Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Command and Control”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 415 records · Page 23

Intraply Hybrid Composites Would Contain Control Strips

"Smart" structural components with sensors and/or actuators distributed throughout their volumes made of intraply hybrid composite materials, according to proposal. Strips of hybrid control material interspersed with strips of ordinary (passive) composite material in some layers, providing distributed control capability. For example, near and far edges of plate bent upward by commanding bottom control strips to expand and simultaneously commanding upper control strips to contract.

Chamis, Christos C.↗

Design and piloted simulation evaluation of integrated flight/propulsion controls for STOVL aircraft

Integrated flight/propulsion control systems have been designed for operation of STOVL aircraft over the low speed powered-lift flight envelope. The control system employs command modes for attitude, flightpath angle and flightpath acceleration during transition, and translational velocity command for hover and vertical landing. The command modes and feedback control are implemented in the form of a state-rate feedback implicit model follower to achieve the desired flying qualities and to suppress the effects of external disturbances and variations in the aircraft characteristics over the low speed envelope. A nonlinear inverse system was used to translate the output from these commands and feedback control into commands for the various aerodynamic and propulsion control effectors that are employed in powered-lift flight. Piloted evaluations of these STOVL integrated control designs have been conducted on Ames Research Center's Vertical Motion Simulator to assess flying qualities over the low-speed flight envelope. Results indicate that Level 1 flying qualities are achieved with this control system concept for each of these low-speed operations over a wide range of wind, atmospheric turbulence, and visibility conditions.

Franklin, James A.↗

Re-Engineering of the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) to Reduce Operational Costs

Satellite telemetry processing onboard the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) is carried out using dedicated software and hardware. The current ground system is expensive to operate and maintain. The mandate to reduce satellite ground system operations and maintenance costs by the year 2000 led NASA to upgrade the command and control systems in order to improve the data processing capabilities, reduce operator experience levels and increase system standardization. As a result, a command and control system product development team was formed to redesign and develop the HST ground system. The command and control system ground system development consists of six elements. The results of the prototyping phase carried out for the following of these elements are presented: the front end processor; middleware, and the graphical user interface.

Garvis, Michael↗

Model reference adaptive control for systems with time varying model commands

Model reference adaptive control is applied to linear time invariant systems for the case of arbitrary time varying model commands. Asymptotic stability is guaranteed, provided that the output stabilized transfer matrix is strictly positive real. Only output measurements are needed. Neither perfect model following nor explicit parameter identification is required. Simulations show the scheme to be capable of guaranteeing stability when the model inputs are time varying.

Abida, L.↗

Towards Human-Friendly Efficient Control of Multi-Robot Teams

This paper explores means to increase efficiency in performing tasks with multi-robot teams, in the context of natural Human-Multi-Robot Interfaces (HMRI) for command and control. The motivating scenario is an emergency evacuation by a transport convoy of unmanned ground vehicles (UGVs) that have to traverse, in shortest time, an unknown terrain. In the experiments the operator commands, in minimal time, a group of rovers through a maze. The efficiency of performing such tasks depends on both, the levels of robots' autonomy, and the ability of the operator to command and control the team. The paper extends the classic framework of levels of autonomy (LOA), to levels/hierarchy of autonomy characteristic of Groups (G-LOA), and uses it to determine new strategies for control. An UGVoriented command language (UGVL) is defined, and a mapping is performed from the human-friendly gesture-based HMRI into the UGVL. The UGVL is used to control a team of 3 robots, exploring the efficiency of different G-LOA; specifically, by (a) controlling each robot individually through the maze, (b) controlling a leader and cloning its controls to followers, and (c) controlling the entire group. Not surprisingly, commands at increased G-LOA lead to a faster traverse, yet a number of aspects are worth discussing in this context.

multi-robot control↗

A Framework for Dynamic Architecture and Functional Allocations for Increasing Airspace Autonomy

To enable scalability of air travel for use cases such as cargo delivery, it is anticipated that future air traffic operations will involve unmanned aircraft operated by remote pilots. Of particular interest are schemes where a small number of pilots operate a large number of vehicles, mitigating high cost and pilot shortage issues. Such architectures require increased levels of automation and supervisory control modes. They also require ensuring safe operations when the command and control link to the vehicle is degraded or lost completely, rendering the vehicle autonomous. To evaluate these variable and dynamic architectures, this paper will present a framework for decomposing the functions necessary to ensure safe, orderly, and expeditious air travel, assessing the agents in the system, and classifying the levels of autonomy. Then, an example allocation to agents of roles for the function of separation assurance is presented, highlighting the dependency of the allocation on three main factors: time criticality of a potential separation violation, the ratio of pilots to vehicles, and the loss of the command and control link.

air traffic management, function allocation, auton↗

A Framework for Dynamic Architecture and Functional Allocations for Increasing Airspace Autonomy

To enable scalability of air travel for use cases such as cargo delivery, it is anticipated that future air traffic operations will involve unmanned aircraft operated by remote pilots. Of particular interest are schemes where a small number of pilots operate a large number of vehicles, mitigating high cost and pilot shortage issues. Such architectures require increased levels of automation and supervisory control modes. They also require ensuring safe operations when the command and control link to the vehicle is degraded or lost completely, rendering the vehicle autonomous. To evaluate these variable and dynamic architectures, this paper will present a framework for decomposing the functions necessary to ensure safe, orderly, and expeditious air travel, assessing the agents in the system, and classifying the levels of autonomy. Then, an example allocation to agents of roles for the function of separation assurance is presented, highlighting the dependency of the allocation on three main factors; time criticality of a potential separation violation, the ratio of pilots to vehicles, and the loss of the command and control link.

air traffic management↗

A global spacecraft control network for spacecraft autonomy research

The development and implementation of the Automated Space System Experimental Testbed (ASSET) space operations and control network, is reported on. This network will serve as a command and control architecture for spacecraft operations and will offer a real testbed for the application and validation of advanced autonomous spacecraft operations strategies. The proposed network will initially consist of globally distributed amateur radio ground stations at locations throughout North America and Europe. These stations will be linked via Internet to various control centers. The Stanford (CA) control center will be capable of human and computer based decision making for the coordination of user experiments, resource scheduling and fault management. The project's system architecture is described together with its proposed use as a command and control system, its value as a testbed for spacecraft autonomy research, and its current implementation.

Kitts, Christopher A.↗

Laboratory process control using natural language commands from a personal computer

PC software is described which provides flexible natural language process control capability with an IBM PC or compatible machine. Hardware requirements include the PC, and suitable hardware interfaces to all controlled devices. Software required includes the Microsoft Disk Operating System (MS-DOS) operating system, a PC-based FORTRAN-77 compiler, and user-written device drivers. Instructions for use of the software are given as well as a description of an application of the system.

Will, Herbert A.↗

Supporting Multiple Programs and Projects at NASA's Kennedy Space Center

With the conclusion of the shuttle program in 2011, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) had found itself at a crossroads for finding transportation of United States astronauts and experiments to space. The agency would eventually hand off the taxiing of American astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS) that orbits in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) about 210 miles above the earth under the requirements of the Commercial Crew Program (CCP). By privatizing the round trip journey from Earth to the ISS, the space agency has been given the additional time to focus funding and resources to projects that operate beyond LEO; however, adding even more stress to the agency, the premature cancellation of the program that would succeed the Shuttle Program - The Constellation Program (CxP) -it would inevitably delay the goal to travel beyond LEO for a number of years. Enter the Space Launch System (SLS) and the Orion Multipurpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV). Currently, the SLS is under development at NASA's Marshall Spaceflight Center in Huntsville, Alabama, while the Orion Capsule, built by government contractor Lockheed Martin Corporation, has been assembled and is currently under testing at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in Florida. In its current vision, SLS will take Orion and its crew to an asteroid that had been captured in an earlier mission in lunar orbit. Additionally, this vehicle and its configuration is NASA's transportation to Mars. Engineers at the Kennedy Space Center are currently working to test the ground systems that will facilitate the launch of Orion and the SLS within its Ground Services Development and Operations (GSDO) Program. Firing Room 1 in the Launch Control Center (LCC) has been refurbished and outfitted to support the SLS Program. In addition, the Spaceport Command and Control System (SCCS) is the underlying control system for monitoring and launching manned launch vehicles. As NASA finds itself at a junction, so does all of its associated centers across the US. KSC has found itself at the blunt end of change as the entire center has transitioned from an operations mindset to a development mentality. The author of this paper has had the fortunate privilege and opportunity to be part of a transforming NASA during the fall months of 2014. The following is a high level account of projects that he had the chance to work on including the Spaceport Command and Control System, the Advanced Ground System and Maintenance Program Project, Customer Avionics Development & Analysis (CAIDA) Lab and Swamp Works.

Advanced Ground System Maintenance↗

Command module/service module reaction control subsystem assessment

Detailed review of component failure histories, qualification adequacy, manufacturing flow, checkout requirements and flow, ground support equipment interfaces, subsystem interface verification, protective devices, and component design did not reveal major weaknesses in the command service module (CSM) reaction control system (RCS). No changes to the CSM RCS were recommended. The assessment reaffirmed the adequacy of the CSM RCS for future Apollo missions.

Weary, D. P.↗

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Integration in the National Airspace System (NAS) Project KDP-C Review

The topics discussed are the UAS-NAS project life-cycle and ARMD thrust flow down, as well as the UAS environments and how we operate in those environments. NASA's Armstrong Flight Research Center at Edwards, CA, is leading a project designed to help integrate unmanned air vehicles into the world around us. The Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration in the National Airspace System project, or UAS in the NAS, will contribute capabilities designed to reduce technical barriers related to safety and operational challenges associated with enabling routine UAS access to the NAS. The project falls under the Integrated Systems Research Program office managed at NASA Headquarters by the agency's Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate. NASA's four aeronautics research centers - Armstrong, Ames Research Center, Langley Research Center, and Glenn Research Center - are part of the technology development project. With the use and diversity of unmanned aircraft growing rapidly, new uses for these vehicles are constantly being considered. Unmanned aircraft promise new ways of increasing efficiency, reducing costs, enhancing safety and saving lives 460265main_ED10-0132-16_full.jpg Unmanned aircraft systems such as NASA's Global Hawks (above) and Predator B named Ikhana (below), along with numerous other unmanned aircraft systems large and small, are the prime focus of the UAS in the NAS effort to integrate them into the national airspace. Credits: NASA Photos 710580main_ED07-0243-37_full.jpg The UAS in the NAS project envisions performance-based routine access to all segments of the national airspace for all unmanned aircraft system classes, once all safety-related and technical barriers are overcome. The project will provide critical data to such key stakeholders and customers as the Federal Aviation Administration and RTCA Special Committee 203 (formerly the Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics) by conducting integrated, relevant system-level tests to adequately address safety and operational challenges of national airspace access by unmanned aircraft systems, or UAS. In the process, the project will work with other key stakeholders to define necessary deliverables and products to help enable such access. Within the project, NASA is focusing on five sub-projects. These five focus areas include assurance of safe separation of unmanned aircraft from manned aircraft when flying in the national airspace; safety-critical command and control systems and radio frequencies to enable safe operation of UAS; human factors issues for ground control stations; airworthiness certification standards for UAS avionics and integrated tests and evaluation designed to determine the viability of emerging UAS technology. Five Focus Areas of the UAS Integration in the NAS Project Separation Assurance Provide an assessment of how planned Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) separation assurance systems, with different functional allocations, perform for UAS in mixed operations with manned aircraft Assess the applicability to UAS and the performance of NASA NextGen separation assurance systems in flight tests with realistic latencies and uncertain trajectories Assess functional allocations ranging from today's ground-based, controller-provided aircraft separation to fully autonomous airborne self-separation Communications Develop data and rationale to obtain appropriate frequency spectrum allocations to enable safe and efficient operation of UAS in the NAS Develop and validate candidate secure safety-critical command and control system/subsystem test equipment for UAS that complies with UAS international/national frequency regulations, standards and recommended practices and minimum operational and aviation system performance standards for UAS Perform analysis to support recommendations for integration of safety-critical command and control systems and air traffic control communications to ensure safe and efficient operation of UAS in the NAS Human Systems Integration Develop a research test bed and database to provide data and proof of concept for GCS - ground control station - operations in the NAS Coordinate with standards organizations to develop human-factors guidelines for GCS operation in the NAS Certification Define a UAS classification scheme and approach to determining Federal Aviation Regulation airworthiness requirements applicable to all UAS digital avionics Provide hazard and risk-related data to support development of type design criteria and best development practices Integrated Tests and Evaluation Integrate and test mature concepts from technical elements to demonstrate and test viability Evaluate the performance of technology development in a relevant environment (full-mission, human-in-the-loop simulations and flight tests)

outreach↗

The Spartan attitude control system - Ground support computer

The Spartan Attitude Control System (ACS) contains a command and control computer. This computer is optimized for the activities of the flight and contains very little human interface hardware and software. The computer system provides the technicians testing of Spartan ACS with a convenient command-oriented interface to the flight ACS computer. The system also decodes and time tags data automatically sent out by the flight computer as key events occur. The duration and magnitude of all system maneuvers is also derived and displayed by this system. The Ground Support Computer is also the primary Ground Support Equipment for the flight sequencer which controls all payload maneuvers, and long term program timing.

Schnurr, R. G., Jr.↗

Key Differences in Operating a Rover on the Moon vs. Mars

The command and control model for spacecraft operations, as well as the distribution of tasks between ground assets and in space assets, whether with a crew or solely robotic, is fundamentally constrained by the round trip light time between the space asset and the control facility (presumably on Earth, though not required). For an asset on Mars, the round trip light time varies, from roughly fourteen minutes to up to forty minutes. For a Lunar asset the round-trip light time is measured in only a few seconds, but current communications systems may more than double the latency with system overhead. For a Lunar Asset the total command latency may range from six seconds to more than forty, depending on communications overhead and data rates. Further, these variables are not always predictable, thus complicating operations. There are several differentiating factors for Lunar vs. Mars operations, Round trip light time/Atmosphere/Lighting and ShadowsTerrain type and knowledge/Round trip light time has implications for the distribution of tasks between ground and in space assets. Even at Lunar Distances, the combination of round trip light time plus communications systems overhead does not enable joy stick driving of a rover. The best that can be done, if driving from Earth, is near real time command and control. By 2030, driving from in space may be possible. Productivity on Mars requires either long operational sequences of commands, as is done for current rovers such as Curiosity, significant autonomous capability or, as may be possible by 2030, command and control support from space. Another implication of the long round trip light time from Earth to Mars, is that flight software functions must be resident on the in space asset. On the Moon, there is considerably more flexibility, enabling processing functions, to be resident on Earth or in space. This provides the opportunity to take advantage of the considerable processing power available on the ground, but may be constrained by data rates. On the Moon, for practical operational purposes, there is no atmosphere. Hence there is no scattering of light in the shadows. This has implications for image interpretation and driving near the poles. The Moon has permanently shadowed regions (PSR), unique terrain with unknown surface properties. With no scattering of light in shadows, driving on the Moon, particularly at the poles, where we have strong evidence of water, may prove to be hazardous and complex, requiring non-optical sensors, such as LIDAR.

Trimble, Jay↗

An extension of command shaping methods for controlling residual vibration using frequency sampling

The authors present an extension to the impulse shaping technique for commanding machines to move with reduced residual vibration. The extension, called frequency sampling, is a method for generating constraints that are used to obtain shaping sequences which minimize residual vibration in systems such as robots whose resonant frequencies change during motion. The authors present a review of impulse shaping methods, a development of the proposed extension, and a comparison of results of tests conducted on a simple model of the space shuttle robot arm. Frequency shaping provides a method for minimizing the impulse sequence duration required to give the desired insensitivity.

Singer, Neil C.↗

UAS Integration into the NAS: HSI Full Mission Simulation Preliminary Results

The goal of the Full Mission Sim was to examine the effects of different command and control interfaces on UAS pilots' ability to respond to ATC commands and traffic advisories. Results suggest that higher levels of automation (i.e., waypoint-to-waypoint control interfaces) lead to longer initial response times and longer edit times. The findings demonstrate the importance of providing pilots with interfaces that facilitate their ability to get back "in the loop."

ground control stations↗

The Planning Execution Monitoring Architecture

The Planning Execution Monitoring (PEM) architecture is a design concept for developing autonomous cockpit command and control software. The PEM architecture is designed to reduce the operations costs in the space transportation system through the use of automation while improving safety and operability of the system. Specifically, the PEM autonomous framework enables automatic performance of many vehicle operations that would typically be performed by a human. Also, this framework supports varying levels of autonomous control, ranging from fully automatic to fully manual control. The PEM autonomous framework interfaces with the core flight software to perform flight procedures. It can either assist human operators in performing procedures or autonomously execute routine cockpit procedures based on the operational context. Most importantly, the PEM autonomous framework promotes and simplifies the capture, verification, and validation of the flight operations knowledge. Through a hierarchical decomposition of the domain knowledge, the vehicle command and control capabilities are divided into manageable functional "chunks" that can be captured and verified separately. These functional units, each of which has the responsibility to manage part of the vehicle command and control, are modular, re-usable, and extensible. Also, the functional units are self-contained and have the ability to plan and execute the necessary steps for accomplishing a task based upon the current mission state and available resources. The PEM architecture has potential for application outside the realm of spaceflight, including management of complex industrial processes, nuclear control, and control of complex vehicles such as submarines or unmanned air vehicles.

Wang, Lui↗

Apollo Experience Report: Command and Service Module Reaction Control Systems

The reaction control systems of the Apollo command and service module were developed and modified between July 1961 and July 1969. The successful development of these systems, as part of the Apollo Program, was the result of extensive testing, retesting, and modifications of the hardware to ensure system capability and intrasystem compatibility.

Taeuber, Ralph J.↗