SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
AS part of the International Committee on Aviation Training in Extended Envelopes (ICATEE), recommendations are in progress regarding simulation model fidelity for upset training. This presentation provides a status update and current recommendations for specific model features that are currently being considered. The purpose of this presentation is to provide an update of the recent ICATEE aero modeling recommendations to the SUPRA aero model subteam.
Prior to a spacewalk during the NASA STS/129 mission in November 2009, Columbia Broadcasting System (CBS) correspondent William Harwood reported astronauts, "were awakened again", as they had been the day previously. Fearing something not properly connected was causing a leak, the crew, both on the ground and in space, stopped and checked everything. The alarm proved false. The crew did complete its work ahead of schedule, but the incident reminds us that correctly connecting hundreds and thousands of entities, subsystems and systems, finding leaks, loosening stuck valves, and adding replacements to very large complex systems over time does not occur magically. Everywhere major projects present similar pressures. Lives are at - risk. Responsibility is heavy. Large natural and human-created disasters introduce parallel difficulties as people work across boundaries their countries, disciplines, languages, and cultures with known immediate dangers as well as the unexpected. NASA has long accepted that when humans have to go where humans cannot go that simulation is the sole solution. The Agency uses simulation to achieve consensus, reduce ambiguity and uncertainty, understand problems, make decisions, support design, do planning and troubleshooting, as well as for operations, training, testing, and evaluation. Simulation is at the heart of all such complex systems, products, projects, programs, and events. Difficult, hazardous short and, especially, long-term activities have a persistent need for simulation from the first insight into a possibly workable idea or answer until the final report perhaps beyond our lifetime is put in the archive. With simulation we create a common mental model, try-out breakdowns of machinery or teamwork, and find opportunity for improvement. Lifecycle simulation proves to be increasingly important as risks and consequences intensify. Across the world, disasters are increasing. We anticipate more of them, as the results of global warming prove more and more ominous-glaciers melting in Bolivia, floods in Saudi Arabia, the Maldives sinking and salt rising along the Nile. Fear grows about potential asteroid crashes and nightly television images raise awareness of victims of floods, hurricanes, cyclones and typhoons, fire, tornado, tsunami, bombings, landslides, and cross-boundary criminality. The Red Cross says that disasters impact 250 million people each year. That means that 700,000 people are having a very bad day today. Modeling and simulation is and must be part of the solution.
According to a Nielsen survey at the time of this reporting, 41% of all households have a game console. This is one market in which NASA has been absent from education and outreach efforts. Kinect Engineering with Learning (KEWL) is made to enter into that market and bring NASA education and outreach to a very familiar venue. KEWL creates an education and outreach experience that is more participatory, both in a school and museum environment. KEWL is a set of applications that runs on an Xbox 360 using the Kinect controller used for education and outreach. These applications currently include: Train R2, a visual simulation of Robonaut 2 that allows students to control a virtual R2 in a game environment; Drive R2, an interface using the Xbox 360 and Kinect controller that allows students to control the real R2 using the methods they learned playing Train R2; ISS experience, a visual tour of the interior of the International Space Station where students use their body to fly through the virtual ISS; Gravity Ball, a simulation of throwing balls in the gravity of different planets; Solar Array repair, a simulation of the simplified STS-121 solar array repair mission; and PlaySpace, a Mars/Moon application that allows students to experience different aspects of Mars/Moon. Users can "fly through" the ISS using their body, allowing an experience similar to what an astronaut would have on orbit. In PlaySpace, users can fly over the surface of Mars and view surface data obtained by Mars rovers. Users of Train R2 and Drive R2 can experience what it is like to control a robot over a distance with a time delay, simulating the time delay that would occur between ground control and an on-orbit robot. The initial ISS experiences were built using parts of code from the NASA Enigma software. The models used in these experiences were also from the Integrated Graphics Operations and Analysis Lab model database. The PlaySpace experience incorporates surface data obtained from NASA rovers and satellites and was built by NASA JPL.
CBS is a computerize battle simulation system driven by Army Corps and Division Command Post Exercises and Battle Command Training Program War Fighter exercises.
Flight simulation requirements for reducing aircraft training flight time, discussing control system and instrument motion characteristics, visual simulation and critical maneuvers motion
Footage shows the crew of STS-92, Commander Brian Duffy, Pilot Pamela A. Melroy, and Mission Specialists Koichi Wakata, Leroy Chiao, Peter J.K. Wisoff, Michael E. Lopez-Alegria, and William S. McArthur during various parts of their training. Clips are seen of the Shuttle bailout training, Shuttle arm and extravehicular activity (EVA) training at the Virtual Reality Lab, EVA training at the Neutral Buoyancy Lab, Shuttle operations training, EVA prep and post training in the Full Fuselage Trainer, ascent and post insertion training in the Guidance Navigation Simulator, and Mission Specialist Wakata in the Shuttle Engineering Dome and training on the Manipulator Development Facility.
Footage shows the crew of STS-102, Commander James D. Wetherbee, Pilot James M. Kelly, and Mission Specialists Andrew S. W. Thomas and Paul Richards, during various parts of their training. Scenes include: (1) neutral buoyancy lab training; (2) undocking/fly-around training in the GNS (Navigation Simulator); (3) crew equipment interface test; (4) Remote Manipulator System (RMS) training in the GNS; and (5) docking training in the GNS.
Practical tools which can extend the state of the art of moving base flight simulation for research and training are developed. Main approaches to this research effort include: (1) application of the vestibular model for perception of orientation based on motion cues: optimum simulator motion controls; and (2) visual cues in landing.
It is pointed out that most of the modern flight simulators used for pilot training have included expensive motion bases, while the quantitative justification for motion is lacking. The present investigation is concerned with the effects of flight versus simulator conditions on scan behavior as a function of control mode and the presence or absence of traffic on the map display. Matching tests conducted in flight and in a fixed-base simulator permitted an evaluation of the differences in scanning behavior in the real world (flight) and in the 'less real' world (simulator). Scanning behavior in flight was found to be significantly different from the simulator. In flight, the dwell percentage increased on the Electronic Attitude Direction Indicator (EADI), and decreased on the Electronic Horizontal Situation Indicator (EHSI). The average dwell time on all instruments decreased in flight.
This paper adds data to help the development of simulator motion cueing guidelines for stall recovery training by identifying time-varying manual control behavior in a stall recovery task under different simulator motion conditions. A study was conducted with seventeen general aviation pilots in the NASA Ames Vertical Motion Simulator. Pilots had to follow a flight director through four stages of a high-altitude stall task. A time-varying identification method was used to quantify how pilot manual control parameters change throughout different stages of the task in both roll and pitch. Four motion configurations were used: no motion, generic hexapod motion, enhanced hexapod motion and full motion. Pilot performance was highest for the enhanced hexapod and full motion configurations in both roll and pitch, and the lowest without motion. In the roll axis, the pilot position gain did not significantly change throughout the stall task, but was the lowest for the condition with no motion. The pilot roll velocity gain was significantly different between motion conditions, the largest difference being found close to the stall point. The enhanced hexapod motion condition had the highest pilot roll velocity gain. In the pitch axis, the pilot position gain was significantly different between time segments but not between motion conditions. The pilot pitch velocity gain was highest for the full motion condition and increased close to the stall point, but did not change significantly for the other motion conditions. Overall, pilot control behavior under enhanced hexapod motion was most similar to that under full aircraft motion. This indicates that motion cueing for stall recovery training on hexapod simulators might be improved by using the principles behind the enhanced hexapod motion configuration.
Lunar surface exploration during Artemis missions will require the specific skill set of geology sampling. Apollo astronauts had extensive training and used specialized tools to collect lunar rocks, core samples, pebbles, sand, and dust. The inflexibility of the pressurized Apollo spacesuits forced sampling to be taken at a standstill posture. However, new exploration spacesuits are expected to incorporate advanced materials and joint bearings, allowing for greater mobility and a wider range of functional postures. Thus, science and exploration during Artemis missions will likely involve a variety of standing, squatting, and kneeling postures. In preparation for future lunar exploration missions, NASA provides geologic training to astronauts and other mission personnel. This professional training with a spacesuit in simulated lunar environments will enhance performance and reduce risk of injury to astronauts on the lunar surface. However, anecdotally, untrained or newly trained people wearing prototype planetary spacesuits have been observed to performing motions differently than a trained geologist would when conducting the same geology sampling tasks. Therefore, a tool for evaluating geology postures at extravehicular activity (EVA) training facilities becomes required. In this paper, we introduce a novel inertial measurement unit (IMU)-based method of geology task assessments in spacesuited conditions during simulated lunar EVAs. As a case study, two subjects (one geologist and one non-geologist) participated and donned the Mark III prototype planetary spacesuit during offloading with the spreader bar gimbal in NASA’s Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS). For automated geology task assessments, the spacesuit was instrumented with three wireless IMUs (APDM Opal, OR, USA): one on the chest and one each on the left and right ankle bearings. Then subjects performed geology tasks using various tools (rake, trench, hammer chisel, scoop, and drive tube) for 45 minutes each. The chest IMU measured the torso tilt angle in the sagittal plane. We used an ensemble learning method with the ankle IMUs to discriminate between standing and kneeling activities. IMU data were processed using custom MATLAB (Mathworks, MA, USA) software. In our case study, the developed method was able to discriminate differences in standing and kneeling activity levels between subjects who were all highly experienced with spacesuited testing. Our preliminary data showed one subject maintained the constant and lower range of the upper body tilt angle while both standing and kneeling, while the other subject showed more variation of the upper body tilt angle and preferred bending the upper body rather than changing from standing to kneeling posture and vice versa. While geology experience may be a factor, these results need further investigation as suit sizing and ARGOS offloading configurations have been proven to have a significant influence on suited ARGOS tasks. Also, more subjects will be needed to complete these tasks for validation. IMU-based geology task assessments can provide useful information for geology training programs. Additionally, our IMU-based posture analysis can provide new insights into how to evaluate spacesuited geology task characteristics of astronauts during simulated lunar EVAs.
Today's flight simulators, such as NASA's multimillion dollar Vertical Motion Simulator (VMS), recreate an authentic aircraft environment, and reproduce the sensations of flight by mechanically generating true physical events. In addition to their application as a training tool for pilots, simulators have become essential in the design, construction, and testing of new aircraft. Simulators allow engineers to study an aircraft's flight performance and characteristics without the cost or risk of an actual test flight. Because of their practicality, simulators will become more and more important in the development and design of new, safer aircraft.
This position with the Simulation and Graphics Branch (ER7) at Johnson Space Center (JSC) provided an introduction to vehicle hardware, mission planning, and simulation design. ER7 supports engineering analysis and flight crew training by providing high-fidelity, real-time graphical simulations in the Systems Engineering Simulator (SES) lab. The primary project assigned by NASA mentor and SES lab manager, Meghan Daley, was to develop a graphical simulation of the rendezvous, proximity operations, and docking (RPOD) phases of flight. The simulation is to include a generic crew/cargo transportation vehicle and a target object in low-Earth orbit (LEO). Various capsule, winged, and lifting body vehicles as well as historical RPOD methods were evaluated during the project analysis phase. JSC core mission to support the International Space Station (ISS), Commercial Crew Program (CCP), and Human Space Flight (HSF) influenced the project specifications. The simulation is characterized as a 30 meter +V Bar and/or -R Bar approach to the target object's docking station. The ISS was selected as the target object and the international Low Impact Docking System (iLIDS) was selected as the docking mechanism. The location of the target object's docking station corresponds with the RPOD methods identified. The simulation design focuses on Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC) system architecture models with station keeping and telemetry data processing capabilities. The optical and inertial sensors, reaction control system thrusters, and the docking mechanism selected were based on CCP vehicle manufacturer's current and proposed technologies. A significant amount of independent study and tutorial completion was required for this project. Multiple primary source materials were accessed using the NASA Technical Report Server (NTRS) and reference textbooks were borrowed from the JSC Main Library and International Space Station Library. The Trick Simulation Environment and User Training Materials version 2013.0 release was used to complete the Trick tutorial. Multiple network privilege and repository permission requests were required in order to access previous simulation models. The project was also an introduction to computer programming and the Linux operating system. Basic C++ and Python syntax was used during the completion of the Trick tutorial. Trick's engineering analysis and Monte Carlo simulation capabilities were observed and basic space mission planning procedures were applied in the conceptual design phase. Multiple professional development opportunities were completed in addition to project duties during this internship through the System for Administration, Training, and Education Resources for NASA (SATERN). Topics include: JSC Risk Management Workshop, CCP Risk Management, Basic Radiation Safety Training, X-Ray Radiation Safety, Basic Laser Safety, JSC Export Control, ISS RISE Ambassador, Basic SharePoint 2013, Space Nutrition and Biochemistry, and JSC Personal Protective Equipment. Additionally, this internship afforded the opportunity for formal project presentation and public speaking practice. This was my first experience at a NASA center. After completing this internship I have a much clearer understanding of certain aspects of the agency's processes and procedures, as well as a deeper appreciation from spaceflight simulation design and testing. I will continue to improve my technical skills so that I may have another opportunity to return to NASA and Johnson Space Center.
The spinning rocket simulator (SRS) is an ongoing project at Oral Roberts University. The goal of the SRS is to gather crucial data concerning a spinning rocket under thrust for the purpose of analysis and correction of the coning motion experienced by this type of spacecraft maneuver. The computer animation simulates a virtual, scale model of the component of the SRS that represents the spacecraft itself. This component is known as the (VSM), or virtual spacecraft model. During actual physical simulation, this component of the SRS will experience a coning. The goal of the animation is to cone the VSM within that range to accurately represent the motion of the actual simulator. The drive system of the SRS is the apparatus that turns the actual simulator. It consists of a drive motor, motor mount and chain to power the simulator into motion. The motor mount is adjustable and rigid for high torque application. A digital stepper motor controller actuates the main drive motor for linear acceleration. The chain transfers power from the motor to the simulator via sprockets on both ends.
The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic brought a dramatic and rapid transformation to almost every aspect of humanity. The world’s space agencies and their missions were not immune to the wide-sweeping changes. One discipline principally affected was mission operations and the various groups supporting that function. Mission support teams, especially for complex and crewed missions like the International Space Station (ISS) were forced to rethink how and where control center staff performed their vital work. Operations training – an essential element to mission ops, had unique hurdles to overcome. Operations training is responsible for preparing astronaut crews for their missions, training and certifying flight controllers, as well as ensuring that new team members are ready to join their colleagues. Every element of training was impacted during the pandemic. From orientation and introductory classes for new controllers, simulations, and advanced lessons, On the Job Training (OJT) and final evaluations; all aspects faced challenges. Trainers at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama were forced to become more efficient with trainees and resources to continue supporting ISS payload operations. The pandemic arrived in the USA in March 2020. Immediately, NASA mandated that the support for ISS real-time operations was critical. As a result, physical access to key facilities was restricted. Trainers and trainees had to quickly shift to 100% remote learning. In the short term, this was not a problem. However, instructors discovered lessons they were accustomed to delivering in a classroom environment often did not translate to remote teaching. Another hurdle to operations training was the mandate that all simulations could only be held remotely. The logistics of even small simulations proved to be challenging due to Information Technology (IT) restrictions and public internet limitations. With simulations essentially halted, as well as the restrictions on most OJT, trainees were essentially stopped in their advancement towards certification. Once limitations were identified, trainers prioritized new options. Transitioning to all electronic learning materials was a relatively easy fix. Teaching to large groups took additional shifts in the training paradigm. Methods for preparing astronauts for their missions were revised. Simulation supervisors found efficient techniques to provide realistic training experiences. Communication and coordination with management was essential. In every case, the payload operations instructors found novel solutions to all functions listed. This paper discusses the factors and solutions payloads operations trainers found to keep scientific research on the ISS flying forward to mission success.
Early in the development of the Space Shuttle, it became clear that NASA needed a method of deploying and retrieving payloads from the payload bay. The Shuttle Remote Manipulator System (SRMS) was developed to fill this need. The 50 foot long robotic arm is an anthropomorphic design consisting of three electromechanical joints, six degrees of freedom, and two boom segments. Its composite boom construction provided a light weight solution needed for space operations. Additionally, a method of capturing payloads with the arm was required and a unique End Effector was developed using an electromechanical snare mechanism. The SRMS is operated using a Displays and Controls Panel and hand controllers located within the aft crew compartment of the shuttle. Although the SRMS was originally conceived to deploy and retrieve payloads, its generic capabilities allowed it to perform many other functions not originally conceived of. Over the years it has been used for deploying and retrieving constrained and free flying payloads, maneuvering and supporting EVA astronauts, satellite repair, International Space Station construction, and as a viewing aid for on-orbit International Space Station operations. After the Columbia accident, a robotically compatible Orbiter Boom Sensor System (OBSS) was developed and used in conjunction with the SRMS to scan the Thermal Protection System (TPS) of the shuttle. These scans ensure there is not a breach of the TPS prior to shuttle re-entry. Ground operations and pre mission simulation, analysis and planning played a major role in the success of the SRMS program. A Systems Engineering Simulator (SES) was developed to provide a utility complimentary to open loop engineering simulations. This system provided a closed-loop real-time pilot-driven simulation giving visual feedback, display and control panel interaction, and integration with other vehicle systems, such as GN&C. It has been useful for many more applications than traditional training. Evolution of the simulations, guided by the Math Model Working Group, showed the utility of input from multiple modeling groups with a structured forum for discussion.There were many unique development challenges in the areas of hardware, software, certification, modeling and simulation. Over the years, upgrades and enhancements were implemented to increase the capability, performance and safety of the SRMS. The history and evolution of the SRMS program provided many lessons learned that can be used for future space robotic systems.
This document contains the proceedings of the Training Workshop on Multiscale Modeling, Simulation and Visualization and Their Potential for Future Aerospace Systems held at NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia, March 5 - 6, 2002. The workshop was jointly sponsored by Old Dominion University's Center for Advanced Engineering Environments and NASA. Workshop attendees were from NASA, other government agencies, industry, and universities. The objectives of the workshop were to give overviews of the diverse activities in hierarchical approach to material modeling from continuum to atomistics; applications of multiscale modeling to advanced and improved material synthesis; defects, dislocations, and material deformation; fracture and friction; thin-film growth; characterization at nano and micro scales; and, verification and validation of numerical simulations, and to identify their potential for future aerospace systems.
The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic brought a dramatic and rapid transformation to almost every aspect of humanity in 2020. The world’s space agencies and their missions were not immune to the wide-sweeping changes. One discipline principally affected was mission operations and the various groups supporting that function. Mission support teams, especially for complex and crewed missions like the International Space Station were forced to rapidly rethink how and where control center staff performed their vital work. Operations training – an essential element to mission ops, had unique hurdles to overcome. Operations training is responsible for preparing astronaut crews for their missions, providing training to flight controllers, as well as ensuring that new team members are ready to join their colleagues. Every element of training was impacted by COVID restrictions. From orientation and introductory classes for new controllers, simulations and advanced lessons, On the Job Training and final evaluations; all aspects faced new challenges. Trainers at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama, were forced to become more efficient with trainees and resources to continue supporting payload operations. The pandemic started in the USA in March 2020. Immediately, NASA mandated that the support for ISS real-time operations was critical. As a result, physical access to key facilities was restricted. Trainers and trainees had to quickly shift to 100 percent remote learning. In the short term, this was not a problem. However, instructors discovered lessons that they were accustomed to delivering in a classroom environment did not translate to remote teaching. Another hurdle to operations training was the mandate that all simulations could only be held remotely. The logistics of even small simulations proved to be challenging due to IT restrictions and public internet limitations. With simulations essentially stopped, as well as the restrictions on most OJT, trainees were essentially stopped in their advancement towards certification. Once limitations were identified, trainers prioritized new options. Transitioning to all electronic learning materials was a relatively easy fix. Teaching to large groups took additional shifts in the training paradigm. Methods for preparing astronauts for their missions were revised. Simulation supervisors found more efficient techniques to provide realistic training experience. Communication and approvals from management was essential. In every case, the payload operations instructors found novel solutions to all functions listed. This paper will discuss the factors and solutions payloads operations trainers found to keep scientific research on the ISS flying forward to mission success.