Results for “modular concepts” — Page 36

NASA NTRS2012

NASA's Robotic Lunar Lander Development Project

Since early 2005, NASA's Robotic Lunar Lander Development (RLLD) office at NASA MSFC, in partnership with the Applied Physics Laboratory (APL), has developed mission concepts and preformed risk-reduction activities to address planetary science and exploration objectives uniquely met with landed missions. The RLLD team developed several concepts for lunar human-exploration precursor missions to demonstrate precision landing and in-situ resource utilization, a multi-node lunar geophysical network mission, either as a stand-alone mission, or as part of the International Lunar Network (ILN), a Lunar Polar Volatiles Explorer and a Mercury lander mission for the Planetary Science decadal survey, and an asteroid rendezvous and landing mission for the Exploration Precursor Robotics Mission (xPRM) office. The RLLD team has conducted an extensive number of risk-reduction activities in areas common to all lander concepts, including thruster testing, propulsion thermal control demonstration, composite deck design and fabrication, and landing leg stability and vibration. In parallel, the team has developed two robotic lander testbeds providing closed-loop, autonomous hover and descent activities for integration and testing of flight-like components and algorithms. A compressed-air test article had its first flight in September 2009 and completed over 150 successful flights. This small test article (107 kg dry/146 kg wet) uses a central throttleable thruster to offset gravity, plus 3 descent thrusters (~37lbf ea) and 6 attitude-control thrusters (~12lbf ea) to emulate the flight system with pulsed operation over approximately 10s of flight time. The test article uses carbon composite honeycomb decks, custom avionics (COTS components assembled in-house), and custom flight and ground software. A larger (206 kg dry/322 kg wet), hydrogen peroxide-propelled vehicle began flight tests in spring 2011 and fly over 30 successful flights to a maximum altitude of 30m. The monoprop testbed also uses a central gravity-canceling thruster and 3 descent thrusters, but has 12 attitude-control thrusters and a maximum flight time of over a minute. The testbed uses aluminum ortho-grid decks, an LN200-1 IMU, Roke Manor Radar Altimeter, Illunis optical cameras, Novatel Pro-Pak GPS truth data system, Pressure transducers & thermocouples for housekeeping, "In-Control" ground system software, and the core Flight Executive (cFE) modular software environment. The peroxide lander testbed is able to accept other sensors and algorithms for testing, both from within NASA and from other customers. Through these activities, the RLLD team has significantly reduced technical risks for all small and medium class robotic landers for the Moon and other airless planetary bodies.

Cohen, Barbara A.↗

NASA NTRS1998

A Geometry Based Infra-Structure for Computational Analysis and Design

The computational steps traditionally taken for most engineering analysis suites (computational fluid dynamics (CFD), structural analysis, heat transfer and etc.) are: (1) Surface Generation -- usually by employing a Computer Assisted Design (CAD) system; (2) Grid Generation -- preparing the volume for the simulation; (3) Flow Solver -- producing the results at the specified operational point; (4) Post-processing Visualization -- interactively attempting to understand the results. For structural analysis, integrated systems can be obtained from a number of commercial vendors. These vendors couple directly to a number of CAD systems and are executed from within the CAD Graphical User Interface (GUI). It should be noted that the structural analysis problem is more tractable than CFD; there are fewer mesh topologies used and the grids are not as fine (this problem space does not have the length scaling issues of fluids). For CFD, these steps have worked well in the past for simple steady-state simulations at the expense of much user interaction. The data was transmitted between phases via files. In most cases, the output from a CAD system could go to Initial Graphics Exchange Specification (IGES) or Standard Exchange Program (STEP) files. The output from Grid Generators and Solvers do not really have standards though there are a couple of file formats that can be used for a subset of the gridding (i.e. PLOT3D data formats). The user would have to patch up the data or translate from one format to another to move to the next step. Sometimes this could take days. Specifically the problems with this procedure are:(1) File based -- Information flows from one step to the next via data files with formats specified for that procedure. File standards, when they exist, are wholly inadequate. For example, geometry from CAD systems (transmitted via IGES files) is defined as disjoint surfaces and curves (as well as masses of other information of no interest for the Grid Generator). This is particularly onerous for modern CAD systems based on solid modeling. The part was a proper solid and in the translation to IGES has lost this important characteristic. STEP is another standard for CAD data that exists and supports the concept of a solid. The problem with STEP is that a solid modeling geometry kernel is required to query and manipulate the data within this type of file. (2) 'Good' Geometry. A bottleneck in getting results from a solver is the construction of proper geometry to be fed to the grid generator. With 'good' geometry a grid can be constructed in tens of minutes (even with a complex configuration) using unstructured techniques. Adroit multi-block methods are not far behind. This means that a million node steady-state solution can be computed on the order of hours (using current high performance computers) starting from this 'good' geometry. Unfortunately, the geometry usually transmitted from the CAD system is not 'good' in the grid generator sense. The grid generator needs smooth closed solid geometry. It can take a week (or more) of interaction with the CAD output (sometimes by hand) before the process can begin. One way Communication. (3) One-way Communication -- All information travels on from one phase to the next. This makes procedures like node adaptation difficult when attempting to add or move nodes that sit on bounding surfaces (when the actual surface data has been lost after the grid generation phase). Until this process can be automated, more complex problems such as multi-disciplinary analysis or using the above procedure for design becomes prohibitive. There is also no way to easily deal with this system in a modular manner. One can only replace the grid generator, for example, if the software reads and writes the same files. Instead of the serial approach to analysis as described above, CAPRI takes a geometry centric approach. This makes the actual geometry (not a discretized version) accessible to all phases of the analysis. The connection to the geometry is made through an Application Programming Interface (API) and NOT a file system. This API isolates the top-level applications (grid generators, solvers and visualization components) from the geometry engine. Also this allows the replacement of one geometry kernel with another, without effecting these top-level applications. For example, if UniGraphics is used as the CAD package then Parasolid (UG's own geometry engine) can be used for all geometric queries so that no solid geometry information is lost in a translation. This is much better than STEP because when the data is queried, the same software is executed as used in the CAD system. Therefore, one analyzes the exact part that is in the CAD system. CAPRI uses the same idea as the commercial structural analysis codes but does not specify control. Software components of the CAD system are used, but the analysis suite, not the CAD operator, specifies the control of the software session. This also means that the license issues (may be) minimized and individuals need not have to know how to operate a CAD system in order to run the suite.

Haimes, Robert↗

NASA NTRS2021

PHEMTO: The Polarimetric High Energy Modular Telescope Observatory

Based upon dual focusing techniques, the Polarimetric High-Energy Modular Telescope Observatory (PHEMTO) is designed to have performance several orders of magnitude better than the present hard X-ray instruments, in the 1–600 keV energy range. This, together with its angular resolution of around one arcsecond, and its sensitive polarimetry measurement capability, will give PHEMTO the improvements in scientific performance needed for a mission in the 2050 era in order to study AGN, galactic black holes, neutrons stars, and supernovae. In addition, its high performance will enable the study of the non-thermal processes in galaxy clusters with an unprecedented accuracy.

X–/γ–ray focusing telescopes↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Strategy for Developing Technologies for Megawatt-class Nuclear Electric Propulsion Systems

In late fiscal year 2020, the Space Nuclear Propulsion (SNP) project began the process of formulating an investment strategy to support development of the technologies required for a high-power (megawatt-class) nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) system capable of performing human-scale missions. This activity was initiated concurrent with several high-level studies and assessments were either under way or had just concluded. Studies of human-scale Mars missions have been performed several times over the past two decades. One of the most recent studies examined opposition-class human Mars missions to occur in the late 2030s timeframe [1,2]. The mission architecture assumed a hybrid NEP/chem-propelled vehicle that used a high specific impulse (Isp) NEP-system and a liquid oxygen (LOx)-liquid methane high thrust chemical stage (two 110 kN (25 klbf) thrust, 365 s Isp engines) for maneuvers performed to enter and exit gravity wells. Trajectory analyses performed in this study showed that such a mission could be performed with 2-4 MWe directed into the electric propulsion system (operating for 20,000+ hours), with the large range representing different opposition-class Mars mission opportunities and permutations on the trajectory design, concept of operations, and technology choices. In 2020, the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) performed a study to evaluate the maturity of the different technologies required for nuclear propulsion systems [3]. The executive summary of this report provided the following top-level conclusions: • “The majority of critical technologies for… NEP/Chem… systems are relatively immature” • “TRLs [technology readiness levels] in the literature are often overestimated” • “The majority of critical technologies… for NEP/Chem… systems are at a relatively high level of advancement degree of difficulty (AD2 > 4) for maturation, requiring a dual development approach” • “The proper assessment of baseline TRL and AD2 values and the estimation of requirements and resources required for advancement have been consistent issues for NEP,” • “Non-advocate reviews should occur at the start of a technology program and at all key milestones.” In 2021, the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) issued a separate report [4] identifying the “primary technical and programmatic challenges, merits, and risks for maturing space nuclear propulsion technologies of interest to a future human Mars exploration mission.” That work contained several important findings, including: • “Developing a MWe-class NEP system for the baseline mission would require increasing power by orders of magnitude relative to NEP system flight- or ground-based technology demonstrations completed to date.” • “Subscale in-space flight testing of NEP systems cannot address many of the risks and potential failure modes associated with the baseline mission NEP system. With sufficient M&S [modeling & simulation] and ground testing, including modular subsystem tests at full scale and power, flight qualification requirements can be met by the cargo missions that will precede the first crewed mission to Mars. Fully integrated ground testing may not be required.” • “As a result of low and intermittent investment over the past several decades, it is unclear if even an aggressive program would be able to develop an NEP system capable of executing the baseline mission in 2039.” These efforts motivated the SNP project to investigate the technologies available for a megawatt-class high power nuclear electric propulsion system. That system is illustrated schematically in Figure 1 and is comprised of five separate top-level critical technology elements (CTEs). 1. Nuclear Reactor – Thermal power source for the system, utilizing high-assay low enriched uranium (HALEU) as the nuclear fuel. Reactor radiation shielding is also included in this CTE. 2. Power Conversion – Operates as a thermodynamic cycle, accepting nuclear reactor thermal power as an input and converting it to mechanical power. 3. Power Management and Distribution (PMAD) – Accepts as an input mechanical power from the power conversion system, which is used to generate electrical power. The PMAD system also distributes the generated electrical power to all other parts of the spacecraft, including the high-power EP system. The PMAD system may also perform duties such as isolation, fault detection, and power transformation/rectification for different spacecraft systems, including the thrusters. 4. Electric Propulsion (EP) – Accepts as an input electrical power, which is used to accelerate a propellant to high speeds to produce thrust. This system includes the power processing unit (PPU), which converts the power it receives to the correct current and voltage required by the thrusters, and the propellant storage and feed systems, which contain and meter the flow of propellant to the thrusters. 5. Thermal Management (Radiators/Heat Rejection) – The cold side of the thermodynamic power conversion cycle, accepts thermal power from the power conversion system and radiatively rejects that heat to space. In this paper, we describe the SNP project formulation and investment strategy that aims to accomplish the research and development required to advance the technology readiness for each CTE. The strategy relies heavily upon experimental testing supported by modeling and simulation to yield realistic assessments of the technologies, which in turn will be used to inform future NEP system-level design decisions and any potential technology downselects.

Kurt A Polzin↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of a Ground Multi-Mission Low-Cost Optical Terminal (LCOT) for Free-Space Optical Communications

Once confined to the realm of laboratory experiments and theoretical papers, space-based laser communications (lasercomm) are on the verge of achieving mainstream status. Organizations from Facebook to NASA, and missions from cubesats to Orion are employing lasercomm to achieve gigabit communication speeds at mass and power requirements lower than that of traditional radio frequency (RF) methods. Since first demonstrating free-space optical communications services with Lunar Laser Communications Demonstration (LLCD) in 2013, NASA has invested in developing optical communications technologies and capabilities to enhancing its space communications networks. Along with evolving optical space terminals, NASA is also developing lasercomm grounds stations capable of meeting the rapidly increasing data volume demands of upcoming missions, from low-earth to lunar orbits and beyond and integrating these advanced capabilities into its Near-Space and Deep Space Networks. To meet this emerging need, the Low-Cost Optical Terminal (LCOT) project at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) is designing, building and validating a prototype for a flexible, multi-mission, and economical optical ground terminal that could be used as a blueprint for a global network of optical ground stations, capable of supporting a wide variety of missions. To date a major impediment to widespread adoption of laser communication has been the lack of an existing ground network infrastructure. A mission that wishes to take advantage of laser communication not only needs to invest in an optical space terminal, but it must also finance the creation of ground terminals to receive the downlink signal. This adds significant additional cost. Missions that do decide to incur the cost of financing a network of ground terminals end up building highly specialized optical receivers that are operable as receivers for that specific mission only. Significant Non-Recurring Engineering (NRE) cost is invested to build highly specialized one-of-a-kind ground terminals that go into storage after that particular mission is over. This is not an economical approach and does nothing to grow the number of optical ground stations available to future missions. In essence each mission that wants to take advantage of the benefits of lasercom has to start from scratch to provide a ground terminal network to support it. As long as this is the case, the cost for using laser communications will be too high for most missions to consider. LCOT intends to close this gap in technology by designing and developing a standard optical ground terminal design that is flexible enough to serve as a receiver for a wide range of future missions – a ground terminal that can be quickly reconfigured to receive downlinks at different wavelengths using different signal formats. Not only does LCOT have the industry-building objectives of utilizing commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) components to the maximum extent possible, but also spurs the commercial development of other necessary lasercomm components not currently offered by industry. Finally, LCOT will give NASA scientists and engineers a facility where they can gain real-world experience with optical communications. It will give engineers a cost-effective way to try out new concepts and processes by providing the infrastructure for such testing. In this way it is hoped LCOT will serve as a stimulus for innovation in optical communications and speed its widespread adoption by future missions. The LCOT is comprised of five subsystems: Free-Space Optical, Transceiver, Amplifier, Monitor and Control, and Observatory Infrastructure. In August 2021, the LCOT team installed a 70 cm telescope, developed by Planewave Instruments that was optimized for optical communications. Free-Space Optical subsystem comprises of the telescope and its associated hardware, including a transmitter optical assembly, wide field cameras, two optical benches, and an adaptive optics subsystem. The transmit optical assembly, a unique concept design, is a cluster of four functionally independent transmit subassemblies located on the receive telescope. In addition to receiving optical signals and directing the expanded beam with high precision to the space terminal, it also performs tracking functions. The transmit optical assembly will support operations from Low Earth Orbit (LEO) through lunar and will be used as a template for industry manufacturing. The Optical Infrastructure subsystem is responsible for providing environmentally controlled shelters for LCOT equipment and various other systems. To maintain the safety and proper functionality of the telescope, a 16 ft Astrohaven clamshell dome procured which provides all-sky coverage without the need to rotate the dome. Additionally, Atmospheric Monitoring Assembly (AMA) will be part of optical infrastructure subsystem to ensure accurate performance of the LCOT. Like existing optical ground stations, LCOT will measure standard weather station parameters, infrared all sky image of cloud cover, and cloud height. LCOT, however, adds requirements for measuring night time seeing and, in the future, daytime seeing. Unlike other optical ground terminals, the LCOT is transceiver agnostic; user transceivers may be duplex transceivers, standalone receivers, or standalone transmitters with or without acquisition beacon functionality. As such, the LCOT project accommodates testing with external customer transceivers in a flexible manor, further complimenting its intended multi-mission goals. Another unique component of LCOT is the use of a new amplifier technology – the Very Large Mode Area (VLMA) amplifiers. This new technology allows LCOT to avoid the issues faced by previous laser communications ground terminals, gives users more flexibility and modular capability, and is capable of reaching an order of magnitude higher peak power than traditional High Power Optical Amplifiers (HPOA). One drawback of the VLMA HPOA approach is that the amplified light is output into free-space. The solution developed by LCOT is an optics train that couples the output of the VLMA amplifier into a short fiber for transport to the transmit telescopes with high efficiency. Like many of the LCOT components, a set of detailed manufacturing drawings have been created for the optics train to allow any machine shop with a multi-axis Computer Numerical Control (CNC) machine to fabricate the piece parts from commonly available materials. In line with the goals of LCOT, the monitor and control functions are developed as a modular and flexible system with the ability to support future hardware or algorithm changes, minimizing disruptions. A main priority of development in the Monitor and Control Subsystem (MCS) is the safety monitor system.

laser communication↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of a Ground Multi-mission Low Cost Optical Terminal(LCOT) for Free-Space Optical Communication

Once confined to the realm of laboratory experiments and theoretical papers, space-based laser communications (lasercomm) are on the verge of achieving mainstream status. Organizations from Facebook to NASA, and missions from cubesats to Orion are employing lasercomm to achieve gigabit communication speeds at mass and power requirements lower than that of traditional radio frequency (RF) methods. Since first demonstrating free-space optical communications services with Lunar Laser Communications Demonstration (LLCD) in 2013, NASA has invested in developing optical communications technologies and capabilities to enhancing its space communications networks. Along with evolving optical space terminals, NASA is also developing lasercomm grounds stations capable of meeting the rapidly increasing data volume demands of upcoming missions, from low-earth to lunar orbits and beyond and integrating these advanced capabilities into its Near-Space and Deep Space Networks. To meet this emerging need, the Low-Cost Optical Terminal (LCOT) project at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) is designing, building and validating a prototype for a flexible, multi-mission, and economical optical ground terminal that could be used as a blueprint for a global network of optical ground stations, capable of supporting a wide variety of missions. To date a major impediment to widespread adoption of laser communication has been the lack of an existing ground network infrastructure. A mission that wishes to take advantage of laser communication not only needs to invest in an optical space terminal, but it must also finance the creation of ground terminals to receive the downlink signal. This adds significant additional cost. Missions that do decide to incur the cost of financing a network of ground terminals end up building highly specialized optical receivers that are operable as receivers for that specific mission only. Significant Non-Recurring Engineering (NRE) cost is invested to build highly specialized one-of-a-kind ground terminals that go into storage after that particular mission is over. This is not an economical approach and does nothing to grow the number of optical ground stations available to future missions. In essence each mission that wants to take advantage of the benefits of lasercom has to start from scratch to provide a ground terminal network to support it. As long as this is the case, the cost for using laser communications will be too high for most missions to consider. LCOT intends to close this gap in technology by designing and developing a standard optical ground terminal design that is flexible enough to serve as a receiver for a wide range of future missions – a ground terminal that can be quickly reconfigured to receive downlinks at different wavelengths using different signal formats. Not only does LCOT have the industry-building objectives of utilizing commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) components to the maximum extent possible, but also spurs the commercial development of other necessary lasercomm components not currently offered by industry. Finally, LCOT will give NASA scientists and engineers a facility where they can gain real-world experience with optical communications. It will give engineers a cost-effective way to try out new concepts and processes by providing the infrastructure for such testing. In this way it is hoped LCOT will serve as a stimulus for innovation in optical communications and speed its widespread adoption by future missions. The LCOT is comprised of five subsystems: Free-Space Optical, Transceiver, Amplifier, Monitor and Control, and Observatory Infrastructure. In August 2021, the LCOT team installed a 70 cm telescope, developed by Planewave Instruments that was optimized for optical communications. Free-Space Optical subsystem comprises of the telescope and its associated hardware, including a transmitter optical assembly, wide field cameras, two optical benches, and an adaptive optics subsystem. The transmit optical assembly, a unique concept design, is a cluster of four functionally independent transmit subassemblies located on the receive telescope. In addition to receiving optical signals and directing the expanded beam with high precision to the space terminal, it also performs tracking functions. The transmit optical assembly will support operations from Low Earth Orbit (LEO) through lunar and will be used as a template for industry manufacturing. The Optical Infrastructure subsystem is responsible for providing environmentally controlled shelters for LCOT equipment and various other systems. To maintain the safety and proper functionality of the telescope, a 16 ft Astrohaven clamshell dome procured which provides all-sky coverage without the need to rotate the dome. Additionally, Atmospheric Monitoring Assembly (AMA) will be part of optical infrastructure subsystem to ensure accurate performance of the LCOT. Like existing optical ground stations, LCOT will measure standard weather station parameters, infrared all sky image of cloud cover, and cloud height. LCOT, however, adds requirements for measuring night time seeing and, in the future, daytime seeing. Unlike other optical ground terminals, the LCOT is transceiver agnostic; user transceivers may be duplex transceivers, standalone receivers, or standalone transmitters with or without acquisition beacon functionality. As such, the LCOT project accommodates testing with external customer transceivers in a flexible manor, further complimenting its intended multi-mission goals. Another unique component of LCOT is the use of a new amplifier technology – the Very Large Mode Area (VLMA) amplifiers. This new technology allows LCOT to avoid the issues faced by previous laser communications ground terminals, gives users more flexibility and modular capability, and is capable of reaching an order of magnitude higher peak power than traditional High Power Optical Amplifiers (HPOA). One drawback of the VLMA HPOA approach is that the amplified light is output into free-space. The solution developed by LCOT is an optics train that couples the output of the VLMA amplifier into a short fiber for transport to the transmit telescopes with high efficiency. Like many of the LCOT components, a set of detailed manufacturing drawings have been created for the optics train to allow any machine shop with a multi-axis Computer Numerical Control (CNC) machine to fabricate the piece parts from commonly available materials. In line with the goals of LCOT, the monitor and control functions are developed as a modular and flexible system with the ability to support future hardware or algorithm changes, minimizing disruptions. A main priority of development in the Monitor and Control Subsystem (MCS) is the safety monitor system.

Haleh Safavi↗

NASA NTRS2017

Improving Satellite Compatible Microdevices to Study Biology in Space

The technology for biology in space lags far behind the gold standard for biological experiments on Earth. To remedy this disparity, the Rothschild lab works on proof of concept, prototyping, and developing of new sensors and devices to further the capabilities of biology research on satellites. One such device is the PowerCell Payload System. One goal for synthetic biology in aiding space travel and colonization is to genetically engineer living cells to produce biochemicals in space. However, such farming in space presupposes bacteria retain their functionality post-launch, bombarded by radiation, and without the 1G of Earth. Our questions is, does a co-culture of cyanobacteria and protein-synthesizing bacteria produce Earth-like yields of target proteins? Is the yield sensitive to variable gravitational forces? To answer these questions, a PowerCell Payload System will spend 1 year aboard the German Aerospace Center's Euglena and Combined Regenerative Organic-food Production In Space (Eu:CROPIS) mission satellite. The PowerCell system is a pair of two 48-well microfluidic cards, each well seeded with bacteria. The system integrates fluidic, thermal, optical, electronic, and control systems to germinate bacteria spores, then measure the protein synthesized for comparison to parallel experiments conducted on the Earth. In developing the PowerCell Payload, we gained insight into the shortcomings of biology experiments on satellites. To address these issues, we have started three new prototyping projects: 1) The development of an extremely stable and radiation resistant cell-free system, allowing for the construction of proteins utilizing only cell components instead of living cells. This can be lyophilized on a substrate, like paper. (2) Using paper as a microfluidic platform that is flexible, stable, cheap, and wicking. The capillary action eliminates the need for pumps, reducing volume, mass, and potential failing points. Electrodes can be printed on the paper to sense for biochemicals. (3) Developing a modular, semi-autonomous microfluidic device that can be easily adapted for a variety of common biological experiments. This versatility will allow for quicker and cheaper experimentation. These improvements to satellite experiment platforms have the potential to radically increase the return from NASA's biological and field studies with reduced development time, mass, and cost with increased robustness data and interpretation.

biology in spac↗