Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Autonomous Vehicle Navigation”

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.

371 records · Page 21
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Achieving Equilibrium for Dense, Integrated, Vehicle Navigation

Drone usage has proliferated in recent years with many applications that have market-changing potential. Applications that include parcel delivery, wildlife protection, precision farming, law enforcement, and industrial inspection, just to name a few. In this paper, the term drone is used to mean both Unmanned Aerial Vehicle and small Unmanned Aircraft System vehicles. Flight infrastructure can currently only support a few thousand aircraft flying over the United States National Airspace System (NAS) at any given time. A delay atone airport sends ripple effects through the system, causing more delays and missed connections. Once regulations and safety policies are put in place to allow for the widespread use of unmanned drones, the number of aircraft in the NAS is expected to skyrocket to millions, potentially congesting the airspace resulting in possible separation violations. In air traffic control, separation is the concept of keeping an “ownship” aircraft outside a minimum distance from “intruder” aircraft to reduce the risk of the aircraft colliding, as well as preventing accidents due to secondary factors, such as wake turbulence. Maintaining proper separation is a safety critical property for drones in the airspace. This paper addresses separation in time and in distance for high volume corridors (en-route) and lanes(on ground). The requirements and necessary conditions for maintaining proper separation and reaching maximum throughput for a given corridor/lane are addressed assuming unidirectional corridors/lanes where an aircraft arrives from one side and departs from the opposite side. Simulation results are presented that show the presented solution guarantees a set of drones to reach the equilibrium state by adjusting their speed based on their distance to the aircraft in front of them. The equilibrium state is defined as a state when a set of n aircraft moving at a relatively constant speed and uniform spacing from each other in a congested system. A congested system is defined as a state when the aircraft cannot move at their maximum allowed speed. Unlike existing centralized and pre-planned approaches, the proposed solution is fully distributed and enables autonomous aircraft to decide to adjust their speed and distance with respect to the preceding aircraft, dynamically. Simulation results are presented that assess the feasibility of the approach using a large number of drones and evaluate the scalability of the proposed solution.

Mahyar R. Malekpour↗
NASA NTRS2024

Testing of Advanced Capabilities to Enable In-time Safety Management and Assurance for Future Flight Operations

In order to refine an initial Concept of Operations, explore Concepts of Use, and expose/validate requirements for future In-Time Aviation Safety Management Systems (IASMS), testing architectures were created, along with a set of capabilities and underlying information exchange protocols. These systems were conceived and developed based on hazards associated with two envisioned urban area flight domains: (1) highly autonomous small uncrewed aerial systems (sUAS) operating at low altitudes, and (2) highly autonomous air taxis. The initial scope of this development is described in [1]; this report provides an update, focusing on the subsequent developments and test activities. As stated in [1], it is important to note that there are many capabilities already in use by the industry (or soon to be in use) that will play critical roles in future IASMS designs. Those reported here were developed to address a gap in the current state-of-the-art regarding specific hazards/risks, and/or to allow for investigation of the interplay between and across hazard types — particularly regarding how overall safety risk can be reduced or managed effectively. Results of testing and development activities are organized by the operational phase wherein a particular capability would be employed (i.e., preflight, in-flight, and post-flight/off-line). Pre-flight: A set of capabilities were developed to help mitigate safety risk prior to flight (e.g., during flight and mission planning). Results of testing summarize (1) validation activities to raise the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) and (2) evaluation activities where the capabilities were applied to flight/mission planning procedures and used by operators/pilots. For the latter, flight plans were automatically assessed, and operators/pilots were notified of hazardous flight segments so as to enable adjustment of the flight plan and re-evaluation, and/or to better inform go/no-go decisions. Capabilities addressed hazards associated with power consumption, third-party risk, wind, navigation system performance, radiofrequency interference, and proximity to geo-spatial threats (e.g., buildings, trees, and no-fly zones). In-flight: Flight experiments tested capabilities that detect and respond to hazards encountered during flight. In the first series, safety hazards were monitored and assessed onboard, and system-generated mitigation maneuvers were recorded (but not acted upon by the vehicle). In the second series, mitigation maneuver commands directed the aircraft in response to safety hazards (i.e., auto-mitigation). The sUAS used for testing is described in full, as is the test architecture, which included commercial avionics, research avionics, and onboard software designed to detect, assess, and respond to hazards. The onboard system was designed as a run-time assurance framework, consistent with [2] and supportive of both supervisory and automated modes. The primary functions included: real-time risk assessment (RTRA), auto-pilot monitoring, constraint monitoring, and contingency select/triggering. RTRA performs integrated risk assessment considering data from several hazard-related monitors (e.g., battery, motors, navigation, communications, population density, and loss-of-control). Post-flight/off-line: Data monitored and recorded during flights can enable IASMS capabilities that execute after flights have completed (or “off-line”). These include: (1) the ability to identify anomalies and trends that may only be observable when comparing data spanning a number of similar flights; (2) the ability to update and validate pre-flight and in-flight capabilities and any underlying models to improve their performance; (3) the ability to report anomalies/off-nominals that may indicate design changes or maintenance actions are needed; and (4) the ability for humans involved in operations to report safety-relevant observations to help in understanding the flight data and/or the operational context of a flight. Progress on three such capabilities is summarized; the first investigates anomaly detection given a limited set of flight logs and applies an approach previously used for space operations. The second explores what could be identified using a larger set of flight logs, including from web-based forums where flight logs are posted by sUAS autopilot users. The third creates a new means of collecting information on UAS incidents and accidents via the Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS).

sUAS↗
DOE OSTI2025

High-Resolution Sampling of a River Plume Front with Uncrewed Underwater and Aerial Vehicles

Sampling fast-propagating oceanic features is inherently challenging and demands versatile instrumentation and innovative strategies. This paper introduces a novel sampling strategy designed to capture such phenomena, exemplified by a river plume front. Our method revolves around modifying the preprogrammed pathway of an uncrewed underwater vehicle (UUV) to dynamically track and three-dimensionally sample the evolution of the front. To enable the UUV to follow the feature, we adapt the use of a drifting gateway buoy to be positioned and trapped at the front’s convergence zone, allowing underway navigation relative to the buoy. In our demonstration, we showcase the effectiveness of this strategy by successfully conducting over 30 crossings of a river plume front within a 6-h window. The UUV sensors allowed a comprehensive assessment of key front characteristics, including density, velocity, and turbulence. Supplemental drone footage contributed to the overall picture and facilitated the transformation of the dataset into a front-following reference frame. This article provides an in-depth description of the deployment strategy and required postcollection data processing, including frontal crossing detection, the assessment of the frontal orientation from drone footage, and defining the plume bottom boundaries using backscatter intensity contours.

autonomous observations↗
NASA NTRS2019

Bounding Methods for Heterogeneous Lidar-derived Navigational Geofences

Safe Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) operations near the ground require navigation methods that avoid fixed obstacles such as buildings, power lines and trees. Aerial lidar surveys of ground structures are available with the precision and accuracy to geolocate obstacles, but the high volume of raw survey data can exceed the compute power of onboard processors and the rendering ability of ground-based flight planning maps. Representing ground structures with bounding polyhedra instead of point clouds greatly reduces the data size and can enable effective obstacle avoidance, as long as the bounding geometry envelopes the structures with high spatial fidelity. This report describes in detail four methods to compute bounding geometries of ground obstacles from lidar point clouds. The four methods are: 1) 2.5D Maximum Elevation Box, 2) 2.5D Ground Map Extrusion, 3) 3D Bounding Cylinder, and 4) 3D Bounding Box. The methods are applied to five point cloud datasets from lidar surveys of UAV flight research sites in Georgia and Virginia with an average point spacing that ranges from 0.1m to 0.6m. The methods are assessed using survey areas with geometrically heterogeneous ground structures: buildings, vegetation, power lines, and sub-meter structures such as road signs and guy wires. The 2.5D Maximum Elevation Box method is useful for simple structures. The 2.5D Ground Map Extrusion method efficiently encloses vegetation, but requires handdrawn ground footprints. The 3D Bounding Cylinder method excels at enclosing linear structures such as power lines and fences. The 3D Bounding Box method excels at enclosing planar structures such as buildings. The methods are compared on the basis of data compression and boundary fidelity on selected areas. The 2.5D methods yield the highest data compression but the polyhedra produced by them enclose significant amounts of empty space. Boundary fidelity is superior for the 3D methods, though this fidelity comes at the cost of a roughly thirtyfold lower data compression ratio than the 2.5D Maximum Elevation Box method. A mix of these output geometries is proposed for autonomous UAV navigation with limited on-board computing. Both the accuracy and spatial detail of emerging satellite-based survey technology lower than that of aerial lidar scanning survey technology. Sub-meter structures and thin linear structures are not reliably mapped at present by satellite-based surveys.

Moore, Andrew J.↗
NASA NTRS2013

Helicopter Flight Test of a Compact, Real-Time 3-D Flash Lidar for Imaging Hazardous Terrain During Planetary Landing

A second generation, compact, real-time, air-cooled 3-D imaging Flash Lidar sensor system, developed from a number of cutting-edge components from industry and NASA, is lab characterized and helicopter flight tested under the Autonomous Precision Landing and Hazard Detection and Avoidance Technology (ALHAT) project. The ALHAT project is seeking to develop a guidance, navigation, and control (GN&C) and sensing system based on lidar technology capable of enabling safe, precise crewed or robotic landings in challenging terrain on planetary bodies under any ambient lighting conditions. The Flash Lidar incorporates a 3-D imaging video camera based on Indium-Gallium-Arsenide Avalanche Photo Diode and novel micro-electronic technology for a 128 x 128 pixel array operating at a video rate of 20 Hz, a high pulse-energy 1.06 μm Neodymium-doped: Yttrium Aluminum Garnet (Nd:YAG) laser, a remote laser safety termination system, high performance transmitter and receiver optics with one and five degrees field-of-view (FOV), enhanced onboard thermal control, as well as a compact and self-contained suite of support electronics housed in a single box and built around a PC-104 architecture to enable autonomous operations. The Flash Lidar was developed and then characterized at two NASA-Langley Research Center (LaRC) outdoor laser test range facilities both statically and dynamically, integrated with other ALHAT GN&C subsystems from partner organizations, and installed onto a Bell UH-1H Iroquois "Huey" helicopter at LaRC. The integrated system was flight tested at the NASA-Kennedy Space Center (KSC) on simulated lunar approach to a custom hazard field consisting of rocks, craters, hazardous slopes, and safe-sites near the Shuttle Landing Facility runway starting at slant ranges of 750 m. In order to evaluate different methods of achieving hazard detection, the lidar, in conjunction with the ALHAT hazard detection and GN&C system, operates in both a narrow 1deg FOV raster-scanning mode in which successive, gimbaled images of the hazard field are mosaicked together as well as in a wider, 4.85deg FOV staring mode in which digital magnification, via a novel 3-D superresolution technique, is used to effectively achieve the same spatial precision attained with the more narrow FOV optics. The lidar generates calibrated and corrected 3-D range images of the hazard field in real-time and passes them to the ALHAT Hazard Detection System (HDS) which stitches the images together to generate on-the-fly Digital Elevation Maps (DEM's) and identifies hazards and safe-landing sites which the ALHAT GN&C system can then use to guide the host vehicle to a safe landing on the selected site. Results indicate that, for the KSC hazard field, the lidar operational range extends from 100m to 1.35 km for a 30 degree line-of-sight angle and a range precision as low as 8 cm which permits hazards as small as 25 cm to be identified. Based on the Flash Lidar images, the HDS correctly found and reported safe sites in near-real-time during several of the flights. A follow-on field test, planned for 2013, seeks to complete the closing of the GN&C loop for fully-autonomous operations on-board the Morpheus robotic, rocket-powered, free-flyer test bed in which the ALHAT system would scan the KSC hazard field (which was vetted during the present testing) and command the vehicle to landing on one of the selected safe sites.

Roback, VIncent E.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Neurovestibular Session Summary

Oman - The early mission operational problems caused by space motion sickness have been largely resolved in recent years. This has been achieved by appropriate timeline adjustments, voluntary head movement restriction, and judicious use of promethazine. Crew members now simply accept that some symptoms "come with the job," and usually last only a few days. But as more people have flown longer flights, we've seen cases of space sickness and inversion illusion that take several weeks to resolve. Visual reorientation illusions continue throughout long flights, and occasionally cause difficulties. EVA astronauts sometimes suddenly fear they will fall out of the payload bay or off of the RMS or Strella arms. Orientation and navigation in three dimensions in the MIR station reportedly does not come naturally, because modules have different visual verticals. It is clear that the neurovestibular problems of spaceflight have not disappeared. After return to Earth, many crew members are disoriented and ataxic in the first hour after return, and require assistance leaving the vehicle, Flight surgeons say that the longer the mission, the stronger the aftereffects, certain of which last for weeks. We do not yet know how to predict who will be afflicted. Looking ahead to 3-4 month long voyages to Mars, it seems obvious that if cruise is in O-G, the crew may encounter neurovestibular problems on arrival. Artificial G may be broadly effective as a countermeasure for many of the physiological changes of spaceflight, but from the neurovestibular perspective, it is a double-edged sword. We know that the Coriolis stimulus resulting from rotation is potentially disorienting and nauseogenic. But we don't yet know how much artificial G will be enough, nor how successfully people can adapt to a specific angular velocity and hypo G level. Development of countermeasures remains a big challenge for our neurovestibular community. Maintaining an interdisciplinary perspective is important. Three examples were presented at this meeting: 1) Transgenic animal experiments suggest that in addition to the light illumination cycle, vestibular inputs may also serve as an important input to the circadian system. 2) Radiation can cause important CNS effects in animals, including loss of spatial memory. 3) As described in our session, otolith inputs may contribute to cardiovascular regulation of orthostatic tolerance. Over the past three days, we've all enjoyed catching up with old friends, and making many new ones. On behalf of my colleagues, I want to thank Al Coats and the USRA DSLS staff for the great job they did in running this meeting. And keeping the emphasis on fun. And also my Co- Chair, Mal Cohen, who had more stamina than many of us, despite major surgery only three weeks ago. Mal and I have written a few lines describing each of the seventeen papers in our session, to give you a quick over-view, and as a guide to the full abstracts, We have grouped them under five themes: preflight and inflight countermeasurements, postlanding posture and locomotion deficits: assessment and prediction, adaptive processes, relationships among physical simuli, perceptions, and eye movements, vestibular contribution to human autonomic responses, and implications and recommendations.

Oman, Charles↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Approach for Defining IASMS Services, Functions, and Capabilities

Assuring safety in the NAS with the inclusion of new entrants, such as Advanced Air Mobility (AAM), will require overcoming unique safety challenges that result from combining innovative technologies with novel airspace concepts for moving people and cargo using autonomous vehicles. The focus of the In-time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS) is to overcome AAM’s safety assurance challenges. The IASMS Concept of Operations (ConOps) describes an interconnected set of services, functions, and capabilities (SFCs) designed to manage operational risks, identify unknown risks, and inform system designs. This paper describes an approach for defining SFCs based on technology trends in research, assessment of known and unknown risks in voluntary safety reports, and causal and contributing factors in aviation accidents and incidents. This approach would identify potential SFCs that further expand the Monitor, Assess, and Mitigate (M-A-M) functionality that represents the enabling framework of the IASMS. Safety implications that will result from integration of AAM in the transformation of the National Airspace System (NAS) were addressed in National Academies committees reports on AAM and IASMS. Development of a ConOps for IASMS was a top recommendation and can be represented as a reframing of safety assurance that builds on real-time alerting such as the Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System, and adds the more encompassing in-time temporal parameter in recognition of the different timelines for collecting and assessing safety data for risk mitigations. For example, mining for safety trends from data sources such as the Aviation Safety Information Analysis and Sharing system occurs over a longer time period. Research on AAM operations poses that SFCs can be designed to monitor the safety margin appropriate for AAM including with regards to the distance between current flight parameters and nominal ideal conditions. These in-time comparisons will become more complex as the density of operations increases at least in certain areas and can include planned and actual 4D trajectory, and in-time comparisons having implications on conflict modeling and prediction including expected and actual departure time, fix/waypoint crossing times, and arrival time. These comparisons would be integrated as part of SFCs that redefine and inform new safety margin. An increased safety margin improves management of operational risks while reducing the potential for anomalies. An increased safety margin also has implications for operator confidence in the certainty of its operations and trust in automation. Technology trends in research could be used to refine existing SFCs and define needs for additional SFCs that provide safety improvements to the design and operation of vehicles, airspace design, and operator performance requirements. NASA is developing innovative approaches to safeguard against major accidents and incidents that have occurred in the NAS and those anticipated with the inclusion of envisioned AAM operations. The innovations use operational performance data to monitor, detect, and predict flight variations exceeding safe nominal patterns, such as would be caused by navigational error, severe weather complications, or hijacking of UAS controls. These innovative approaches have high potential to prevent accidents and incidents in the new AAM era. It is anticipated that elements of the innovations will evolve into SFCs for the IASMS. Voluntary safety reports can be monitored to identify anomalies related to design or operational performance risks. Reports could be periodically monitored and assessed for specific topics. Reports might serve as weak signals or precursors indicative of emergent risk such as when combined with other safety information. The architecture could include SFCs that are based on voluntary safety reports recognizing the periodic temporal nature of data analysis. As previously mentioned, aviation accidents with their causal and contributing precursors can inform the need for SFCs in the IASMS. Accidents and incidents at San Francisco International Airport such as Asiana 214 and Air Canada 759 illustrate how combinations of different factors lead to increased risk. These types of precursors and different factors have implications on the types of SFCs that could be needed to monitor and manage different sources and types of design and operational risk. Continuing to assure the safety of AAM as designs and operations gain in complexity can be accompanied by defining SFCs that also increase in complexity. These SFCs can leverage information from findings and recommendations synthesized across on-going research, voluntary safety reports, and accident and incident reports. These SFCs can serve to refine accuracy of algorithms and resolve limitations with current practices. The IASMS architecture represents the framework for the SFCs and their critical role in safety assurance.

In-Time Aviation Safety Management System↗
NASA NTRS2007

X-Band Radar for Studies of Tropical Storms from High Altitude UAV Platform

The increased role of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) in NASA's suborbital program has created a strong interest in the development of instruments with new capabilities, more compact sizes and reduced weights than the instruments currently operated on manned aircrafts. There is a strong demand and tremendous potential for using high altitude UAV (HUAV) to carry weather radars for measurements of reflectivity and wind fields from tropical storms. Tropical storm genesis frequently occurs in ocean regions that are inaccessible to piloted aircraft due to the long off shore range and the required periods of time to gather significant data. Important factors of interest for the study of hurricane genesis include surface winds, profiled winds, sea surface temperatures, precipitation, and boundary layer conditions. Current satellite precipitation and surface wind sensors have resolutions that are too large and revisit times that are too infrequent to study this problem. Furthermore, none of the spaceborne sensors measure winds within the storm itself. A dual beam X-band Doppler radar, UAV Radar (URAD), is under development at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center for the study of tropical storms from HUAV platforms, such as a Global Hawk. X-band is the most desirable frequency for airborne weather radars since these can be built in a relatively compact size using off-the-shelf components which cost significantly less than other higher frequency radars. Furthermore, X-band radars provide good sensitivity with tolerable attenuation in storms. The low-cost and light-weight URAD will provide new capabilities for studying hurricane genesis by analyzing the vertical structure of tropical cyclones as well as 3D reflectivity and wind fields in clouds. It will enable us to measure both the 3D precipitation structure and surface winds by using two antenna beams: fixed nadir and conical scanning each produced by its associated subsystem. The nadir subsystem is a magnetron based radar modified from a marine radar transceiver. It is capable of measuring vertical reflectivity and velocity profile while being a lower-cost, smaller size, and lighter weight version of the NASA ER-2 Doppler Radar (EDOP), which has flown during many NASA field campaigns and has provided valuable scientific information on hurricanes and weather phenomena. Unfortunately, EDOP is too large and heavy for most UAV platforms, but the experience gained with this instrument provided us with the heritage to build a new low-cost, light-weight, smaller system that will be capable of flying on UAVs. The scanning subsystem uses a TWT transmitter and provides measurements of 3D reflectivity/wind fields in-clouds. Conical scanning of the radar beam at a 35 deg. incidence angle will also provide information of surface wind speed and direction derived from the surface return over a single 360 deg. sweep. URAD data system will be Linux based with the capability of autonomous operation. It will utilize cutting edge digital receiver and FPGA technologies to carry out the data acquisition and processing tasks. High speed navigation data from the aircraft will also be captured and saved along with radar data for 3D measurement field reconstruction and aircraft motion correction. There is a tremendous potential for UAVs to carry down-looking weather radars for measurements of reflectivity, horizontal and vertical winds from tropical storms. With operation from HUAV platforms, the dual beam X-band radar under development promises to provide greatly needed information for tropical storm research.

Rodriquez, Shannon↗
NASA NTRS2016

CubeSub

This presentation introduces and discusses the development of the CubeSub submersible concept, an Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) designed around the CubeSat satellite form factor. The presented work is part of the author's MSc thesis in Aerospace Engineering at the Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden, and was performed during an internship at the Mission Design Division of the NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA. Still in the early stages of its development, the CubeSub is to become a submersible test-bed for technology qualified for underwater and space environments. With the long-term goal of exploring the underwater environments in outer space, such as the alleged subsurface ocean of Jupiter's moon Europa, a number of technology and operational procedures must be developed and matured. To assist in this, the CubeSub platform is introduced as a tool to allow engineers and scientists to easily test qualified technology underwater. A CubeSat is a class of miniaturized satellite built to a standardized size. The base size is 1U (U for unit), corresponding to a 100 x 100 x 113.5 cu mm cube. A 1U CubeSat can in other words easily be held in one hand. Stacking units give larger satellite sizes such as the also commonly used 1.5U, 2U and 3U. The CubeSat standard is in itself already well established and hundreds of CubeSats have to date been launched into space. Compatible technology is readily available and the know-how exists in the space industry, all of which makes it a firm ground to stand on for the CubeSub. The rationale behind using the CubeSat form factor is to make use of this pre-existing foundation, making the CubeSub easy to develop, modular and readily available. It will thereby aid in the process of maturing the concept of a fully space qualified submersible headed for outer space. As a further clarification, the CubeSub is itself not meant for outer space, but to facilitate development of such a vessel. Along with its uses as a testbed, the CubeSub also holds the potential to become a useful tool for exploration and experimentation here on Earth. A highly standardized system utilizing well-known hardware can reduce the cost and required work load for researchers wishing to perform experiments and exploration. Users could design sensors and experiments to comply with the already well established CubeSat standard, which are then carried by the CubeSub to the region of interest. This in turn means that the end users can focus more on formulating the experiment itself and less about how to get it where they want it. The CubeSub is designed to be built up by modules, which can be assembled in different configurations to fulfill different needs. Each module will be powered individually and intermodular communication will be wireless, removing the need for wiring. The inside of the cylindrical hull will be flooded with ambient water to enhance the interaction between payloads and surrounding environment. The overall torpedo-like shape is similar to that of a conventional AUV, slender and smooth. This is to make for a low drag, reduce the risk of snagging on surrounding objects and make it possible to deploy through an ice sheet via a narrow borehole or navigate in tight areas. To keep costs low and further accelerate development, rapid prototyping is utilized wherever possible. Full-scale prototypes are being constructed through 3D-printing and using COTS (Commercial Off-The-Shelf) components. 3D-printing is used both for the largest hull components and the relatively small and delicate propellers. Arduino boards are used for control and internal communication

AUV↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

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↗
NASA NTRS2013

Dynamics and Control of a Disordered System in Space

In this paper, we present some ideas regarding the modeling, dynamics and control aspects of granular spacecraft. Granular spacecraft are complex multibody systems composed of a spatially disordered distribution of a large number of elements, for instance a cloud of N grains in orbit, with N greater than 10(exp 3). These grains can be large (Cubesat-size) or small (mm-size), and can be active, i.e., a fully equipped vehicle capable sensing their own position and attitude, and enabled with propulsion means, or entirely passive. The ultimate objective would be to study the behavior of the single grains and of large ensembles of grains in orbit and to identify ways to guide and control the shape of a cloud composed of these grains so that it can perform a useful function in space, for instance, as an element of an optical imaging system for astrophysical applications. This concept, in which the aperture does not need to be continuous and monolithic, would increase the aperture size several times compared to large NASA observatories such as ATLAST, allowing for a true Terrestrial Planet Imager that would be able to resolve exo-planet details and do meaningful spectroscopy on distant world. In the paper, we address the modeling and autonomous operation of a distributed assembly (the cloud) of large numbers of highly miniaturized space-borne elements (the grains). A multi-scale, multi-physics model is proposed of the dynamics of the cloud in orbit, as well as a control law for cloud shape maintenance, and preliminary simulation studies yield an estimate of the computational effort, indicating a scale factor of approximately N(exp 1.4) as a function of the number of grains. A granular spacecraft can be defined as a collection of a large number of space-borne elements (in the 1000s) designed and controlled such that a desirable collective behavior emerges, either from the interactions among neighboring grains, and/or between the grains and the environment. In this paper, each grain is considered to be a highly miniaturized spacecraft which has limited size and mass, hence it has limited actuation, limited propulsive capability, limited power, limited sensing, limited communication, limited computational resources, limited range of motion, limited lifetime, and may be expendable. The modeling and dynamics of clouds of vehicles is more challenging than with conventional vehicles because we are faced with a probabilistic vehicle composed of a large number of physically disconnected vehicles. First, different scales of motion occur simultaneously in a cloud: translations and rotations of the cloud as a whole (macro-dynamics), relative rotation and translation of one cloud member with respect to another (meso-dynamics), and individual cloud member dynamics (micro-dynamics). Second, the control design needs to be tolerant of the system complexity, of the system architecture (centralized vs. decentralized large scale system control) as well as robust to un-modeled dynamics and noise sources. Figure 1, top left, shows the kinematic parameters of a 1000 element cloud in orbit. The motion of the system is described with respect to a local vertical-local horizontal (LV-LH) orbiting reference frame (x,y,z)=F(sub ORF) of origin O(sub ORF) which rotates with mean motion omega and orbital semi-major axis R(sub 0). The orbital geometry at the initial time is defined in terms of its six orbital elements, and the orbital dynamics equation for point O(sub ORF) is propagated forward in time under the influence of the gravitational field of the primary and other external perturbations, described below. The origin of this frame coincides with the initial position of the center of mass of the system, and the coordinate axes are z along the local vertical, x toward the flight direction, and y in the orbit normal direction. The assumptions we used to model the dynamics are as follows: 1) The inertial frame is fixed at Earth's center. 2) The orbiting Frame ORF follows Keplerian orbit. 3) the cloud system dynamics is referred to ORF. 4) the attitude of each grain uses the principal body frame as body fixed frame. 5) the atmosphere is assumed to be rigidly rotating with the Earth. Regarding the grains forming the cloud: 1) each grain is modeled as a rigid body; 2) a simple attitude estimator provides attitude estimates, 3) a simple guidance logic commands the position and attitude of each grain, 4) a simple local feedback controller based on PD control of local states is used to stabilize the attitude of the vehicle. Regarding the cloud: 1) the cloud as a whole is modeled as an equivalent rigid body in orbit, and 2) an associated graph establishes agent connectivity and enables coupling between modes of motion at the micro and macro scales; 3) a simple guidance and estimation logic is modeled to estimate and command the attitude of this equivalent rigid body; 4) a cloud shape maintenance controller is based on the dynamics of a stable virtual truss in the orbiting frame. Regarding the environmental perturbations acting on the cloud: 1) a non-spherical gravity field including JO (Earth's spherical field) zonal component, J2 (Earth's oblateness) and J3 zonal components is implemented; 2) atmospheric drag is modeled with an exponential model; 3) solar pressure is modeled assuming the Sun is inertially fixed; and 4) the Earth's magnetic field is model using an equivalent dipole model. The equations of motion are written in a referential system with respect to the origin of the orbiting frame and the state is propagated forward in time using an incremental predictor-corrector scheme. A representative cloud with varying number of grains is simulated to identify the limitations in computation time as the number of grains grows. We derive a control law to track a desired surface in the ORF (equivalently to maintain a reference cloud shape) by defining an error from a desired surface shape, and designing a control law that is exponentially stable and reduces the tracking error to zero. Figure 1 (top right) shows a comparison of various requirements for simulation of single spacecraft vs. granular spacecraft, indicating the high degree of complexity that needs to be taken into consideration. The ORF components of control force required by one of the grains is, for this particular case, in the micro-Newton range. However, no attempt has been made yet to reconfigure (or re-orient) the cloud configuration internally, for which forces in the milli-Newton level are expected, depending on the time required to do the reconfiguration. Figure 1, bottom, shows the computation time as a function of the number of grains, indicating an order N(exp 1.43) scaling on a 8 Gb, 1067 MHz RAM MacOSX computer with a 3.06 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor. With this metric, the same simulation for a system of N=1000 grains would take 5.4 hours, and 146 hours (i.e., 6 days) for a system with N=10,000 grains. Therefore, efficient ways to simulate this complex system, where not only the time scales of natural system dynamics, but also the sampling times of the Guidance, Navigation, and Control are included, remain to be explored. Additional details on the cloud modeling, dynamics, and control will be described in the paper.

simulation↗