SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Team X”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 415 records · Page 23

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2010

Ares I-X Ground Diagnostic Prototype

The automation of pre-launch diagnostics for launch vehicles offers three potential benefits: improving safety, reducing cost, and reducing launch delays. The Ares I-X Ground Diagnostic Prototype demonstrated anomaly detection, fault detection, fault isolation, and diagnostics for the Ares I-X first-stage Thrust Vector Control and for the associated ground hydraulics while the vehicle was in the Vehicle Assembly Building at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and while it was on the launch pad. The prototype combines three existing tools. The first tool, TEAMS (Testability Engineering and Maintenance System), is a model-based tool from Qualtech Systems Inc. for fault isolation and diagnostics. The second tool, SHINE (Spacecraft Health Inference Engine), is a rule-based expert system that was developed at the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory. We developed SHINE rules for fault detection and mode identification, and used the outputs of SHINE as inputs to TEAMS. The third tool, IMS (Inductive Monitoring System), is an anomaly detection tool that was developed at NASA Ames Research Center. The three tools were integrated and deployed to KSC, where they were interfaced with live data. This paper describes how the prototype performed during the period of time before the launch, including accuracy and computer resource usage. The paper concludes with some of the lessons that we learned from the experience of developing and deploying the prototype.

Schwabacher, Mark A.↗

NASA NTRS2021

Recommendation on Orbiting Sample Cleanliness

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration-European Space Agency (NASA-ESA) Mars Sample Return (MSR) campaign involves the collection of samples on Mars by the Perseverance (Mars 2020) rover and their return to Earth. To accomplish this, the Orbiting Sample container (OS) will be sent to Mars to accommodate the collected samples then launched from Mars and returned to Earth, where the samples will be removed for examination in the Sample Return Facility (SRF). Crucial to this entire sequence will be establishment of the required level of cleanliness inside the OS. In February 2021, the NASA Headquarters' Mars Sample Return Program and Office of Planetary Protection assembled an MSR OS Tiger Team (OSTT) to discuss the appropriate cleanliness level options of the interior of the OS. The team's remit was primarily focused on evaluating the trade-offs between Planetary Protection cleanliness levels 4a and 4b. These cleanliness levels are determined by the Committee on Space Research (COSPAR) planetary protection regulations, where 4a requires <300 bacterial spores/m^2 and <3 x 10^5 bacterial spores on the spacecraft (in this case, the interior of the OS) and 4b mandates the more stringent requirement of <30 bacterial spores on the spacecraft. This report documents the consensus opinion submitted by the OSTT that recommended the interior of the OS be cleaned to a 4a requirement with any feasible added effort toward 4b. This report provides, as well, the rationale for that decision.

Charles S. Cockell↗

NASA NTRS2012

The NASA X-Ray Mission Concepts Study

The 2010 Astrophysics Decadal Survey recommended a significant technology development program towards realizing the scientific goals of the International X-ray Observatory (IXO). NASA has undertaken an X-ray mission concepts study to determine alternative approaches to accomplishing IXO's high ranking scientific objectives over the next decade given the budget realities, which make a flagship mission challenging to implement. The goal of the study is to determine the degree to which missions in various cost ranges from $300M to $2B could fulfill these objectives. The study process involved several steps. NASA released a Request for Information in October 2011, seeking mission concepts and enabling technology ideas from the community. The responses included a total of 14 mission concepts and 13 enabling technologies. NASA also solicited membership for and selected a Community Science Team (CST) to guide the process. A workshop was held in December 2011 in which the mission concepts and technology were presented and discussed. Based on the RFI responses and the workshop, the CST then chose a small group of notional mission concepts, representing a range of cost points, for further study. These notional missions concepts were developed through mission design laboratory activities in early 2012. The results of all these activities were captured in the final X-ray mission concepts study report, submitted to NASA in July 2012. In this presentation, we summarize the outcome of the study. We discuss background, methodology, the notional missions, and the conclusions of the study report.

Petre, Robert↗

NASA NTRS2002

SMEX-Lite Modular Solar Array Architecture

For the most part, Goddard solar arrays have been custom designs that are unique to each mission. The solar panel design has been frozen prior to issuing an RFP for their procurement. There has typically been 6-9 months between RFP release and contract award, followed by an additional 24 months for performance of the contract. For Small Explorer (SMEX) missions, with three years between mission definition and launch, this has been a significant problem. The SMEX solar panels have been sufficiently small that the contract performance period has been reduced to 12-15 months. The bulk of this time is used up in the final design definition and fabrication of flight solar cell assemblies. Even so, it has been virtually impossible to have the spacecraft design at a level of maturity sufficient to freeze the solar panel geometry and release the RFP in time to avoid schedule problems with integrating the solar panels to the spacecraft. With that in mind, the SMEX-Lite project team developed a modular architecture for the assembly of solar arrays to greatly reduce the cost and schedule associated with the development of a mission- specific solar array. In the modular architecture, solar cells are fabricated onto small substrate panels. This modular panel (approximately 8.5" x 17" in this case) becomes the building block for constructing solar arrays for multiple missions with varying power requirements and geometrical arrangements. The mechanical framework that holds these modules together as a solar array is the only mission-unique design, changing in size and shape as required for each mission. There are several advantages to this approach. First, the typical solar array development cycle requires a mission unique design, procurement, and qualification including a custom qualification panel. With the modular architecture, a single qualification of the SMEX-Lite modules and the associated mechanical framework in a typical configuration provided a qualification by similarity to multiple missions. It then becomes possible to procure solar array modules in advance of mission definition and respond quickly and inexpensively to a selected mission's unique requirements. The solar array modular architecture allows the procurement of solar array modules before the array geometry has been frozen. This reduces the effect of procurement lead-time on the mission integration and test flow by as much as 50%. Second, by spreading the non-recurring costs over multiple missions, the cost per unit area is also reduced. In the case of the SMEX-Lite procurement, this reduction was by about one third of the cost per unit area compared to previous SMEX mission-unique procurements. Third, the modular architecture greatly facilitates the infusion of new solar cell technologies into flight programs as these technologies become available. New solar cell technologies need only be fabricated onto a standard-sized module to be incorporated into the next available mission. The modular solar array can be flown in a mixed configuration with some new and some standard cell technologies. Since each module has its own wiring terminals, the array can be arranged as desired electrically with little impact to cost and schedule. The solar array modular architecture does impose some additional constraints on systems and subsystem engineers. First, they must work with discrete solar array modules rather than size the array to fit exactly within an available envelope. The array area is constrained to an integer multiple of the module area. Second, the modular design is optimized for space radiation and thermal environments not greatly different from a typical SMEX LEO environment. For example, a mission with a highly elliptical orbit (e.g., Polar, SMEX/FAST) would require thicker coverglasses to protect the solar cells from the more intense radiation environment.

Lyons, John↗

NASA NTRS2007

The Operation and Evolution of the Swift X-ray Telescope

The Swift X-ray Telescope (XRT) is a CCD based X-ray telescope designed for localization, spectroscopy and long term light curve monitoring of Gamma-Ray Bursts and their X-ray afterglows. Since the launch of Swift in November 2004, the XRT has undergone significant evolution in the way it is operated. Shortly after launch there was a failure of the thermo-electric cooler on the XRT CCD, which led to the XRT team being required to devise a method of keeping the XRT CCD temperature below 50C utilizing only passive cooling by minimizing the exposure of the XRT radiator to the Earth. We present in this paper an update on how the modeling of this passive cooling method has improved in first -1000 days since the method was devised, and the success rate of this method in day-to-day planning. We also discuss the changes to the operational modes and onboard software of the XRT. These changes include improved rapid data product generation in order to improve speed of rapid Gamma-Ray Burst response and localization to the community; changes to the way XRT observation modes are chosen in order to better fine tune data aquisition to a particular science goal; reduction of "mode switching" caused by the contamination of the CCD by Earth light or high temperature effects.

Kennea, Jamie↗

NASA NTRS2011

Comparison of Magnetospheric MultiScale (MMS) Formation Design Algorithms

The MMS mission consists of four identical spinning spacecraft in a tetrahedron-like formation during predefined orbital regions-of-interest [1]. The MMS formation will fly about a highly eccentric orbit to study magnetic reconnection in the Earth.s magnetosphere. The mission is divided in two main science phases of markedly different orbit size. Phase 1 is a 1.2 R(sub E) x 12 R(sub E) (R(sub E) equals one Earth radius) orbit phase where science will be performed on the day-side of the magnetosphere, and Phase 2 is a 1.2 R(sub E) x 25 R(sub E) orbit phase where science will be performed on the night-side of the magnetosphere. For each phase, the MMS formation initially will fly a series of tetrahedron sizes ranging between 10-km and 400-km to assist the science team in determining the best value for the remainder of the phase. This paper presents a preliminary comparison of the algorithms currently available to determine desired MMS formation states. After a brief description of the MMS formation flying metrics and associated requirements, the five formation design algorithm combinations considered here are presented. Monte Carlo simulations determine the performance of each algorithm defined in terms of formation lifetime and fuel consumption. Preliminary results focusing on the smaller formation size for Phase 1 are discussed and the conclusions are presented along with indications for future work.

Mann, L.↗

NASA NTRS2019

During the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) Second Servicing Mission (SM2), degradation of unsupported Teflon(trademark) FEP (fluorinated ethylene propylene), used as the outer layer of the multi-layer insulation (MLI) blankets, was evident as large cracks on the telescope light shield. A sample of the degraded outer layer was retrieved during the mission and returned to Earth for ground testing and evaluation. The results of the Teflon(trademark) FEP sample evaluation and additional testing of pristine Teflon FEP led the investigative team to theorize that the HST damage was caused by thermal cycling with deep-layer damage from electron and proton radiation which allowed the propagation of cracks along stress concentrations, and that the damage increased with the combined total dose of electrons, protons, UV and x-rays along with thermal cycling. This paper discusses the testing and evaluation of the Teflon(trademark) FEP.

Townsend, Jacqueline↗

NASA NTRS2000

BOREAS TF-11 Decomposition Data over the SSA-Fen

The BOREAS TF-11 team collected several data sets in its efforts to fully describe the flux and site characteristics at the SSA-Fen site. This data set contains decomposition rates of a standard substrate (wheat straw) across treatments. The measurements were conducted in 1994 as part of a 2 x 2 factorial experiment in which we added carbon (300 g/sq m as wheat straw) and nitrogen (6 g/sq m as urea) to four replicate locations in the vicinity of the TF-11 tower. The data are stored in tabular ASCII files.

Valentine, David W.↗