Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “JPL introduction”

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.

54 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2021

Confronting Future Models with Future Satellite Observations of Clouds and Aerosols

The NASA Aerosol, Clouds, Convection and Precipitation (ACCP) Study convened a workshop in November 2020 to understand the future of modeling aerosols, clouds, convection and precipitation, and how satellite data can contribute to that future. ACCP is a project to define a satellite mission to be launched late in the 2020’s to advance cloud and aerosol science, following the recommendations of the latest NASA Decadal Survey. The ACCP modeling workshop goal was to answer the following questions: 1. What will be the critical science questions for clouds and aerosols in 10 years? 2. Where will simulations of clouds and aerosols across scales of space (process models to global) and time (nowcasting to climate prediction) be in 10 years? 3. What data will be available from space? What data would provide the most benefit? 4. What are the state of the art methods for confronting models with cloud and aerosol observations, including assimilation and climatological analysis techniques? The virtual workshop was anchored by a series of pre-recorded talks. Two days of synchronous sessions focused on discussion of the talks, along with small group breakout exercises. After an introduction to the ACCP concept came a panel discussing the future of modeling clouds and aerosols across scales. Participants were then asked to contribute their ideas. On the second day, there were two panel discussions. First came a discussion of the future of satellite observing systems. Second was a discussion of model-data synthesis methods. Finally, participants were asked to develop their own model-data synthesis proposal. The meeting began with an overview of the ACCP mission concept by Graeme Stephens (NASA-JPL). ACCP is a satellite mission for clouds and aerosols, likely anchored by advanced active lidar and radar systems in space, designed to observe detailed aerosol profile and type information, as well as cloud microphysics and dynamics. ACCP will integrate across sensors and observational types to get multi-spectral views of the same scenes, with better resolution than is available today. Launch is scheduled for 2027 or 2029. ACCP is being thought of as a comprehensive mission that may comprise more than one platform and more than one orbit plane (i.e., inclined and polar), with multiple combinations of sensors.

Future Models↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s Moon Trek Portal: New Capabilities Supporting Mission Planning and Engagement

Introduction: NASA’s Moon Trek (https://trek.nasa.gov/moon/) is one of a growing number of interactive, browser-based, online portals for planetary data visualization and analysis produced by NASA’s Solar System Treks Project (SSTP). Moon Trek continues to be enhanced with new data and new capabilities enabling it to facilitate the planning and conducting of upcoming lunar missions by NASA, its commercial partners, and its international partners, as well as advancing its role as a valuable outreach tool. A Comprehensive Online Web Portal: Developed at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and managed as a project of NASA’s Solar System Exploration Research Virtual Institute (SSERVI) at NASA Ames Research Center, Moon Trek is a browser-based web portal. The portal provides easy-to-use tools for browsing, data layering, data product blending, and feature search among thousands of data products covering topography, mineralogy, elemental abundance, geology, and much more. Visualizations are provided in var-ious map projections, interactive 3D viewing, and in virtual reality. Using an in-house stereo workflow, SSTP is able to produce new NAC-based high-resolution mosaics and DEMs. Diverse Applications for Lunar Exploration: Baseline analytic tools available to all users include dis-tance measurement, elevation profiling, sun angle calculation, and 3D print file generation. More advanced account-level tools allow users to perform more computationally intensive analyses. These include ray-traced lighting analysis for user-specified areas over user-specified time/date ranges and time intervals, electro-static surface potential analysis, subsetting of large data products, slope analysis, and Lunar Laser Ranging geometry calculation. Artificial intelligence (AI) and ma-chine learning (ML) based tools have been implemented for crater detection and hazard analysis, boulder detection and hazard analysis, and rockfall detection. New Tools Facilitating Exploration: Additional, new tools have recently been added and others are in development, offering even greater functionality in con-ducting analyses of potential landing sites and areas of surface operations. The new Line-of-Sight tool facilitates communications planning between locations on the lunar surface, between any given site on the lunar surface and a specified ground station on the Earth, and between a site on the lunar surface and a relay asset in lunar orbit, all taking into account local lunar topography. The new Data Plotter tool provides both tabular and graphical representations of pixel values along a user specified path for a growing number of data products. The new NAC Finder tool will identify and pro-vide access to NAC images that intersect a user-defined path or bounded area. The SSTP development team is looking to leverage the capabilities of its existing AI and ML crater, boulder, and rockfall detection and analysis tools, and extend that technology to a generalized feature detector that can be trained on instances of specific types of landforms and then search the lunar surface for more examples of such features. New traverse planning tools are being developed with use cases in generalized concept studies and specific mission planning in mind. These will facilitate finding optimal traverse paths based on constraints such as slope, lighting, hazard avoidance, and communications. These will be complemented by new traverse visualization capabilities. Users will be able to interactively ride along with a rover, examining 3D views of the terrain while adjusting camera height and viewing angle along with selecting different data layer overlays to drape across the terrain. Engaging the Public: The capabilities being developed for mission planning are being leveraged to further enhance Moon Trek’s proven utility as a valuable public outreach resource. This includes providing multiple lev-els of engagement with different points of entry. At its simplest level, promoting understanding through visualization, media and the public will be able to easily visualize and conduct their own exploration of lunar sites targeted by NASA and its partners. For a more in-depth experience, we are working with our stakeholders to promote understanding through interaction by extend-ing our current landing site and traverse analysis capabilities, making simplified access to these tools available to those who want to explore more deeply key factors in planning a mission through interactive and possibly even gamified experiences. The highest degree of public outreach, focusing on engagement through scientific participation, could be achieved through our work with missions and the NASA Office of the Chief Scientist on Moon Trek’s extension as a tool with specialized capabilities for facilitating citizen science. In such scenarios, participants become members of extended mis-sion science teams, using dedicated and integrated interfaces to analyze mission data to help answer questions key to lunar science and exploration. We are work-ing with NASA’s Office of Communications, museums, planetariums, and the media to help them easily integrate accurate, detailed visualizations of NASA’s lunar destinations and exploration into their content/productions and to engage diverse audiences in diverse venues.

Moon Trek↗
NASA NTRS1998

Thermoelectric materials development

A systematic search for advanced thermoelectric materials was initiated at JPL several years ago to evaluate candidate materials which includes consideration of the following property attributes: (1) semiconducting properties; (2) large Seebeck coefficient; (3) high carrier mobility and high electrical conductivity; (4) low lattice thermal conductivity; and (5) chemical stability and low vapor pressure. Through this candidate screening process, JPL identified several families of materials as promising candidates for improved thermoelectric materials including the skutterudite family. As part of an ongoing effort to develop skutterudite materials with lower thermal conductivity values, several solid solutions and filled skutterudite materials were investigated under the effort sponsored by DOE. The efforts have primarily focused on: (1) study of existence and properties of solid solutions between the binary compounds CoSb3 and IrSb3, and RuSb2Te, and (2) CeFe(4-x)Sb12 based filled compositions. For the solid solutions, the lattice thermal conductivity reduction was expected to be reduced by the introduction of the Te and Ru atoms while in the case of CeFe(4-x)Ru(x)Sb12 based filled compositions. For the solid solutions, the lattice thermal conductivity reduction was expected to be reduced by the introduction of the Te and Ru atoms while in the case of CeFe(4-x)Ru(x)Sb12 filled compositions, the reduction would be caused by the rattling of Ce atoms located in the empty voids of the skutterudite structure and the substitution of Fe for Ru. The details of the sample preparation and characterization of their thermoelectric properties are reported in this report.

Fleurial, J. P.↗
NASA NTRS2008

Automated and Adaptive Mission Planning for Orbital Express

The Orbital Express space mission was a Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) lead demonstration of on-orbit satellite servicing scenarios, autonomous rendezvous, fluid transfers of hydrazine propellant, and robotic arm transfers of Orbital Replacement Unit (ORU) components. Boeing's Autonomous Space Transport Robotic Operations (ASTRO) vehicle provided the servicing to the Ball Aerospace's Next Generation Serviceable Satellite (NextSat) client. For communication opportunities, operations used the high-bandwidth ground-based Air Force Satellite Control Network (AFSCN) along with the relatively low-bandwidth GEO-Synchronous space-borne Tracking and Data Relay Satellite System (TDRSS) network. Mission operations were conducted out of the RDT&E Support Complex (RSC) at the Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico. All mission objectives were met successfully: The first of several autonomous rendezvous was demonstrated on May 5, 2007; autonomous free-flyer capture was demonstrated on June 22, 2007; the fluid and ORU transfers throughout the mission were successful. Planning operations for the mission were conducted by a team of personnel including Flight Directors, who were responsible for verifying the steps and contacts within the procedures, the Rendezvous Planners who would compute the locations and visibilities of the spacecraft, the Scenario Resource Planners (SRPs), who were concerned with assignment of communications windows, monitoring of resources, and sending commands to the ASTRO spacecraft, and the Mission planners who would interface with the real-time operations environment, process planning products and coordinate activities with the SRP. The SRP position was staffed by JPL personnel who used the Automated Scheduling and Planning ENvironment (ASPEN) to model and enforce mission and satellite constraints. The lifecycle of a plan began three weeks outside its execution on-board. During the planning timeframe, many aspects could change the plan, causing the need for re-planning. These variable factors, ranging from shifting contact times to ground-station closures and required maintenance times, are discussed along with the flexibility of the ASPEN tool to accommodate changes to procedures and the daily or long-range plan, which contributed to the success of the mission. This paper will present an introduction to ASPEN, a more in-depth discussion on its use on the Orbital Express mission, and other relative work. A description of ground operations after the SRP deliveries were made is included, and we briefly discuss lessons learned from the planning perspective and future work.

scheduling↗
NASA NTRS1997

Introduction and Highlights of the Workshop

Four generations of CAD/CAM systems can be identified, corresponding to changes in both modeling functionality and software architecture. The systems evolved from 2D and wireframes to solid modeling, to parametric/variational modelers to the current simulation-embedded systems. Recent developments have enabled design engineers to perform many of the complex analysis tasks, typically performed by analysis experts. Some of the characteristics of the current and emerging CAD/CAM/CAE systems are described in subsequent presentations. The focus of the workshop is on the potential of CAD/CAM/CAE systems for use in simulating the entire mission and life-cycle of future aerospace systems, and the needed development to realize this potential. First, the major features of the emerging computing, communication and networking environment are outlined; second, the characteristics and design drivers of future aerospace systems are identified; third, the concept of intelligent synthesis environment being planned by NASA, the UVA ACT Center and JPL is presented; and fourth, the objectives and format of the workshop are outlined.

Noor, Ahmed K.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Experimental approaches for improving SiGe thermoelectric efficiency at JPL

Efforts to improve the thermoelectric efficiency of silicon-germanium alloys are discussed. These efforts are essentially focused on substantially enhancing carrier concentration levels and thus increasing the power factor values of n-type materials. With the help of thermodynamic phase diagram calculations, a combination of various crystal growth and dopant saturation techniques is used for this purpose. Bulk polycrystal growth of double-doped materials is achieved by zone leveling while a new method (the traveling heater method) for high-quality single-crystal growth of SiGe is being developed. Thin films of homogeneous single-crystalline multidoped Si80Ge20 have also been successfully grown from low-temperature melts to investigate combined dopant solid solubility variations. Very high carrier concentration levels were obtained by (P+As)-combined diffusion in zone-leveled and hot-pressed materials. The good overall understanding of doping mechanisms which has been achieved should enable optimization of the thermoelectric properties over this extended carrier concentration range. Reductions in thermal conductivity are being sought by introduction of very small phonon scattering centers (inert material) in the initial powders-precursors of Si-Ge alloys. This approach should benefit both n- and p-type materials.

Borshchevsky, Alex↗
NASA NTRS1993

Mission Operations and Command Assurance: Automating an Operations TQM Task

A long-term program is in progress at JPL to reduce cost and risk of mission operations through defect prevention and error management. A major element of this program, Mission Operations and Command Assurance (MO&QA), provides a system level function on flight projects to instill quality in mission operations. MO&CA embodies the Total Quality Management (TQM) principle of Continuous Process Inprovement (CPI) and uses CPI in applying automation to mission operations to reduce risk and costs. MO&CA has led efforts to apply and has implemented automation in areas that impact the daily flight project environment including Incident Surprise Anomoly tracking and reporting; command data verification, tracking, and reporting; and command support data usage. MO&CA's future work in automation will take into account that future missions systems must be designed to avoid increasing error through the introduction of automation, while adapting to the demands of smaller flight teams.

automation↗
NASA NTRS1993

Mission operations and command assurance - Automating an operations TQM task

A long-term program is in progress at JPL to reduce cost and risk of mission operations through defect prevention and error management. A major element of this program, Mission Operations and Command Assurance (MO&CA), provides a system level function on flight projects to instill quality in mission operations. MO&CA embodies the total quality management TQM principle of continuous process improvement (CPI) and uses CPI in applying automation to mission operations to reduce risk and costs. MO&CA has led efforts to apply and has implemented automation in areas that impact the daily flight project work environment including Incident Surprise Anomaly tracking and reporting; command data verification, tracking and reporting; and command support data usage. MO&CA's future work in automation will take into account that future mission operations systems must be designed to avoid increasing error through the introduction of automation, while adapting to the demands of smaller flight teams.

Welz, Linda↗
NASA NTRS2003

Certification Processes for Safety-Critical and Mission-Critical Aerospace Software

This document is a quick reference guide with an overview of the processes required to certify safety-critical and mission-critical flight software at selected NASA centers and the FAA. Researchers and software developers can use this guide to jumpstart their understanding of how to get new or enhanced software onboard an aircraft or spacecraft. The introduction contains aerospace industry definitions of safety and safety-critical software, as well as, the current rationale for certification of safety-critical software. The Standards for Safety-Critical Aerospace Software section lists and describes current standards including NASA standards and RTCA DO-178B. The Mission-Critical versus Safety-Critical software section explains the difference between two important classes of software: safety-critical software involving the potential for loss of life due to software failure and mission-critical software involving the potential for aborting a mission due to software failure. The DO-178B Safety-critical Certification Requirements section describes special processes and methods required to obtain a safety-critical certification for aerospace software flying on vehicles under auspices of the FAA. The final two sections give an overview of the certification process used at Dryden Flight Research Center and the approval process at the Jet Propulsion Lab (JPL).

Nelson, Stacy↗
NASA NTRS2003

Certification Processes for Safety-Critical and Mission-Critical Aerospace Software

This document is a quick reference guide with an overview of the processes required to certify safety-critical and mission-critical flight software at selected NASA centers and the FAA. Researchers and software developers can use this guide to jumpstart their understanding of how to get new or enhanced software onboard an aircraft or spacecraft. The introduction contains aerospace industry definitions of safety and safety-critical software, as well as, the current rationale for certification of safety-critical software. The Standards for Safety-Critical Aerospace Software section lists and describes current standards including NASA standards and RTCA DO-178B. The Mission-Critical versus Safety-Critical software section explains the difference between two important classes of software: safety-critical software involving the potential for loss of life due to software failure and mission-critical software involving the potential for aborting a mission due to software failure. The DO-178B Safety-critical Certification Requirements section describes special processes and methods required to obtain a safety-critical certification for aerospace software flying on vehicles under auspices of the FAA. The final two sections give an overview of the certification process used at Dryden Flight Research Center and the approval process at the Jet Propulsion Lab (JPL).

Nelson, Stacy↗
NASA NTRS1972

JPL lithium doped solar cell development program

One of the most significant problems encountered in the use of silicon solar cells in space is the sensitivity of the device to electron and proton radiation exposure. The p-diffused-into-n-base solar cells were replaced with the more radiation tolerant n-diffused-into-p-base solar cells. Another advancement in achieving greater radiation tolerance was the discovery that the addition of lithium to n-base silicon resulted in what appeared to be annealing of radiation-induced defects. This phenomenon is being exploited to develop a high efficiency radiation resistant lithium-doped solar cell. Lithium-doped solar cells fabricated from oxygen-lean and oxygen-rich silicon were obtained with average initial efficiencies of 11.9% at air mass zero and 28 C, as compared to state-of-the-art n-p cells fabricated from 10 ohm cm silicon with average efficiencies of 11.3% under similar conditions. Lithium-doped cells demonstrated the ability to withstand three to five times the fluence of 1-MeV electrons before degrading to a power equivalent to state-of-the-art solar cells. The principal investigations are discussed with respect to fabrication of high efficiency radiation resistant lithium-doped cells, including starting material, p-n junction diffusion, lithium source introduction, and lithium diffusion.

Berman, P. A.↗
NASA NTRS1998

Inflatable Microstrip Reflectarray Antennas At X and Ka-Band Frequencies

Introduction: Inflatable antenna technology is being developed by JPL/NASA to enable the capabilities of low mass, high packaging efficiency, and low-cost deployment for future spacecraft high-gain and large aperture antennas. One of the technologies being considered [11 is the inflatable microstrip reflectarray. A conventional inflatable parabolic reflector antenna will offer similar advantages with the added capability of wide electrical bandwidth. However, it suffers from the difficulty of maintaining its required large, thin, and curved-parabolic surface in the space environment. Since the microstrip reflectarray has the "natural" flat reflecting surface, it is much easier to maintain the required surface tolerance using an inflatable structure. This is the primary reason, despite its narrow bandwidth characteristic, that the inflatable microstrip reflectarray is being studied. This article discusses an already-developed one-meter X-band inflatable microstrip reflectarray and a three-meter Ka-band inflatable microstrip reflectarray which is currently under development. Both antennas' RF structures are designed at JPL and their mechanical inflatable structures are designed and manufactured at ILC Dover, Inc.

Huang, John↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Updated Secondary Lunar Meteoroid Ejecta Model for Engineering Design

Introduction: The surface of the Moon is constantly being bombarded by a flux of meteoroids of various sizes. Impacts due to these meteoroids produce secondary ejecta material at much lower speeds but with a total mass larger than the original impactor. Details about the secondary ejecta are important for planning missions on the lunar surface. In this work, an updated ejecta model is presented called the Meteoroid Model of Secondary Ejecta (MeMoSeE), to re-place the Apollo-era ejecta model, NASA SP-8013 [1], in the SLS-SPEC 159 Design Specification for Natural Environments (DSNE) [2]. The model pro-duces secondary ejecta flux environments for a user-specified location on the lunar surface, and sorts the incoming secondary flux by angular direction and speed. Methods: MeMoSeE is separated into three parts: the inputs, the conversion step, and the integration of fluxes. Inputs to the model include the primary meteoroid fluxes and the primary near-Earth object (NEO) fluxes. Meteoroid fluxes, both asteroidal and cometary, are calculated using the Meteoroid Engineering Model (MEM3) [3] for different locations on the Moon. For each surface location, an ephemeris is generated using the JPL HORIZONS System [4] that feeds into MEM3. The NEO fluxes are approximated by the high-density population of MEM3 (i.e., only the directionality), where the speed distribution of the NEO fluxes is renormalized to match observations [5]. The regolith properties are used as defined in the DSNE [2]. The conversion step utilizes scaling laws given by Housen & Holsapple 2011 [6] to convert the primary impactor flux to the total mass of secondary ejecta. The ejecta distribution, at the point-of-impact (POI), is separated into a zenith angle and azimuthal angle distribution. The zenith angle distribution follows a beta distribution where the peak depends on the impact altitude angle and the impact azimuth [7]. We employ an ejecta azimuth distribution that is based on Rival & Mandeville 1999 [8] which focuses ejecta in the downstream direction for more oblique impacts. Finally, during the integration step, we sum secondary ejecta number fluxes at a particular region-of-interest (ROI) that originated from many POI locations over the entire surface of the Moon. We keep track of both altitude and azimuth angle bins as well as a range of speed bins, following the igloo gridding as done in MEM3 [9]. The ejecta particle size distribution and density is assumed to be the same as the lunar regolith [10, 2]. Results: The primary fluxes are computed for one Metonic cycle (19 years) for various locations over the lunar surface with a fixed orientation. Both the angular and speed distributions of the primary fluxes are dependent on the latitude and longitude. The over-all primary fluxes show a roughly 13% increase from the eastern limb to the western limb. In general, the speed distribution of the secondary fluxes span from a user-defined minimum speed to the escape speed of the Moon (2.38 km/s), roughly following a power-law relation [6]. Different parts of the speed distribution come from different primary impact locations on the Moon. The secondary ejecta is dominated by the slowest speeds, where these particles originate nearby the ROI. For speeds around 71% of the escape speed, the secondary ejecta originates from locations near the antipodal point. On the other hand, for secondary ejecta speeds that exceed roughly 90% the escape speed, the ejecta particles come from all over the lunar surface to the ROI. Comparing the secondary ejecta fluxes from MeMoSeE with NASA SP-8013 [1], there is a reduction by about 2-3 orders of magnitude for secondary ejecta particles greater than 1 µg. These estimates agree with recent findings from Bjorkman & Christiansen 2019 [11]. The secondary ejecta fluxes are also compared with the primary fluxes, where the ejecta fluxes are roughly an order of magnitude greater than the primary fluxes. References: [1] Cour-Palais, B. G., (1969) NASA SP-8013. [2] NASA SLS-SPEC-159 Rev. H (2020). [3] Moorhead, A. V., et al. (2019) JS&R, 1-17. [4] Giorgini, J. D., (2015) IAUGA, 29, 2256293. [5] Moorhead, A. V., (2020) Memo OSMA/MEO/Lunar-001. [6] Housen, K. R., and Holsapple, K. A., (2011) Icarus, 211(1), 856-875. [7] Gault, D. E., and Wedekind, J. A., (1978) L&PSCP, 9, 3843-3875. [8] Rival, M., and Mandeville, J., (1999) Space Debris, 1(1), 45-57. [9] Moorhead, A. V., (2019) MEM3 User Guide. [10] Carrier, W. D., (1973) The Moon, 6(3-4), 250-263. [11] Bjorkman, M. D. & Christiansen, E. L., (2019) ODC

impacts↗
NASA NTRS2013

Challenges of Integrating NASAs Space Communication Networks

The transition to new technology, innovative ideas, and resistance to change is something that every industry experiences. Recent examples of this shift are changing to using robots in the assembly line construction of automobiles or the increasing use of robotics for medical procedures. Most often this is done with cost-reduction in mind, though ease of use for the customer is also a driver. All industries experience the push to increase efficiency of their systems; National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the commercial space industry are no different. NASA space communication services are provided by three separately designed, developed, maintained, and operated communications networks known as the Deep Space Network (DSN), Near Earth Network (NEN) and Space Network (SN). The Space Communications and Navigation (SCaN) Program is pursuing integration of these networks and has performed a variety of architecture trade studies to determine what integration options would be the most effective in achieving a unified user mission support organization, and increase the use of common operational equipment and processes. The integration of multiple, legacy organizations and existing systems has challenges ranging from technical to cultural. The existing networks are the progeny of the very first communication and tracking capabilities implemented by NASA and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) more than 50 years ago and have been customized to the needs of their respective user mission base. The technical challenges to integrating the networks are many, though not impossible to overcome. The three distinct networks provide the same types of services, with customizable data rates, bandwidth, frequencies, and so forth. The differences across the networks have occurred in effort to satisfy their user missions' needs. Each new requirement has made the networks more unique and harder to integrate. The cultural challenges, however, have proven to be a significant obstacle for integration. Over the past few decades of use, user missions and network personnel alike have grown accustomed to the processes by which services are provided by the NASA communications and navigation networks. The culture established by each network has created several challenges that need to be overcome in order to effectively integrate the networks. As with any change, there has been resistance, an apprehension to explore automation of existing processes, and a working environment that attempts to indirectly influence change without mandating compliance. Overcoming technical and cultural challenges is essential to successfully integrating the networks and although the challenges are numerous, the integration of the networks promises a more efficient space communications network for NASA and its customers, as well as potential long-term cost savings to the agency. This paper, Challenges of Integrating NASA Legacy Communications Networks, will provide a brief overview of the current NASA space communications networks as well as the an overview of the process implemented while performing the SCaN Trade Studies and an introduction to the requirements driving integration of the SCaN Networks. This paper will describe in detail the challenges experienced, both technical and cultural, while working with NASA space communications network-specific personnel. The paper will also cover lessons learned during the performance of architecture trade studies and provide recommendations for ways to improve the process.

Reinert, Jessica M.↗
NASA NTRS2013

Challenges of Integrating NASA's Space Communications Networks

The transition to new technology, innovative ideas, and resistance to change is something that every industry experiences. Recent examples of this shift are changing to using robots in the assembly line construction of automobiles or the increasing use of robotics for medical procedures. Most often this is done with cost-reduction in mind, though ease of use for the customer is also a driver. All industries experience the push to increase efficiency of their systems; National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the commercial space industry are no different. NASA space communication services are provided by three separately designed, developed, maintained, and operated communications networks known as the Deep Space Network (DSN), Near Earth Network (NEN) and Space Network (SN). The Space Communications and Navigation (SCaN) Program is pursuing integration of these networks and has performed a variety of architecture trade studies to determine what integration options would be the most effective in achieving a unified user mission support organization, and increase the use of common operational equipment and processes. The integration of multiple, legacy organizations and existing systems has challenges ranging from technical to cultural. The existing networks are the progeny of the very first communication and tracking capabilities implemented by NASA and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) more than 50 years ago and have been customized to the needs of their respective user mission base. The technical challenges to integrating the networks are many, though not impossible to overcome. The three distinct networks provide the same types of services, with customizable data rates, bandwidth, frequencies, and so forth. The differences across the networks have occurred in effort to satisfy their user missions' needs. Each new requirement has made the networks more unique and harder to integrate. The cultural challenges, however, have proven to be a significant obstacle for integration. Over the past few decades of use, user missions and network personnel alike have grown accustomed to the processes by which services are provided by the NASA communications and navigation networks. The culture established by each network has created several challenges that need to be overcome in order to effectively integrate the networks. As with any change, there has been resistance, an apprehension to explore automation of existing processes, and a working environment that attempts to indirectly influence change without mandating compliance. Overcoming technical and cultural challenges is essential to successfully integrating the networks and although the challenges are numerous, the integration of the networks promises a more efficient space communications network for NASA and its customers, as well as potential long-term cost savings to the agency. This paper, Challenges of Integrating NASA Legacy Communications Networks, will provide a brief overview of the current NASA space communications networks as well as the an overview of the process implemented while performing the SCaN Trade Studies and an introduction to the requirements driving integration of the SCaN Networks. This paper will describe in detail the challenges experienced, both technical and cultural, while working with NASA space communications network-specific personnel. The paper will also cover lessons learned during the performance of architecture trade studies and provide recommendations for ways to improve the process.

Systems Integration↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Genesis Solar Wind – Capture, Return, Curate and Analyze: Looking Backward and Creating a Timeline

Introduction: In 1997 NASA’S Discovery Program selected the Genesis mission proposal to return solar wind samples to Earth for laboratory analyses. Principal Investigator Donald S. Burnett and the science team defined the purity of collector materials and ability to analyze solar wind composition to the precision required for planetary science. As a small mission, focused on a well-defined science goal, yet needing careful attention to engineering details, the communication among scientists and engineers, nurtured by Don Burnett, was exceptional. Genesis Mission and Curation Legacy: Genesis, as the first U. S. spacecraft to return astromaterial samples since Apollo, not only integrated the mission planning and flight teams, but also the science and sample curation teams during the mission development period. Since Genesis is a sample return mission, the Science Team was essential in certifying the collectors (sample containers for solar atoms). From inception, Genesis established mission funding for returned sample curation. JSC was lead in contamination control during mission preparation, including establishment of an ISO 4 cleanroom facility and use of ultrapure water (UPW) for cleaning flight hardware (and, as it turned out, for cleaning collectors after the mishap). Reliable, fast communication among scientists, engineers and curators at the hands-on level established deep respect among team members and efficient decision-making. JSC’s 50-years of astromaterial sample curation provided experienced sample processors onsite during recovery in Utah (a deep bench for emergency response). Post-recovery curation included iterative collaboration with science sample users to clean or verify cleanliness of samples. The science legacy from Genesis is addressed by Burnett and Jurewicz, this volume. In The Beginning: After Apollo sample return, Burnett and Marcia Neugebauer at JPL began discussing a solar wind sample return, with Neugebauer arguing that separate collection of solar wind regimes was essential science. By 1992 a solar wind sample return mission was presented at a workshop, and by 1994 a mission was proposed named Suess-Urey. The mission was re-proposed under a new name GENESIS and selected in 1997. Susan Niebur captured the Genesis mission history and stories, from high level management documents and from many interviews with participants [2]. Her account lets readers glimpse personality of participants in quotations from interviews. Need and Scope for Detailed Technical Timeline: A timeline constructed from lower level task documents has been initiated to document the resources and skills actually used, as well as task sequence or concurrency. Timelines for high level mission events are captured in two documents [1] [2] and for detailed re-entry events in [3]. A detailed technical timeline for Genesis mission and curation activities will provide data points for lower level tasks, such as ISO 4 curation facility construction time, preparation for nominal sample field recovery, mishap recovery, and UPW expansion. Changes in technology context 1990-2024: Semiconductor technologies were easily accessible in the U.S.A. (1990-1999), and the Genesis team used those resources for cleanroom design and UPW system expansion. Image documentation was changing from film to digital during cleanroom construction and payload cleaning (1997-2001). Engineering design was done using computer aided design proprietary software, making more difficult the archiving of payload configuration and materials. Email of documents, tracked delivery service and virtual meeting capability greatly improved communication efficiency. Information sources – Pre-launch mission preparation: Examples of mission science, engineering and contamination control are collector purity testing, payload design/fabrication and ISO 4 cleanroom construction. Information on timing of these activities comes from facility readiness reviews, management reviews, shipping documents, procurement documents, test reports, travel documents, laboratory logs, Quality Assurance documents, dates on images, participant notebooks and emails. Information sources – Sample return re-entry and field recovery activities: Information comes from event timelines produced by Mid-Air Recovery team, Lockheed team lead notes and from chase video, JPL Quality Assurance. Information also comes from images and logbooks from UTTR cleanroom operations and from curatorial documents. Information sources – Resulting science and sample cleaning processes: Agendas from the annual gatherings of the science team initially trace testing for collector purity/cleanliness, and after sample recovery, include collector cleaning and cleanliness assessment. Post-recovery documents include curatorial orders and procedures, sample allocation documents and LPSC abstracts. Timeline Objectives: A simple spreadsheet timeline with headers DATE, EVENT, PEOPLE, COMMENT, INFORMATION SOURCE has been initiated and currently has over 90 entries. While this is not definitive historical research, it is a quick look at the evolution of Genesis curation with pointers to documents or people with information. Engineers for future missions may find useful points of comparison for development of facilities. References:[1] Genesis Mission Reference Document, (2011) JPL D-62382.[2] Niebur S. M., edited by Brown D. W. (2023) NASA’s Discovery Program: The First 20 Years of Competitive Planetary Exploration, NASA-SP-2023-4238.[3] Genesis Mishap Investigation Board Report, Vol. 1 (July 2005).

solar wind↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Advancing Dust Tolerant Mechanisms for a Sustained Exploration of the Moon

Introduction: “I think dust is probably one of our greatest inhibitors to a nominal operation on the Moon. I think we can overcome other physio-logical or physical or mechanical problems except dust.”– Gene Cernan, Apollo 17 Technical Debrief The Apollo missions revealed the impact of lu-nar dust on mechanisms. Lunar dust particles are jagged and electrostatically charged, giving them the ability to bind or damage mechanisms and alter thermal properties. Reports documented clogged equipment and jammed mechanisms in every mission, regardless of surface duration, as well as clogged mechanisms in the Extravehicular Mobility Suit (EMS), including zippers, wrist and hose locks, faceplates, and sunshades [1-2]. Several astronauts remarked they could not have sustained surface activity much longer because clogged joints would have frozen up completely [2]. Effective dust mitigation strategies are need-ed to support longer duration stays on the lunar surface [3-4]. State of the Art: Technology for mechanisms able to operate in dusty enviroments is advancing rapidly due to the needs of both Mars rovers and the Artemis program. Vacuum-tight connectors are essential for spacesuits and habitats, and their performance can be dependent on cleaning technologies, which have proven difficult on the lunar surface. Several TRL 3-5 technologies are undergoing tests with the expectation to reach TRL 6 within 1-2 years. Some mechanisms will be infused and tested on the VIPER (Volatiles Inves-tigating Polar Exploration Rover) mission planned for mid-2020s. NASA Funded Efforts: NASA has recognized the need for dust tolerant mechanisms, and has partnered with industry to advance the state-of-the-art. At NASA GRC, KSC, and JSC, the Dust Tolerant Mechanisms Project is working to devel-op advanced actuator seals for rotary joints and rotary bearing technologies for long-term sus-tained operation in lunar dust environments. An-other NASA project at NASA GRC, partnered with GSFC, JPL, and KSC is Motors for Dusty & Ex-treme Cold Environments (MDECE). MDECE is developing an unheated magnetically-geared mo-tor that can operate continuously for a long dura-tion at an ambient temperature of -243 ºC (33 K). NASA GRC has the capability to characterize the effects of dust on seals, mechanisms, and other mating surfaces and components under lunar conditions [5]. Through the SBIR/STTR program, NASA has funded several companies to advance dust toler-ant mechanisms via the Dust Tolerant Mecha-nisms sub-topic with applications in surface mobil-ity, spacesuits, connectors, joints, and more. LSIC and Community Efforts: The Lunar Surface Innovation Consortium (LSIC) Dust Miti-gation focus group has fostered collaborations across NASA, industry, and academia to develop solutions that minimizes the impact of lunar dust on robotic and human systems. Community ef-forts have included topical meetings on dust tol-erant mechanisms, featured technology presenta-tions, and feedback to NASA on potential gaps and needs. Testing: In 2021, NASA released NASA-STD-1008 [6]. This NASA Technical Standard estab-lishes minimum requirements and provides guid-ance for testing systems and hardware to be ex-posed to dust in planetary environments. The standard has specific sections dedicated to Mechanisms Testing (e.g. bearings, gears) as well as Seals and Mating Surfaces Testing (e.g. hatches, docking systems). Gaps and Needs: NASA is tracking dust tol-erant mechanisms as a gap in a cross-directorate analysis of capability areas needed to enable fu-ture human space-flight architectures. Two high-priority gap areas include additional facilities for testing mechanisms in lunar-surface conditions, and a better understanding of vulnerabilities to the smallest, nanometer-scale dust particles. Conclusion: Understanding and mitigating lu-nar dust is critical to successful, sustained opera-tions on the lunar surface – whether autonomous or otherwise. This presentation will discuss both the state-of-the-art and open needs in lunar dust tolerant mechanisms, technology impacts, mitiga-tion approaches, testing, LSIC community efforts, and more. References: [1] Gaier, J. R. (2020). The Im-pact of Dust on Lunar Surface Equipment During Apollo. Lunar Dust 2020. [2] GRC, & Gaier, J. R. (2005). The Effects of Lunar Dust on EVA Sys-tems During the Apollo Missions. [3] Johansen, M. R. (2020). An Update on NASA’s Lunar Dust Mitigation Strategy. Lunar Dust 2020. [4] ASI, CSA, ESA, JAXA, & NASA. (2016). Dust Mitiga-tion Gap Assessment Report. [5] Jimenez, N. et al (2022), LPSC Abstract 2572. [6] NASA-STD-1008, 2021.

J I Nunez↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

VERNE: Revealing the Mysteries and Histories of Venus

Introduction: The three Venus missions that were recently selected for upcoming flight (VERITAS, DAVINCI+, and EnVision) will be incredibly valuable to our understanding of Venus’ history, geology, and atmosphere. However, even once completed, key gaps in our knowledge of Venus, and more generally the formation and active processes on rocky, Earth-like planets, will still persist. Remaining questions include 1) how global intrinsic magnetic fields might be maintained on rocky worlds, and how they could then go extinct, and 2) what role atmospheric sulfur chemistry plays in climates of Earth-like planets, which is an increasingly timely subject as Earth’s own atmospheric sulfur content is climbing due to human activity. These questions require in-situ observations from Venus’ cloud deck, at the altitudes at which the UV absorber exists. The Venus Environment Research and Novel Exploration (VERNE) mission will address these questions with an aerial platform that will drift around the equatorial region of the planet for 9 days. VERNE will collect data to determine the identity of the mysterious UV absorber, while also taking magnetic field measurements over the tesserae, the regions on Venus that are most likely to retain remanent crustal magnetization, in order to understand the potential role of a past intrinsically-generated global magnetic field on Venus. Mission Objectives: The two major science objectives that drive the VERNE mission are: 1) Determine the identity of the Venusian unknown ultraviolet absorber(s). First observed approximately a century ago [1], the composition of Venus’ ultraviolet (UV) absorber is one of the oldest mysteries in Venus atmospheric chemistry [2,3]. While several candidate UV absorbers (mostly sulfur species) have been proposed, no consensus has been reached on its composition and its specific interactions with the atmosphere. Determining the identity of the UV absorber will aid climate models by showing how and where incident solar energy is absorbed by the atmosphere and make progress towards understanding the chemical and energetic processes taking place above Venus’ upper cloud deck [4]. 2) Determine if Venus retains evidence of a past, internally-generated magnetic field. While Venus does not currently have an intrinsically-generated magnetic field, evidence for the existence of a past field on Venus and a timeline of its decay will fill in a more holistic picture of the evolution of Venus’ geological record and atmosphere. As the oldest geologic units on the surface, Venus’ tesserae may still have remanent crustal magnetization signatures within the rocky composition [5]. In any case, the signatures detected will provide insight into Venus’ past geological and core dynamo activity. Mission Summary: VERNE includes a 3-part flight system made up of 1) an entry system with a HEEET (Heatshield for Extreme Entry Environment Technology) aeroshell, 2) an orbiter for data relay, and 3) an in-situ balloon and gondola. After entry into Venus’ atmosphere, the balloon will be deployed within the upper cloud deck, at an altitude of 62 km, over a tesserae region. The in-situ data collection will last for the duration of 2 full circumnavigations of the planet, which will take ~9 days. Instrumentation Suite: The four instruments that comprise VERNE’s instrument payload will enable the identification of the unknown UV absorber and the detection of remanent crustal magnetization if it exists in the tesserae. The proposed instrument suite cycle during mission operations is shown in Fig. 1. The four instruments are described below: 1) Adams (ion neutral mass spectrometer) has a range of 18-257 AMU and will detect and distinguish the mixing ratios of O₂, H₂O, H₂SO₄, S, S₂, S₃, S₄, S₅, S₆, S₇, S₈, SO, SO₂, OSSO, SO₃, Cl₂, FeCl₃ and other trace sulfur and organic species. The spatial (longitudinal) and temporal (day/night) variations will be observed throughout 2 circumnavigations with a sample cadence of 12 minutes. 2) Shelley (nephelometer) will determine the size distribution of the aerosols (0.4 to 36 um) in the atmosphere. With a size resolution of <0.7 um, it can determine which mode of H2SO4 is present and characterize the large (>30 um) organic particles previously detected by the Venera and Galileo missions [6,7]. 3) Herbert (UV imager) will measure UV radiance at 283 nm (the wavelength of SO2 absorption) and 365 nm (the unknown part of the absorber). UV images will be taken concurrently with the INMS and nephelometer to correlate UV absorption with abundances of the UV absorber species. 4) Vonnegut (magnetometer) has a range of >600 nT and a precision and accuracy of 1 nT. If magnetized by a past field, the crust may have retained a magnetization of up to 3 A/m2 [5]. With a noise floor of 10 nT, the magnetometer will be able to detect RCM from an altitude of 62 km, even if the thickness of the magnetized crust is just 1 km (Fig. 2). Mission Concept Design: VERNE will be launched with a mass of 3300 kg in an intermediate-high performance class vehicle with a 4-m fairing. The 475-day mission includes 466 days for the cruise, coasting, and orbit initialization phases before entry, descent, and balloon deployment. During the 9-day science phase, the aerial platform will make 2 circumnavigations of the planet at an altitude of 62 km. The INMS and the nephelometer will acquire data for 2 hours during the daytime and nighttime during each circumnavigation, while the UV imager will be on for the duration of the daytime, and the magnetometer will be operational throughout the entirety of the science phase. Data will be stored and processed with the JPL-designed Sphinx command and data handling system. Data will be sent from the balloon to the orbiter using an S-band relay link, stored on the orbiter, and then forwarded to Earth where it will be received by the DSN. Conclusion: VERNE will fill key gaps in our understanding of the history and ongoing processes related to the geology and atmosphere of Venus and rocky worlds in general. Even with adequate flight system contingencies and expected costs below the $900M New Frontiers cost cap, VERNE is not without its risks and challenges. Further trade spaces to explore include 1) using solely battery power vs. including solar panels to increase the mission duration and 2) investigating the use of lightweight materials and 3D-printed structures to reduce the gondola mass, among others. Acknowledgments: We would like to thank the JPL Planetary Science Summer School, especially our mentors Troy Hudson, Karl Mitchell, and Leslie Lowes, as well as our Team-X study lead Al Nash and the members of Team-X. We’d additionally like to thank our review panel for asking insightful questions and providing valuable feedback. References: [1] Ross, F. E. (1928) Astrophysical J., 68, 57-92. [2] Rossow, W. B. et al. (1980) J. Geophysical Research, 85, 8107-8128. [3] Pinto, J. P. et al. (2021) Nature Communications, 12, 175. [4] Titov, D. V. et al. (2007) Cosmic Research, 21, 401. [5] O’Rourke, J. et al. (2019) Geophysical Research Lett., 46, 5768–5777. [6] Limaye, S. S. et al. (2018) Astrobiology, 18(9), 1181-1198. [7] Grinspoon, D. H. et al. (2013) Planetary and Space Sci., 41(7), 515-542. [8] Parker, R. L. (2003) J. Geophysical Research, 108, 5006. *The cost information contained in this document is of a budgetary and planning nature and is intended for informational purposes only. It does not constitute a commitment on the part of JPL and/or Caltech.

H Alpert↗