Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “spacecraft elements”

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 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1993

Verification of technical elements of the advanced spacecraft based upon the CCSDS recommendation

We are going to meet the era when advanced spacecraft such as space stations are developed and operated. The current system of the satellite operations control will need to undergo many changes. We consider that the future system will require the following functions: the function for interchanging data between international agencies, processing the various kinds of space data, and distributing data as many unspecified users require. However, we have to solve the following problems in order to satisfy these requirements: the problem of standardization of space data communication protocol, establishment of multimedia data management method, and standardization of the user interface. This paper describes three techniques to solve the above mentioned problems. That is, standardization of the data communication protocol between space and ground by AOS (Advanced Orbiting System) protocol of CCSDS (Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems) Recommendation, management of multimedia data by catalog reference, standardization of user interface by SFDU(Standard Formatted Data Unit) of CCSDS Recommendation.

Hara, Hideo↗
NASA NTRS2009

Grooved Fuel Rings for Nuclear Thermal Rocket Engines

An alternative design concept for nuclear thermal rocket engines for interplanetary spacecraft calls for the use of grooved-ring fuel elements. Beyond spacecraft rocket engines, this concept also has potential for the design of terrestrial and spacecraft nuclear electric-power plants. The grooved ring fuel design attempts to retain the best features of the particle bed fuel element while eliminating most of its design deficiencies. In the grooved ring design, the hydrogen propellant enters the fuel element in a manner similar to that of the Particle Bed Reactor (PBR) fuel element.

Emrich, William↗
NASA NTRS1993

Magellan spacecraft and memory state tracking: Lessons learned, future thoughts

Numerous studies have been dedicated to improving the two main elements of Spacecraft Mission Operations: Command and Telemetry. As a result, not much attention has been given to other tasks that can become tedious, repetitive, and error prone. One such task is Spacecraft and Memory State Tracking, the process by which the status of critical spacecraft components, parameters, and the contents of on-board memory are managed on the ground to maintain knowledge of spacecraft and memory states for future testing, anomaly investigation, and on-board memory reconstruction. The task of Spacecraft and Memory State Tracking has traditionally been a manual task allocated to Mission Operations Procedures. During nominal Mission Operations this job is tedious and error prone. Because the task is not complex and can be accomplished manually, the worth of a sophisticated software tool is often questioned. However, in the event of an anomaly which alters spacecraft components autonomously or a memory anomaly such as a corrupt memory or flight software error, an accurate ground image that can be reconstructed quickly is a priceless commodity. This study explores the process of Spacecraft and Memory State Tracking used by the Magellan Spacecraft Team highlighting its strengths as well as identifying lessons learned during the primary and extended missions, two memory anomalies, and other hardships encountered due to incomplete knowledge of spacecraft states. Ideas for future state tracking tools that require minimal user interaction and are integrated into the Ground Data System will also be discussed.

Bucher, Allen W.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Spacecraft Software Maintenance: An Effective Approach to Reducing Costs and Increasing Science Return

Flight software is a mission critical element of spacecraft functionality and performance. When ground operations personnel interface to a spacecraft, they are typically dealing almost entirely with the capabilities of onboard software. This software, even more than critical ground/flight communications systems, is expected to perform perfectly during all phases of spacecraft life. Due to the fact that it can be reprogrammed on-orbit to accommodate degradations or failures in flight hardware, new insights into spacecraft characteristics, new control options which permit enhanced science options, etc., the on- orbit flight software maintenance team is usually significantly responsible for the long term success of a science mission. Failure of flight software to perform as needed can result in very expensive operations work-around costs and lost science opportunities. There are three basic approaches to maintaining spacecraft software--namely using the original developers, using the mission operations personnel, or assembling a center of excellence for multi-spacecraft software maintenance. Not planning properly for flight software maintenance can lead to unnecessarily high on-orbit costs and/or unacceptably long delays, or errors, in patch installations. A common approach for flight software maintenance is to access the original development staff. The argument for utilizing the development staff is that the people who developed the software will be the best people to modify the software on-orbit. However, it can quickly becomes a challenge to obtain the services of these key people. They may no longer be available to the organization. They may have a more urgent job to perform, quite likely on another project under different project management. If they havn't worked on the software for a long time, they may need precious time for refamiliarization to the software, testbeds and tools. Further, a lack of insight into issues related to flight software in its on-orbit environment, may find the developer unprepared for the challenges. The second approach is to train a member of the flight operations team to maintain the spacecraft software. This can prove to be a costly and inflexible solution. The person assigned to this duty may not have enough work to do during a problem free period and may have too much to do when a problem arises. If the person is a talented software engineer, he/she may not enjoy the limited software opportunities available in this position; and may eventually leave for newer technology computer science opportunities. Training replacement flight software personnel can be a difficult and lengthy process. The third approach is to assemble a center of excellence for on-orbit spacecraft software maintenance. Personnel in this specialty center can be managed to support flight software of multiple missions at once. The variety of challenges among a set of on-orbit missions, can result in a dedicated, talented staff which is fully trained and available to support each mission's needs. Such staff are not software developers but are rather spacecraft software systems engineers. The cost to any one mission is extremely low because the software staff works and charges, minimally on missions with no current operations issues; and their professional insight into on-orbit software troubleshooting and maintenance methods ensures low risk, effective and minimal-cost solutions to on-orbit issues.

Shell, Elaine M.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Spacecraft Onboard Software Maintenance: An Effective Approach which Reduces Costs and Increases Science Return

Flight software (FSW) is a mission critical element of spacecraft functionality and performance. When ground operations personnel interface to a spacecraft, they are dealing almost entirely with onboard software. This software, even more than ground/flight communications systems, is expected to perform perfectly at all times during all phases of on-orbit mission life. Due to the fact that FSW can be reconfigured and reprogrammed to accommodate new spacecraft conditions, the on-orbit FSW maintenance team is usually significantly responsible for the long-term success of a science mission. Failure of FSW can result in very expensive operations work-around costs and lost science opportunities. There are three basic approaches to staffing on-orbit software maintenance, namely: (1) using the original developers, (2) using mission operations personnel, or (3) assembling a Center of Excellence for multi-spacecraft on-orbit FSW support. This paper explains a National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Goddard Space Flight Center (NASA/GSFC) experience related to the roles of on-orbit FSW maintenance personnel. It identifies the advantages and disadvantages of each of the three approaches to staffing the FSW roles, and demonstrates how a cost efficient on-orbit FSW Maintenance Center of Excellence can be established and maintained with significant return on the investment.

Shell, Elaine M.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Evaluation of the NASA Arc Jet Capabilities to Support Mission Requirements

NASA accomplishes its strategic goals through human and robotic exploration missions. Many of these missions require launching and landing or returning spacecraft with human or return samples through Earth's and other planetary atmospheres. Spacecraft entering an atmosphere are subjected to extreme aerothermal loads. Protecting against these extreme loads is a critical element of spacecraft design. The safety and success of the planned mission is a prime concern for the Agency, and risk mitigation requires the knowledgeable use of thermal protection systems to successfully withstand the high-energy states imposed on the vehicle. Arc jets provide ground-based testing for development and flight validation of re-entry vehicle thermal protection materials and are a critical capability and core competency of NASA. The Agency's primary hypersonic thermal testing capability resides at the Ames Research Center and the Johnson Space Center and was developed and built in the 1960s and 1970s. This capability was critical to the success of Apollo, Shuttle, Pioneer, Galileo, Mars Pathfinder, and Orion. But the capability and the infrastructure are beyond their design lives. The complexes urgently need strategic attention and investment to meet the future needs of the Agency. The Office of Chief Engineer (OCE) chartered the Arc Jet Evaluation Working Group (AJEWG), a team of experienced individuals from across the Nation, to capture perspectives and requirements from the arc jet user community and from the community that operates and maintains this capability and capacity. This report offers the AJEWG's findings and conclusions that are intended to inform the discussion surrounding potential strategic technical and investment strategies. The AJEWG was directed to employ a 30-year Agency-level view so that near-term issues did not cloud the findings and conclusions and did not dominate or limit any of the strategic options.

Calomino, Anthony↗
NASA NTRS2010

Got Mercury?

Many lamps used in various spacecraft contain elemental mercury, which is efficiently absorbed through the lungs as a vapor. The liquid metal vaporizes slowly at room temperature, but may be completely vaporized when lamps are operating. Because current spacecraft environmental control systems are unable to remove mercury vapors, we considered short-term and long-term exposures. Using an existing study, we estimated mercury vapor releases from lamps that are not in operation during missions lasting less than or equal to 30 days; whereas we conservatively assumed complete vaporization from lamps that are operating or being used during missions lasing more than 30 days. Based on mercury toxicity, the Johnson Space Center's Toxicology Group recommends stringent safety controls and verifications for any hardware containing elemental mercury that could yield airborne mercury vapor concentrations greater than 0.1 mg/m3 in the total spacecraft atmosphere for exposures lasting less than or equal to 30 days, or concentrations greater than 0.01 mg/m3 for exposures lasting more than 30 days.

Meyers, Valerie↗
NASA NTRS1980

Swarms: Optimum aggregations of spacecraft

Swarms are aggregations of spacecraft or elements of a space system which are cooperative in function, but physically isolated or only loosely connected. For some missions the swarm configuration may be optimum compared to a group of completely independent spacecraft or a complex rigidly integrated spacecraft or space platform. General features of swarms are induced by considering an ensemble of 26 swarms, examples ranging from Earth centered swarms for commercial application to swarms for exploring minor planets. A concept for a low altitude swarm as a substitute for a space platform is proposed and a preliminary design studied. The salient design feature is the web of tethers holding the 30 km swarm in a rigid two dimensional array in the orbital plane. A mathematical discussion and tutorial in tether technology and in some aspects of the distribution of services (mass, energy, and information to swarm elements) are included.

Mayer, H. L.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Got Mercury?

Many of the operational and payload lighting units used in various spacecraft contain elemental mercury. If these devices were damaged on-orbit, elemental mercury could be released into the cabin. Although there are plans to replace operational units with alternate light sources, such as LEDs, that do not contain mercury, mercury-containing lamps efficiently produce high quality illumination and may never be completely replaced on orbit. Therefore, exposure to elemental mercury during spaceflight will remain possible and represents a toxicological hazard. Elemental mercury is a liquid metal that vaporizes slowly at room temperature. However, it may be completely vaporized at the elevated operating temperatures of lamps. Although liquid mercury is not readily absorbed through the skin or digestive tract, mercury vapors are efficiently absorbed through the respiratory tract. Therefore, the amount of mercury in the vapor form must be estimated. For mercury releases from lamps that are not being operated, we utilized a study conducted by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Quality to calculate the amount of mercury vapor expected to form over a 2-week period. For longer missions and for mercury releases occurring when lamps are operating, we conservatively assumed complete volatilization of the available mercury. Because current spacecraft environmental control systems are unable to remove mercury vapors, both short-term and long-term exposures to mercury vapors are possible. Acute exposure to high concentrations of mercury vapors can cause irritation of the respiratory tract and behavioral symptoms, such as irritability and hyperactivity. Chronic exposure can result in damage to the nervous system (tremors, memory loss, insomnia, etc.) and kidneys (proteinurea). Therefore, the JSC Toxicology Group recommends that stringent safety controls and verifications (vibrational testing, etc.) be applied to any hardware that contains elemental mercury that could yield airborne mercury vapor concentrations greater than 0.1 mg/cu m in the total spacecraft atmosphere for exposures lasting 30 days or less or 0.01 mg/cu m mercury vapor for exposures lasting more than 30 days. We also encourage the use of alternative devices that do not contain mercury.

Meyers, Valerie E.↗
NASA NTRS1978

Habitability design for spacecraft

Habitability is understood to mean those spacecraft design elements that involve a degree of comfort, quality or necessities to support man in space. These elements are environment, architecture, mobility, clothing, housekeeping, food and drink, personal hygiene, off-duty activities, each of which plays a substantial part in the success of a mission. Habitability design for past space flights is discussed relative to the Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, and Skylab spacecraft, with special emphasis on an examination of the Shuttle Orbiter cabin design from a habitability standpoint. Future projects must consider the duration and mission objectives to meet their habitability requirements. Larger ward rooms, improved sleeping quarters and more complete hygiene facilities must be provided for future prolonged space flights

Franklin, G. C.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Three Generations of Tracking and Data Relay Satellite (TDRS) Spacecraft

The current Tracking and Data Relay Satellite configuration consists of nine in-orbit satellites (four first generation, three second generation and two third generation satellites) globally distributed in geosynchronous orbit to provide near continuous data relay service to missions like Hubble Space Telescope and the International Space Station. The 1st generation spacecraft were designed by TRW/Northrop Grumman with their launches of the five spacecraft ranging from 1983 through 1995. The 2nd and 3rd generation spacecraft were designed by Boeing with their launches ranging 2000 - 2002 and 2013 - 2017 respectively. TDRS-3 is now 27 years on orbit, continues to be a capable asset for the TDRS constellation. Lack of need for inclination control combined with large fuel reserves and redundancy on critical elements provides spacecraft that operate well past design life, all of which contributes to expanded TDRS constellation support capabilities. All spacecraft generations have issues. Significant issues will be summarized with the focus on the Boeing related problems. Degradations and failures are continually assessed and provide the foundation for yearly updates to spacecraft reliability models, constellation service projections and deorbit plans (in order to meet NASAs mandate of limiting orbital debris). Even when accounting for degradations and failures, the life expectancy for the Boeing delivered 2nd generation TDRS-8, 9 10 TDRS are anticipated to be 25+ years.

TDRS↗
NASA NTRS1994

Development of the CSI phase-3 evolutionary model testbed

This report documents the development effort for the reconfiguration of the Controls-Structures Integration (CSI) Evolutionary Model (CEM) Phase-2 testbed into the CEM Phase-3 configuration. This step responds to the need to develop and test CSI technologies associated with typical planned earth science and remote sensing platforms. The primary objective of the CEM Phase-3 ground testbed is to simulate the overall on-orbit dynamic behavior of the EOS AM-1 spacecraft. Key elements of the objective include approximating the low-frequency appendage dynamic interaction of EOS AM-1, allowing for the changeout of components, and simulating the free-free on-orbit environment using an advanced suspension system. The fundamentals of appendage dynamic interaction are reviewed. A new version of the multiple scaling method is used to design the testbed to have the full-scale geometry and dynamics of the EOS AM-1 spacecraft, but at one-tenth the weight. The testbed design is discussed, along with the testing of the solar array, high gain antenna, and strut components. Analytical performance comparisons show that the CEM Phase-3 testbed simulates the EOS AM-1 spacecraft with good fidelity for the important parameters of interest.

Gronet, M. J.↗
NASA NTRS2015

On Possible Arc Inception on Low Voltage Solar Array

Recent analysis of spacecraft failures during the period of 1990-2013 demonstrated clearly that electrostatic discharges caused more than 8 of all registered failures and anomalies, and comprised the most costly losses (25) for operating companies and agencies. The electrostatic discharges on spacecraft surfaces are the results of differential charging above some critical (threshold) voltages. The mechanisms of differential charging are well known, and various methods have been developed to prevent a generation of significant electric fields in areas of triple junctions. For example, low bus voltages in Low Earth Orbit plasma environment and slightly conducting layer over coverglass (ITO) in Geosynchronous Orbit surroundings are believed to be quite reliable measures to prevent discharges on respective surfaces. In most cases, the vulnerable elements of spacecraft (solar arrays, diode boards, etc.) go through comprehensive ground tests in vacuum chambers. However, tests articles contain the miniscule fragments of spacecraft components such as 10-30 solar cells of many thousands deployed on spacecraft in orbit. This is one reason why manufacturing defects may not be revealed in ground tests but expose themselves in arcing on array surface in space. The other reason for ineffectiveness of discharge preventive measures is aging of all materials in harsh orbital environments. The expected life time of modern spacecraft varies within the range of five-fifteen years, and thermal cycling, radiation damages, and mechanical stresses can result in surface erosion on conductive layers and microscopic cracks in coverglass sheets and adhesive films. These possible damages may cause significant increases in local electric field strengths and subsequent discharges. The primary discharges may or may not be detrimental to spacecraft operation, but they can produce the necessary conditions for sustained arcs initiation. Multiple measures were developed to prevent sustained discharges between adjacent strings, and many ground tests were performed to determine threshold parameters (voltage and current) for sustained arcs. And again, manufacturing defects and aging in space environments may result in considerable decrease of critical threshold parameters. This paper is devoted to the analysis of possible reasons behind arcing on spacecraft with low bus voltages.

plasma interaction↗
NASA NTRS2015

On Possible Arc Inception on Low Voltage Solar Array

Recent analysis of spacecraft failures during the period of 1990-2013 demonstrated clearly that electrostatic discharges caused more than 8 percent of all registered failures and anomalies, and comprised the most costly losses (25 percent) for operating companies and agencies. The electrostatic discharges on spacecraft surfaces are the results of differential charging above some critical (threshold) voltages. The mechanisms of differential charging are well known, and various methods have been developed to prevent a generation of significant electric fields in areas of triple junctions. For example, low bus voltages in Low Earth Orbit plasma environment and slightly conducting layer over cover-glass (ITO) in Geosynchronous Orbit surroundings are believed to be quite reliable measures to prevent discharges on respective surfaces. In most cases, the vulnerable elements of spacecraft (solar arrays, diode boards, etc.) go through comprehensive ground tests in vacuum chambers. However, tests articles contain the miniscule fragments of spacecraft components such as 10-30 solar cells of many thousands deployed on spacecraft in orbit. This is one reason why manufacturing defects may not be revealed in ground tests but expose themselves in arcing on array surface in space. The other reason for ineffectiveness of discharge preventive measures is aging of all materials in harsh orbital environments. The expected life time of modern spacecraft varies within the range of five-fifteen years, and thermal cycling, radiation damages, and mechanical stresses can result in surface erosion on conductive layers and microscopic cracks in cover-glass sheets and adhesive films. These possible damages may cause significant increases in local electric field strengths and subsequent discharges. The primary discharges may or may not be detrimental to spacecraft operation, but they can produce the necessary conditions for sustained arcs initiation. Multiple measures were developed to prevent sustained discharges between adjacent strings, and many ground tests were performed to determine threshold parameters (voltage and current) for sustained arcs. And again, manufacturing defects and aging in space environments may result in considerable decrease of critical threshold parameters. This paper is devoted to the analysis of possible reasons behind arcing on spacecraft with low bus voltages.

low voltage solar array↗
NASA NTRS2022

Science Goals and New Mission Concepts for Future Exploration of Titan’s Atmosphere, Geology and Habitability: Titan POlar Scout/orbitEr and in Situ Lake Lander and DrONe Explorer (POSEIDON)

In response to ESA’s “Voyage 2050” announcement of opportunity, we propose an ambitious L-class mission to explore one of the most exciting bodies in the Solar System, Saturn’s largest moon Titan. Titan, a “world with two oceans”, is an organic-rich body with interior-surface-atmosphere interactions that are comparable in complexity to the Earth. Titan is also one of the few places in the Solar System with habitability potential. Titan’s remarkable nature was only partly revealed by the Cassini-Huygens mission and still holds mysteries requiring a complete exploration using a variety of vehicles and instruments. The proposed mission concept POSEI-DON (Titan POlar Scout/orbitEr and In situ lake lander DrONe explorer) would perform joint orbital and in situ investigations of Titan. It is designed to build on and exceed the scope and scientific/technological accomplishments of Cassini-Huygens, exploring Titan in ways that were not previously possible, in particular through full close-up and in situ coverage over long periods of time. In the proposed mission architecture, POSEIDON consists of two major elements: a spacecraft with a large set of instruments that would orbit Titan, preferably in a low-eccentricity polar orbit, and a suite of in situ investigation components, i.e. a lake lander, a “heavy” drone (possibly amphibious) and/or a fleet of mini-drones, dedicated to the exploration of the polar regions. The ideal arrival time at Titan would be slightly before the next northern Spring equinox (2039), as equinoxes are the most active periods to moni-tor still largely unknown atmospheric and surface seasonal changes. The exploration of Titan’s northern latitudes with an orbiter and in situ element(s) would be highly complementary in terms of timing (with possible mission timing overlap), locations, and science goals with the upcoming NASA New Frontiers Dragonfly mission that will provide in situ exploration of Titan’s equatorial regions, in the mid-2030s.

Sebastien Rodriguez↗
NASA NTRS1977

Development of a high capacity bubble domain memory element and related epitaxial garnet materials for application in spacecraft data recorders. Item 1: Development of a high capacity memory element

Several versions of the 100K bit chip, which is configured as a single serial loop, were designed, fabricated and evaluated. Design and process modifications were introduced into each succeeding version to increase device performance and yield. At an intrinsic field rate of 150 KHz the final design operates from -10 C to +60 C with typical bias margins of 12 and 8 percent, respectively, for continuous operation. Asynchronous operation with first bit detection on start-up produces essentially the same margins over the temperature range. Cost projections made from fabrication yield runs on the 100K bit devices indicate that the memory element cost will be less than 10 millicents/bit in volume production.

Besser, P. J.↗
NASA NTRS1972

Contamination threats to critical surfaces from handling and storage practices.

Review of the procedures and results of a program designed to remove the threat of sources of molecular and particulate contamination of critical optical, electrical, and mechanical elements in spacecraft. The results of recent contamination-probing thermal-vacuum tests indicate that some of the materials and practices commonly used to protect critical surfaces from molecular or particulate contamination can themselves represent significant threats. These contamination sources include clean-room and clean-tent materials, gloves, tissues, and covering or packaging materials. Mass and infrared spectral analyses of these materials and the environments and instruments exposed to them show that the contaminants are mostly plasticizers, slip or antistatic agents, and binders used in the manufacture of these products. Products of particular threat include vinyl gloves, boots, clean-tent walls, and some polyethylene sheets and bags. Techniques for reducing these threats are discussed.

Poehlmann, H. C.↗