mission through interactive and possibly even gamified experiences. The highest degree of public outreach, focusing on engagement through scientific participation, could be achieved through our work with missions and the NASA Office of the Chief Scientist on Moon Trek’s extension as a tool with specialized capabilities for facilitating citizen science. In such scenarios, participants become members of extended mis-sion science teams, using dedicated and integrated interfaces to analyze mission data to help answer questions key to lunar science and exploration. We are work-ing with NASA’s Office of Communications, museums, planetariums, and the media to help them easily integrate accurate, detailed visualizations of NASA’s lunar destinations and exploration into their content/productions and to engage diverse audiences in diverse venues.

Moon Trek

A Notional Artemis Lunar Surface Exploration Package (ArLSEP) based on the Gandalf Staff Platform

Introduction: The Artemis program is planning to deliver crew and cargo to the lunar surface, but there is no current package for supporting lunar in-struments and experiments similar to the Apollo Lunar Surface Exploration Package (ALSEP). This abstract provides a possible concept for such a package using the Gandalf Staff Platform as a common core. Gandalf Staff: The Gandalf Staff is an early prototype system developed over FY’21/FY’22 using NASA Science Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) Center Information Fund (CIF) grants to de-sign, build and test “proof-of-concept” components. These components include a 24v battery powered monopole that powers a suite of subsystems, including a Graphical User Interface (GUI) for crew, surface voice and data communications, Lunar Search and Rescue (LunaSAR) navigation and communications, LiDAR, field site external lighting, 360-degree camera, and a geothermal instrument for measuring sub-surface temperature gradient. The staff can be carried independently by an Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA) astronaut, or can be mounted into a tripod for “hands free” support at a surface site being investigated. The staff can be attached to an external solar array and power storage system for long-duration operations. [1,2] ALSEP: An ASLEP flew on each mission Apollo 12 to Apollo 17. For Apollo 11, a simplified packaged called the Early Apollo Scientific Experiments Pack-age (EASEP) was flown. Each package included a “Central Station” that provided the power and communications connected to a variety of instruments and sensors. The power was provided by a Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator (RTG) fueled by Plutoni-um-238 generating 70 watts of power (initially, decayed over time) [3]. The communications system provide for direct to Earth data transfer from the lunar surface. Each pack-age was stowed externally in the Lunar Module (LM) Scientific Equipment (SEQ) bay with a mass up to 163 kg (Apollo 17). The crew unloaded the ALSEP from the LM and deployed the instruments on the lunar surface. Although designed to operate for only 1 year, many sites operated for up to 8 years successfully [4]. The Active Seismic Experiment (ASE) included 3 geophones for detecting seismic waves created by mortars and thumpers deployed by the crew. Other active experiments measured the lunar atmosphere, the heat flow in the subsurface, the lunar gravity and potential gravity waves, the lunar magnetic field, the solar wind and plasma interactions in cislunar space. Passive experiments included collectors for dust and cosmic rays, and retroreflectors for precise measurements of distance using a laser from Earth. The ALSEP program continues to generate insights into lunar formation and evolution. ArLSEP Concepts: The lunar surface science package for the Artemis program will hopefully exceed the capability of the ALSEP. There are multiple issues for discussion leading to the design of a new ArLSEP, needing requirements definition from the science community, NASA mission architecture, and NASA budget planners. 1. Delivery Mechanism Two possible projects currently provide capability to deliver scientific cargo to the lunar surface: 1) the Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) [5] and the Human Landing System (HLS) [6, 7]. Each project is controlled by a different organization within NASA and budgeted with different criteria although both support lunar exploration. The HLS system delivers crew (and potentially cargo) to human landing sites. If an ArLSEP is “predeployed” to such a site, the design must include power (either from the vehicle or independently) to keep the electronics functioning until deployed by the crew. If an ArLSEP is delivered on a vehicle after the crew is present on the lunar surface, safety protocols require adequate distance from the humans for impact from descent propelled sur-face regolith ejecta. This distance can not exceed the capability of the crew to walk (if no rover) to the vehicle for ArLSEP deployment. 2. Overall Guidelines The general design of ArLSEP will likely follow the ALSEP with a common system for communications and power; however, significant architecture differences between Apollo and Artemis exist. Power: The RTG will not be available for early Artemis missions nor likely follow-on Lunar Exploration Transportation Services (LETS) missions [8]. Thus, ArLSEP power must be supplied by solar arrays with sufficient battery capability to “keep alive” necessary electronics during any lunar surface eclipse period. Communication: The Artemis program is developing a series of communications satellites for lunar orbit to provide surface transmission of data and voice to Earth. Called “LunaNET”, this network is component useful for ArLSEP since south polar locations may not always have direct “line-of-sight” to Earth [9]. 3. Concept of Operations (ConOps) The general ConOps for ArLSEP is to deliver the package to lunar surface before the crew arrives, and then have the crew deploy the package after some period of time. This requires coordinated design (for power systems) and launch window (for schedule) on both the cargo and crew missions. Once the ArLSEP is deployed, it will operate autonomously for a number of years. It should be designed to be EVA compatible for crew maintenance and upgrade. 4. Notional Design (for discussion purpose only) The landing site near the South Pole is expected to have no eclipse cycle exceeding 5 days, so the “keep alive” power is 144 hours (6 days to include margin). A 12v ArLSEP will use rechargeable LiFePO4 cells, which are common in the Electric Vehicle (EV) industry. With a current of 5 amps and a 125 watt system, the mass is about 90kg. The comm. system and structure adds another 10kg, thus the “Central Station” is approximately 100kg. The solar power is collected on four arrays (each 2m above the surface), and the entire ArLSEP is designed to stow in a 2m x 1m x 1m volume. The experiment and instrument design will vary for each installation and add mass to the total (although they are expected to fit within the 2m3 volume). Seismic wave generation will likely not be provided with mortars, thus an electric “thumper” will be required. Active instruments such as imaging systems and sensing instruments will benefit from the additional power and communication capability provided by ArLSEP. Passive systems such as retroreflectors, witness plates, and cosmic dust collectors can be added to either the landing vehicle and/or the ArLSEP. With repeated HLS missions to the same human site, the ArLSEP can be expanded and easily maintained for long duration science collection on the lunar surface.

ALSEP

Power Operations of the Mars Exploration Rovers

The rovers of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Mars Exploration Rovers (MER) project, Spirit (MER-A) and Opportunity (MER-B), safely landed on the surface of Mars three weeks apart during January 2004. Spirit and Opportunity were built and operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), which is managed by the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) for NASA. Spirit landed at Gusev Crater, 14.8 degrees south of the equator, and operated continuously on the surface of Mars from January 4, 2004 until last contact from Spirit on March 22, 2010. Opportunity landed at Meridiani Planum, a location 2.5 degrees south of the Martian equator. Opportunity operated continuously on the Martian surface from January 25, 2004 until the last received transmission from Opportunity on June 10, 2018. The goal of the MER project was to determine if Mars ever had a habitable environment, in particular, if it ever had water. During their missions, both Spirit and Opportunity found evidence that liquid water once flowed on the surface of Mars. Both Spirit and Opportunity used a 1.33 m2 triple-junction solar array as their power sources. Based on observations of the original Mars rover, the Sojourner rover of the Mars Pathfinder mission that landed on Mars on July 4, 1997, the expectation was that the Martian dust would rapidly accumulate on the solar arrays of Spirit and Opportunity, and that the rovers would not have enough energy to continue operations after 90 Martian days (sols). Instead, due in part to lower dust accumulation rates than expected and numerous dust cleaning events, the Spirit and Opportunity rovers continued to operate on the Martian surface for over 2000 sols (MER-A) and 5000 sols (MER-B), respectively. During this time, the rovers experienced multiple Martian winters and several dust storms. Because the sources of solar array energy loss were known, the solar array energy output offered a method to scientifically estimate the loading and aeolian removal of dust from the solar arrays each sol. The MER Power operations team called this value that they calculated the solar array Dust Factor (DF). Dust Factor was defined as the fraction of sunlight that penetrates the accumulated dust on the surface of the solar array. A Dust Factor of 1.0 would indicate that the solar array was perfectly clean. A Dust Factor of 0.6 would indicate that only 60% of the available sunlight was able to penetrate the accumulated dust on the solar arrays. The MER Power subsystem operations team used the Multi-Mission Power Analysis Tool (MMPAT) to perform these Dust Factor calculations. The MMPAT software tool modeled the behavior of the solar arrays and the batteries as they interacted with the spacecraft power loads over the mission timeline. MMPAT also had knowledge (through telemetry and user inputs) of telemetered Power subsystem voltages and currents, atmospheric opacity (Tau), rover surface location, rover attitude, the planetary tilt and distance of Mars from the sun based on day of year, the instantaneous elevation of the sun based on time of day, temperatures (internal and external), terrain masking, and shadowing (due to the camera mast and antennas). Once all of the known sources of array energy loss are accounted, the remaining difference between the expected array energy and the actual array energy determines the solar array Dust Factor. The assumptions made while determining the Dust Factor are 1) that the single measured atmospheric opacity value (Tau) is constant over the course of the entire sol, 2) there is no measurable solar cell degradation, 3) there are no shorted strings and therefore, 4) all unexpected solar array energy losses are due to accumulated dust on the solar array. Although it cannot provide an absolute measure of dust loading, the determination of solar array Dust Factor provides a useful way of tracking dust accumulation and aeolian dust removal trends on Martian spacecraft. Any spacecraft on the Martian surface is vulnerable to dust, especially solar-powered spacecraft. The Spirit and Opportunity rovers were operational on the Martian surface for much longer than expected due in part to aeolian removal of dust from their solar arrays. The first few dust removal events were a pleasant surprise to the MER operations teams; however, over time a pattern began to arise. In over three Mars Years on the surface, the Power operations team tracked the solar array Dust Factor at Gusev Crater (location of MER-A) and observed that there were several significant dust removal and deposition events in Mars Year (MY) 27, even in the absence of a large dust storm. In MY 28 at Gusev Crater, the large atmospheric opacity (Tau) increase lagged significant dust removal events. Overall at Gusev Crater, there was a pattern of steady dust accumulation on the solar arrays, with a small number of significant dust cleaning events. At Meridiani Planum, where Opportunity rover operated for over seven Mars Years (late MY 26 to mid MY 34), a clear and consistent pattern of dust movement emerged. Meridiani Planum had a predictable, seasonally dependent pattern of gradual and continuous dust accumulation and removal. In summary, this paper explains the reasons for the development of the solar array Dust Factor and how it was used in mission operations. In particular, this paper describes the MMPAT software package, how it models array energy, including the important assumptions, model inputs and sources of error. And finally, this paper will show how the calculated solar array Dust Factor was used at Gusev Crater and Meridiani Planum to predict dust accumulation rates and weather patterns, and the importance of this generated data set for current and future solar- powered missions to Mars, such as the InSight lander and the planned Mars Sample Return rover.

Chin, Keith B.

TRIDENT Drill Validation at Mars and Lunar Analog Field Sites

Drilling on Earth is typically a human-intensive activity. Drilling on other planets is further complicated by the lack of prior local field surveys of their target area, hence blindly drilling into uncertain target rocks. Field conditions on the Moon or Mars are also different than for shallow drilling on Earth: lower temperatures and pressures, less power available, low masses (hence less weight-on-bit). Given the cost of transport from Earth, no drilling muds or working fluids are likely to be available to carry away cuttings. And impact-gardened regolith and dust vary mechanically and texturally from most terrestrial soils. The Regolith and Ice Drill for Exploration of New Terrains (TRIDENT) is a rotary-percussive 1m-class drill from Honeybee Robotics. It is low-power (rotary and percussive actuators are 200 W each) and lightweight (<20 kg) with the maximum weight on bit limited to 200 N. TRIDENT has been manifested for the Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover (VIPER) and PRIME-1 lunar south pole missions in 2024, has previously been field tested at a hot, dry analog site in the Atacama Desert, and in lunar conditions in thermal vacuum chamber tests. TRIDENT was also part of the 2019 Icebreaker Mars Discovery proposal, as well as in the Mars Life Explorer concept. During ARADS tests, drill control and fault recovery automation software enabled hands-off operations of a rover-mounted TRIDENT drill. TRIDENT Drill Analog Site Validation: Past TRIDENT tests in thermal vacuum (TVAC) chambers targeted containers of manufactured lunar simulants with added volatiles. 2022 TRIDENT ambient testing at NASA Ames drilled into cemented lunar simulant materials. Low cuttings-permeability led to cuttings buildup, and drill choking and binding was observed. The Atacama analog site in ARADS had desiccated unconsolidated sediments that did not challenge the TRIDENT design. However, lunar polar regolith is expected to be diverse and heterogeneous with varying clast sizes, with abundant impactites and perhaps subsurface ice deposits. Neither the simulants nor Atacama testing had completely covered the TRIDENT-targeted field characteristics, motivating further analog tests prior to the planned lunar missions. To gain more insight into the behavior of the TRIDENT hardware in diverse impactites and subsurface ice, and to verify the software automation in that environment, in August 2023 TRIDENT was brought to Haughton Crater, a field analog site in the Canadian Arctic. In September 2023 the same drill was brought to the Bishop Tuff in southern California to verify whether drilling binding behaviors previously seen in lunar simulant testing would be observed in naturally occurring fine-grained massive layers. The ~22 Ma Haughton Crater impact structure is located at 75 ̊22’ N, 89 ̊41’ W, on northwestern Devon Island, Nunavut, Canada. Numerous deposits of pale-grey crater-fill polymictic impact-melt breccia are found within the crater with a typical thickness reaching ~125 m or greater and covering ~60 km -2 . An approximately 600m-thick permafrost layer is also present with ice typically found within 0.5-0.6m of the surface. The volcanic tableland north of Bishop, CA exposes densely welded tuff laid down during the eruption that created the Long Valley Caldera at approximately 0.76 Ma. Extensional faults and the Owens River gorge expose cross-sections across the plateau. The area is viewed as an analog site for Mars features believed to be of pyroclastic origin. Results: Haughton Crater.Drilling tests were conducted 8-13 August 2023 at a previously undisturbed area separated 5-10 m from past years’ Drill Hill test sites (75.4208, -089.7613). In six days, TRIDENT drilled 8 holes to nearly 1 m depth each, totaling 7.80 m. The active layer/ice boundary was at ~67 cm depth, with a total of approximately 2.4 m drilled into ice or ice-cemented impact breccia. During drilling, five drill fault states were observed and successfully recovered. Holes 23-1, 4 and 7 were drilled under manual control, using Honeybee’s Thorax user interface. Holes 23-5, 6, and 8 were drilled with the Ames IBexec automated drilling control software. TRIDENT was observed to have little difficulty in the thawed uncemented impact breccia above the active layer boundary, but required percussion to make slower headway in the ice-cemented breccia. In Hole 23-7 (Fig.1), drilling slowed down in a massive unit just above the active-layer boundary (perhaps a large rock extending into the ice-cementation?), with only 7cm progress made in 27 minutes of high auger torque and constant percussion, leading to a choking fault and then a binding fault. A similar pattern had been observed in TRIDENT Rio Tinto test data from 2017 [6] as well as in the 2022laboratory tests.Bishop Tuff.A team from NASA Ames and the US Geological Survey deployed the same TRIDENT drill to Bishop Sites 1B and 1C (37.4203, -118.4289; 37.4265, -118.4215) on 13-16 September 2023, on the Bishop Tuff plateau. A third drill site was used 17-18 September 2023(37.4598, -118.3667) in an abandoned pumice mine. Four holes (totaling 2.5m depth) were drilled into the fine-grained, meters-thick tuff units at Sites 1B and 1C, and a further two boreholes (totaling 1.98m depth) were made at the pumice site. Drill behavior in the tuff below 10 cm depth was similar to that seen at 65-74 cm depth in Haughton Hole 23-7 (Fig. 1) and that seen in the 2022 lab simulant drilling. Drill safety torque limits were exceeded multiple times resulting in drill stops downhole. These freezes then required external added torques (with a pipe wrench) to resume rotation, to unstick the drill for withdrawal. To prevent this choking and binding behavior we found that more-frequent cuttings removal was necessary, e.g., reducing the “drill bite” size from the nominal 10 cm to 2 cm per bite --bringing the auger up to the surface more frequently, as seen in Bishop Site 1C Hole 2 (Fig.2). This permitted slow progress without drill binding and without external interventions. Conversely, TRIDENT drilling in the more porous pumice target material showed no cuttings buildup issue, and single bites as large as 40 cm were demonstrated. Discussion: We observed that TRIDENT easily penetrated unconsolidated heterogeneous soils (both above the active layer boundary at Haughton and previously in the Atacama). Cemented or consolidated targets that were cuttings-permeable (icy impact breccia, pumice) required more energy applied and percussion. However, in non-cuttings-permeable targets (welded microporous tuff, cemented simulants, boulder) TRIDENT was observed to be prone to excessive cuttings accumulation leading to choking/binding faults and stalling. The wedge cutting bit, used by TRIDENT in field tests and in its flight versions, pulverizes the target rock and creates fine cuttings that ideally are transported up the auger spirals for removal. In porous, fractured or vesicular target materials (such as at the Bishop pumice site) a significant portion of the cuttings are pushed aside, but for non-fractured, microporous targets the cuttings remain in the borehole and accumulate. Rock powder is relatively incompressible as a working fluid at only 100-200N downward force (TRIDENT limits) and hence eventual drilling progress slows or stops. Our recommended strategy for improving TRIDENT cuttings removal in massive target units with low cuttings-permeability is to reduce TRIDENT bite sizes when encountering these units, from 10cm to as little as 1-2cm, to effectively bail the accumulating cuttings. This approach was demonstrated to reduce choking and allowed slow progress to continue in cuttings-impermeable microporous target units (viz. the Bishop tuff in our September 2023 tests or cemented simulants in 2022 ambient tests).

robotic drilling