Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Space Simulation”

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 469 records · Page 26
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1990

Space Station Simulation Computer System (SCS) study for NASA/MSFC. Volume 1: Baseline architecture report

NASA's Space Station Freedom Program (SSFP) planning efforts have identified a need for a payload training simulator system to serve as both a training facility and as a demonstrator to validate operational concepts. The envisioned MSFC Payload Training Complex (PTC) required to meet this need will train the Space Station payload scientists, station scientists, and ground controllers to operate the wide variety of experiments that will be onboard the Space Station Freedom. The Simulation Computer System (SCS) is made up of the computer hardware, software, and workstations that will support the Payload Training Complex at MSFC. The purpose of this SCS Study is to investigate issues related to the SCS, alternative requirements, simulator approaches, and state-of-the-art technologies to develop candidate concepts and designs.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1990

Space Station Simulation Computer System (SCS) study for NASA/MSFC. Volume 2: Baseline architecture report

NASA's Space Station Freedom Program (SSFP) planning efforts have identified a need for a payload training simulator system to serve as both a training facility and as a demonstrator to validate operational concepts. The envisioned MSFC Payload Training Complex (PTC) required to meet this need will train the Space Station payload scientists, station scientists, and ground controllers to operate the wide variety of experiments that will be onboard the Space Station Freedom. The Simulation Computer System (SCS) is the computer hardware, software, and workstations that will support the Payload Training Complex at MSFC. The purpose of this SCS Study is to investigate issues related to the SCS, alternative requirements, simulator approaches, and state-of-the-art technologies to develop candidate concepts and designs.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2005

NASA GRC and MSFC Space-Plasma Arc Testing Procedures

Tests of arcing and current collection in simulated space plasma conditions have been performed at the NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) in Cleveland, Ohio, for over 30 years and at the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) in Huntsville, Alabama, for almost as long. During this period, proper test conditions for accurate and meaningful space simulation have been worked out, comparisons with actual space performance in spaceflight tests and with real operational satellites have been made, and NASA has achieved our own internal standards for test protocols. It is the purpose of this paper to communicate the test conditions, test procedures, and types of analysis used at NASA GRC and MSFC to the space environmental testing community at large, to help with international space-plasma arcing-testing standardization. To be discussed are: 1.Neutral pressures, neutral gases, and vacuum chamber sizes. 2. Electron and ion densities, plasma uniformity, sample sizes, and Debuy lengths. 3. Biasing samples versus self-generated voltages. Floating samples versus grounded. 4. Power supplies and current limits. Isolation of samples from power supplies during arcs. 5. Arc circuits. Capacitance during biased arc-threshold tests. Capacitance during sustained arcing and damage tests. Arc detection. Prevention sustained discharges during testing. 6. Real array or structure samples versus idealized samples. 7. Validity of LEO tests for GEO samples. 8. Extracting arc threshold information from arc rate versus voltage tests. 9. Snapover and current collection at positive sample bias. Glows at positive bias. Kapon (R) pyrolisis. 10. Trigger arc thresholds. Sustained arc thresholds. Paschen discharge during sustained arcing. 11. Testing for Paschen discharge threshold. Testing for dielectric breakdown thresholds. Testing for tether arcing. 12. Testing in very dense plasmas (ie thruster plumes). 13. Arc mitigation strategies. Charging mitigation strategies. Models. 14. Analysis of test results. Finally, the necessity of testing will be emphasized, not to the exclusion of modeling, but as part of a complete strategy for determining when and if arcs will occur, and preventing them from occurring in space.

Ferguson, Dale C.↗
NASA NTRS2005

NASA GRC and MSFC Space-Plasma Arc Testing Procedures

Tests of arcing and current collection in simulated space plasma conditions have been performed at the NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) in Cleveland, Ohio, for over 30 years and at the Marshall Space flight Center (MSFC) for almost as long. During this period, proper test conditions for accurate and meaningful space simulation have been worked out, comparisons with actual space performance in spaceflight tests and with real operational satellites have been made, and NASA has achieved our own internal standards for test protocols. It is the purpose of this paper to communicate the test conditions, test procedures, and types of analysis used at NASA GRC and MSFC to the space environmental testing community at large, to help with international space-plasma arcing testing standardization. To be discussed are: 1. Neutral pressures, neutral gases, and vacuum chamber sizes. 2. Electron and ion densities, plasma uniformity, sample sizes, and Debye lengths. 3. Biasing samples versus self-generated voltages. Floating samples versus grounded. 4. Power supplies and current limits. Isolation of samples from power supplies during arcs. Arc circuits. Capacitance during biased arc-threshold tests. Capacitance during sustained arcing and damage tests. Arc detection. Preventing sustained discharges during testing. 5. Real array or structure samples versus idealized samples. 6. Validity of LEO tests for GEO samples. 7. Extracting arc threshold information from arc rate versus voltage tests. 8 . Snapover and current collection at positive sample bias. Glows at positive bias. Kapton pyrolization. 9. Trigger arc thresholds. Sustained arc thresholds. Paschen discharge during sustained arcing. 10. Testing for Paschen discharge thresholds. Testing for dielectric breakdown thresholds. Testing for tether arcing. 11. Testing in very dense plasmas (ie thruster plumes). 12. Arc mitigation strategies. Charging mitigation strategies. Models. 13. Analysis of test results. Finally, the necessity of testing will be emphasized, not to the exclusion of modeling, but as part of a complete strategy for determining when and if arcs will occur, and preventing them from occurring in space.

Ferguson, Dale C.a↗
NASA NTRS2007

NASA GRC and MSFC Space-Plasma Arc Testing Procedures

Tests of arcing and current collection in simulated space plasma conditions have been performed at the NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) in Cleveland, Ohio, for over 30 years and at the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) in Huntsville, Alabama, for almost as long. During this period, proper test conditions for accurate and meaningful space simulation have been worked out, comparisons with actual space performance in spaceflight tests and with real operational satellites have been made, and NASA has achieved our own internal standards for test protocols. It is the purpose of this paper to communicate the test conditions, test procedures, and types of analysis used at NASA GRC and MSFC to the space environmental testing community at large, to help with international space-plasma arcing-testing standardization. Discussed herein are neutral gas conditions, plasma densities and uniformity, vacuum chamber sizes, sample sizes and Debye lengths, biasing samples versus self-generated voltages, floating samples versus grounded samples, test electrical conditions, arc detection, preventing sustained discharges during testing, real samples versus idealized samples, validity of LEO tests for GEO samples, extracting arc threshold information from arc rate versus voltage tests, snapover, current collection, and glows at positive sample bias, Kapton pyrolysis, thresholds for trigger arcs, sustained arcs, dielectric breakdown and Paschen discharge, tether arcing and testing in very dense plasmas (i.e. thruster plumes), arc mitigation strategies, charging mitigation strategies, models, and analysis of test results. Finally, the necessity of testing will be emphasized, not to the exclusion of modeling, but as part of a complete strategy for determining when and if arcs will occur, and preventing them from occurring in space.

Ferguson, Dale C.↗
NASA NTRS2023

Developing a Hybrid Space Suit Simulator as a Research Tool for Assessing Extravehicular Activity Relevant Workload

Suited testing time is limited and hard to come by, expensive, and requires a whole team to operate and monitor the suit; however, pressurized spacesuits are not always necessary for initial developmental efforts or assessment of informatics. The Human Physiology, Performance, Protection & Operations Laboratory (H-3PO) at NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) is developing a Hybrid Space Suit Simulator (HS3) to support characterization of human performance during planetary surface exploration analogs. The primary goal of HS3 is to create a low cost, modular, and unpressurized suit simulator for use as a research tool which provides relevant physical and cognitive workload approximations with EVA-like immersion during planetary extravehicular activity (EVA) simulations. HS3 consists of a soft suit, communication, thermal control, gloves, boots, helmet, and integrated bioinformatics/sensors. The modular design of HS3 allows it to be modified to support test objectives as needed. HS3 enables H-3PO and NASA to complete critical human health and performance testing to address open risks and knowledge gaps in a timely, repeatable, and controlled manner. Four engineering runs were completed with HS3 as a baseline for capability. General workload was assessed while traversing on a passive treadmill and conducting geology tasks. Liquid cooling temperature, suit temperature, and metabolic rates were collected during one extended three-hour engineering run. For the duration of the engineering run the suit temperature was 26.6 ± 1.58 °C while suit humidity was 53.7 ± 5.11 %. Helmet temperature was higher than suit temperature at 27.8 ± 1.58 °C. Helmet humidity was lower than average suit humidity at 50.12 ± 11.3 °C. The liquid cooling temperature remained stable at 22.4 ± 1.62 °C. Resting metabolic rate was 597 ± 88 BTU/hr while metabolic rate increased during traverse tasks at 1500 ± 319 BTU/hr and geology tasks at 921 ± 129 BTU/hr. Following the engineering runs, a characterization study will be conducted. The subjects will perform EVA-like scenarios in both a shirtsleeve only and donned HS3, consisting of EVA task circuit focused on traversing, geological rock sampling, and task board manipulation. The characterization study will provide data capability for implementing HS3 in analog EVA testing environments.

Monica Hew↗
NASA NTRS1991

Berthing simulator for space station and orbiter

The development of a real-time man-in-the-loop berthing simulator is in progress at NASA Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center (JSC) to conduct a parametric study and to measure forces during contact conditions of the actual docking mechanisms for the Space Station Freedom and the orbiter. In berthing, the docking ports of the Space Station and the orbiter are brought together using the orbiter robotic arm to control the relative motion of the vehicles. The berthing simulator consists of a dynamics docking test system (DDTS), computer system, simulator software, and workstations. In the DDTS, the Space Station, and the orbiter docking mechanisms are mounted on a six-degree-of-freedom (6 DOF) table and a fixed platform above the table. Six load cells are used on the fixed platform to measure forces during contact conditions of the docking mechanisms. Two Encore Concept 32/9780 computers are used to simulate the orbiter robotic arm and to operate the berthing simulator. A systematic procedure for a real-time dynamic initialization is being developed to synchronize the Space Station docking port trajectory with the 6 DOF table movement. The berthing test can be conducted manually or automatically and can be extended for any two orbiting vehicles using a simulated robotic arm. The real-time operation of the berthing simulator is briefly described.

Veerasamy, Sam↗
NASA NTRS2001

Modeling and simulation for space medicine operations: preliminary requirements considered

The NASA Space Medicine program is now developing plans for more extensive use of high-fidelity medical simulation systems. The use of simulation is seen as means to more effectively use the limited time available for astronaut medical training. Training systems should be adaptable for use in a variety of training environments, including classrooms or laboratories, space vehicle mockups, analog environments, and in microgravity. Modeling and simulation can also provide the space medicine development program a mechanism for evaluation of other medical technologies under operationally realistic conditions. Systems and procedures need preflight verification with ground-based testing. Traditionally, component testing has been accomplished, but practical means for "human in the loop" verification of patient care systems have been lacking. Medical modeling and simulation technology offer potential means to accomplish such validation work. Initial considerations in the development of functional requirements and design standards for simulation systems for space medicine are discussed.

Non-programmatic↗
NASA NTRS1975

Dispersion analysis techniques within the space vehicle dynamics simulation program

The Space Vehicle Dynamics Simulation (SVDS) program was evaluated as a dispersion analysis tool. The Linear Error Analysis (LEA) post processor was examined in detail and simulation techniques relative to conducting a dispersion analysis using the SVDS were considered. The LEA processor is a tool for correlating trajectory dispersion data developed by simulating 3 sigma uncertainties as single error source cases. The processor combines trajectory and performance deviations by a root-sum-square (RSS process) and develops a covariance matrix for the deviations. Results are used in dispersion analyses for the baseline reference and orbiter flight test missions. As a part of this study, LEA results were verified as follows: (A) Hand calculating the RSS data and the elements of the covariance matrix for comparison with the LEA processor computed data. (B) Comparing results with previous error analyses. The LEA comparisons and verification are made at main engine cutoff (MECO).

Snow, L. S.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Approach and landing simulator for Space Shuttle Orbiter touchdown conditions

This study describes a computer simulation that provides an accurate calculation of the touchdown conditions. The program is small enough to operate on a personal computer. The program simulates the Orbiter trajectory from an altitude of 10,000 ft to the earth's surface. It assumes the Orbiter files close to its reference altitude profile, with negligible crosswind effects. Flight data have proven both assumption to be valid. By incorporating these assumptions with the Shuttle guidance logic, a quick approximation can be made of the touchdown speed and downrange distance to an accuracy within 400 ft of the mainframe prediction.

Walyus, Keith D.↗
DOE OSTI2025

Symplectic machine learning model for fast simulation of space-charge effects

Symplectic simulation of space-charge effects is crucial for the design and operation of high-intensity particle accelerators. Traditional methods for simulating these effects are often computationally expensive, resulting in significant overhead. In this work, we introduce a generative model based on a U-Net architecture within a generative adversarial network framework to efficiently simulate space-charge effects. The model is trained to predict the transverse multiparticle space-charge Hamiltonian, which can be physically computed using a gridless spectral method. The one-step symplectic transverse transfer map for the particles is then obtained by differentiating the predicted Hamiltonian. Benchmarking results demonstrate that this generative model achieves an order of magnitude higher computational efficiency compared to the spectral method, providing a highly efficient alternative for simulating space-charge effects with a large number of particles. By maintaining symplecticity, the model effectively preserves the phase-space structure and mitigates nonphysical errors in long-term simulations. This model has been integrated into jutrack, a novel autodifferentiable accelerator modeling code developed in the julia programming language.

Beam code development & simulation techniques↗
NASA NTRS2012

The Space Operations Simulation Center (SOSC) and Closed-Loop Hardware Testing for Orion Rendezvous System Design

The exploration goals of Orion / MPCV Project will require a mature Rendezvous, Proximity Operations and Docking (RPOD) capability. Ground testing autonomous docking with a next-generation sensor such as the Vision Navigation Sensor (VNS) is a critical step along the path of ensuring successful execution of autonomous RPOD for Orion. This paper will discuss the testing rationale, the test configuration, the test limitations and the results obtained from tests that have been performed at the Lockheed Martin Space Operations Simulation Center (SOSC) to evaluate and mature the Orion RPOD system. We will show that these tests have greatly increased the confidence in the maturity of the Orion RPOD design, reduced some of the latent risks and in doing so validated the design philosophy of the Orion RPOD system. This paper is organized as follows: first, the objectives of the test are given. Descriptions of the SOSC facility, and the Orion RPOD system and associated components follow. The details of the test configuration of the components in question are presented prior to discussing preliminary results of the tests. The paper concludes with closing comments.

Milenkovic, Zoran↗
NASA NTRS2001

Requirements for Modeling and Simulation for Space Medicine Operations: Preliminary Considerations

The NASA Space Medicine program is now developing plans for more extensive use of high-fidelity medical Simulation systems. The use of simulation is seen as means to more effectively use the limited time available for astronaut medical training. Training systems should be adaptable for use in a variety of training environments, including classrooms or laboratories, space vehicle mockups, analog environments, and in microgravity. Modeling and simulation can also provide the space medicine development program a mechanism for evaluation of other medical technologies under operationally realistic conditions. Systems and procedures need preflight verification with ground-based testing. Traditionally, component testing has been accomplished, but practical means for "human in the loop" verification of patient care systems have been lacking. Medical modeling and simulation technology offer potential means to accomplish such validation work. Initial considerations in the development of functional requirements and design standards for simulation systems for space medicine are discussed.

Dawson, David L.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Comparison of Orion Vision Navigation Sensor Performance from STS-134 and the Space Operations Simulation Center

The Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle is a new spacecraft being designed by NASA and Lockheed Martin for future crewed exploration missions. The Vision Navigation Sensor is a Flash LIDAR that will be the primary relative navigation sensor for this vehicle. To obtain a better understanding of this sensor's performance, the Orion relative navigation team has performed both flight tests and ground tests. This paper summarizes and compares the performance results from the STS-134 flight test, called the Sensor Test for Orion RelNav Risk Mitigation (STORRM) Development Test Objective, and the ground tests at the Space Operations Simulation Center.

Christian, John A.↗