Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “mobility efficiency”

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.

655 records · Page 37
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2014

Human-Robot Interaction Directed Research Project

Human-robot interaction (HRI) is a discipline investigating the factors affecting the interactions between humans and robots. It is important to evaluate how the design of interfaces and command modalities affect the human's ability to perform tasks accurately, efficiently, and effectively when working with a robot. By understanding the effects of interface design on human performance, workload, and situation awareness, interfaces can be developed to appropriately support the human in performing tasks with minimal errors and with appropriate interaction time and effort. Thus, the results of research on human-robot interfaces have direct implications for the design of robotic systems. This DRP concentrates on three areas associated with interfaces and command modalities in HRI which are applicable to NASA robot systems: 1) Video Overlays, 2) Camera Views, and 3) Command Modalities. The first study focused on video overlays that investigated how Augmented Reality (AR) symbology can be added to the human-robot interface to improve teleoperation performance. Three types of AR symbology were explored in this study, command guidance (CG), situation guidance (SG), and both (SCG). CG symbology gives operators explicit instructions on what commands to input, whereas SG symbology gives operators implicit cues so that operators can infer the input commands. The combination of CG and SG provided operators with explicit and implicit cues allowing the operator to choose which symbology to utilize. The objective of the study was to understand how AR symbology affects the human operator's ability to align a robot arm to a target using a flight stick and the ability to allocate attention between the symbology and external views of the world. The study evaluated the effects type of symbology (CG and SG) has on operator tasks performance and attention allocation during teleoperation of a robot arm. The second study expanded on the first study by evaluating the effects of the type of navigational guidance (CG and SG) on operator task performance and attention allocation during teleoperation of a robot arm through uplinked commands. Although this study complements the first study on navigational guidance with hand controllers, it is a separate investigation due to the distinction in intended operators (i.e., crewmembers versus ground-operators). A third study looked at superimposed and integrated overlays for teleoperation of a mobile robot using a hand controller. When AR is superimposed on the external world, it appears to be fixed onto the display and internal to the operators' workstation. Unlike superimposed overlays, integrated overlays often appear as three-dimensional objects and move as if part of the external world. Studies conducted in the aviation domain show that integrated overlays can improve situation awareness and reduce the amount of deviation from the optimal path. The purpose of the study was to investigate whether these results apply to HRI tasks, such as navigation with a mobile robot.

Sandor, Aniko↗
NASA NTRS2017

Drawbar Pull (DP) Procedures for Off-Road Vehicle Testing

As NASA strives to explore the surface of the Moon and Mars, there is a continued need for improved tire and vehicle development. When tires or vehicles are being designed for off-road conditions where significant thrust generation is required, such as climbing out of craters on the Moon, it is important to use a standard test method for evaluating their tractive performance. The drawbar pull (DP) test is a way of measuring the net thrust generated by tires or a vehicle with respect to performance metrics such as travel reduction, sinkage, or power efficiency. DP testing may be done using a single tire on a traction rig, or with a set of tires on a vehicle; this report focuses on vehicle DP tests. Though vehicle DP tests have been used for decades, there are no standard procedures that apply to exploration vehicles. This report summarizes previous methods employed, shows the sensitivity of certain test parameters, and provides a body of knowledge for developing standard testing procedures. The focus of this work is on lunar applications, but these test methods can be applied to terrestrial and planetary conditions as well. Section 1.0 of this report discusses the utility of DP testing for off-road vehicle evaluation and the metrics used. Section 2.0 focuses on test-terrain preparation, using the example case of lunar terrain. There is a review of lunar terrain analogs implemented in the past and a discussion on the lunar terrain conditions created at the NASA Glenn Research Center, including methods of evaluating the terrain strength variation and consistency from test to test. Section 3.0 provides details of the vehicle test procedures. These consist of a review of past methods, a comprehensive study on the sensitivity of test parameters, and a summary of the procedures used for DP testing at Glenn.

wheel↗
NASA NTRS2018

Nasa's Launch Communications Ground Segment for the 21st Century Florida Spaceport

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Near Earth Network (NEN) Project is implementing a new launch communications ground segment to provide services for the next generation of human and robotic space exploration systems. It will deliver unique and advanced capabilities to accelerate the transformation of Kennedy Space Center into a multi-user spaceport in cooperation with the United States Air Force (USAF). The project has leveraged commercial technologies and remote operations concepts matured in NASAs orbiting satellite ground systems to achieve dramatic lifecycle cost efficiencies as compared to the space shuttle-era ground segment. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the development history, capabilities and anticipated use cases of the NEN Launch Communications Segment (NEN LCS).The NASA Kennedy Space Center is co-located with the USAF Eastern Launch Range at Cape Canaveral, Florida. The USAF operates two launch communications ground stations, but they are not designed to transmit voice, commands or other data to the launch vehicle or astronauts. The bi-directional uplink-downlink communications responsibility for human missions has historically resided with the Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. Several market analyses and feasibility studies investigating concepts to provide NASAs next generation launch communications services were performed during the Constellation Program prior to its cancellation in 2009, and as part of the Kennedy Space Centers follow-on efforts to transform itself into a 21st century multi-user spaceport. In 2012, the Kennedy Space Center and the USAF 45th Space Wing jointly led a study to analyze the market needs of current and future launch systems and assess the operational deficiencies of the Eastern Range infrastructure. The study team issued several recommendations, two of which ultimately became driving operational capability requirements for the NEN LCS: increased telemetry data rates of at least 20 Mbps, and S-band uplink capability. Additional capabilities identified in the requirements development process include spread spectrum modulation support, LDPC 12 and 78 error correction codes, support for IRIG-106 and CCSDS data formats, automated best source selection, and Space Link Extension (SLE) services for data distribution. The NEN LCS is comprised of two permanent ground stations, the new Kennedy Uplink Station (KUS) and refurbished Ponce de Leon (PDL) station. Both stations are remotely operated from the Global Monitor and Control Center at Wallops Flight Facility. This core architecture is extensible through host-tenant arrangements with the U.S. Air Force and deployable assets, enabling agile, tailored and robust solutions to meet the needs of civil, commercial or military customers. The NEN LCS has three use cases:1.To provide agile, tailored and robust launch communications solutions to Florida spaceport customers2.To provide orbital communications services to near-earth customers 3.To provide an experimental proving ground for Space Mobile Network concepts and technologies The NEN LCS driving mission is to support the bi-directional link with the Orion crew capsule and two 20 Mbps telemetry links from the Space Launch System core stage on Exploration Mission-1, the first integrated flight of NASAs flagship human exploration systems.

Roberts, Christopher J.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA's Habitation Development Status: Current Concepts and ISRU Opportunities

Introduction: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is embarking on a bold journey to return humankind to the Moon and onward to Mars with innovative commercial, international, and academic partnerships. Under the Artemis series of missions, NASA seeks to establish sustained human exploration of deep space through an objectives-based approach. This approach drives the identification of needed system functionality and the current and future capabilities which will eventually allow humanity to sustainably live beyond Earth. Providing evolvable and scalable habitation is a cornerstone function that calls for the collection and integration of current, developmental, and future technologies that can meet near-term exploration needs while growing into long-term sustained presence. NASA is advancing in-space habitation through its Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) model while designing lunar, Mars transit, and Mars surface habitat government reference concepts for Artemis missions. These efforts have unveiled possible near-term opportunities for the in-space resource utilization community if human habitation is considered a future customer of space resources. NextSTEP Habitation Development: NASA is closely working with commercial partners under its NextSTEP Appendix A model to advance habitation systems in the arena of inflatable and composite habitation structures. Such efforts promise efficiencies in volumetric packaging and overall spacecraft mass respectively. Recent testing by commercial partners have helped to quantify possible failure mechanisms for inflatable structures while advancing their technology towards eventual flight certification. The advancement of such Class II habitation structures, in which the habitat is only fully deployed once in-space or on a planetary surface, is critical to providing increased habitable volume for long-duration missions with no additional mass penalties. The progression of such technology is infused into NASA’s government reference concepts for notional deep space habitation concepts. Current Government Reference Concepts: To best inform the formulation of future collaborative solicitations, NASA employs the practice of internally developing reference concepts for future exploration elements. These concepts aid in identifying the functions and capabilities needed to complete NASA missions as well as feasible solutions within the timeframe needed. Government reference concepts for a lunar Surface Habitat, Mars Transit Habitat, and Mars Sur-face Habitat are continuously being developed and updated to better guide the Agency’s overall exploration architecture. Lunar Surface Habitat. As NASA returns to the Moon, it is evaluating possible lunar surface habitation concepts. The Surface Habitat (SH) reference concept entails a hybrid metallic-inflatable structure capable of initially housing two crew for surface stays of up to 30 days in duration. While initial missions may span ~7 days in duration, consideration is being given to expanding SH’s capability to support a crew of four for up to 60 days over its 15-year design life. Functionally, the SH serves as a ‘hub’ for all Artemis crewed surface operations, providing internal volume for maintenance, medical, logistics, science utilization, and extravehicular activity (EVA) support in addition to core habitation functionality such as environmental control and life support (ECLS) and power generation and distribution among many others. Additionally, NASA has entered a study agreement with the Italian Space Agency (Agenzia Spaziale Italiana – ASI) to investigation a possible Multi-Purpose Habitat (MPH) as an additional or augmenting habit-able element for the lunar surface. Mars Transit Habitat. NASA’s current architectural concept for initial human missions to Mars entails the utilization of a transit habitat (TH) to transport a four-person crew to and from Mars orbit, departing from and returning to a lunar near-rectilinear halo orbit (NRHO), over the course of a ~1,200-day mission. While holding a similar 15-year design lifetime, TH will also support a series of analog mission activities in NRHO to gradually test the systems and interaction with lunar surface elements, some of which may be adapted for Mars surface exploration. Holding similar functional capabilities as SH, TH is sized to support much longer durations in space and greater logistical independence. Mars Surface Habitat. NASA is still exploring the concept of operations for initial crewed missions to Mars. As such, the Mars Surface Habitat (MSH) concept is still in its infancy as options for mobile, pressurized habitation and stationary habitats are being explored. It is expected MSH will leverage heavily from the lunar SH and possible lunar pressurized rover, however the very different Martian environment will likely necessitate modifications. ISRU Opportunities: Despite the advancements under NASA’s NextSTEP habitation work and continually optimized reference concepts, NASA is facing near-term mass and power challenges that may create opportunities to the ISRU community by providing yet another possible customer for space resources. While NASA desires to use regenerative ECLS systems (ECLSS) for all habitation concepts, their operation comes with initial mass penalties and maintenance overheads when compared to simpler open-loop architectures. Because of this, NASA is currently pro-posing an open-loop, consumables-based architecture for its surface habitats to achieve initial launch and delivery lander mass targets while scarring for the in-corporation of regenerative ECLSS to meet longer mission durations and sustained presence. With such an architecture, oxygen and potable water are needed consumables, which initial ISRU systems may be able to provide in a pilot capacity. Although the TH is expecting to utilize regenerative ECLSS, advancements in lunar surface-based ISRU and possible re-supply of spacecraft in lunar or Mars orbit could significantly reduce the logistical need for ECLSS related spares on TH and possibly allow a similar open-loop and consumables-based architecture. In addition to ECLSS mass concerns, the SH is facing challenges with energy storage to support operations over periods of darkness exceeding 100 hours. Both battery and fuel cell-based power architectures are being traded, opening options for external power generation and energy storage. One possibility is ISRU-produced H2 and O2 feeding external primary fuel cell systems which could supplement habitation power generation while reducing initial mass and volume until much more powerful fission power systems might be deployed. Conclusion: Significant advancements are being made in evolvable habitation concepts that span from near-term technologies, such as inflatable structures under NextSTEP, to potentially revolutionary capabilities like the lunar surface construction as funded through the Moon-to-Mars Planetary Autonomous Construction Technologies (MMPACT) project. As NASA investigates both heritage capabilities and rap-idly advancing, disruptive technologies, there are likely many near-term opportunities for initial ISRU capabilities to significantly aid human habitation and increase self-sufficiency beyond Earth.

habitation↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA's Habitation Development Status: Current Concepts and ISRU Opportunities

Introduction: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is embarking on a bold journey to return humankind to the Moon and onward to Mars with innovative commercial, international, and academic partnerships [1]. Under the Artemis series of missions, NASA seeks to establish sustained human exploration of deep space through an objectives-based approach [2]. This approach drives the identification of needed system functionality and the current and future capabilities which will eventually allow humanity to sustainably live beyond Earth. Providing evolvable and scalable habitation is a cornerstone function that calls for the collection and integration of current, developmental, and future technologies that can meet near-term exploration needs while growing into long-term sustained presence. NASA is advancing in-space habitation through its Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) model while designing lunar, Mars transit, and Mars surface habitat government reference concepts for Artemis missions. These efforts have unveiled possible near-term opportunities for the in-space resource utilization community if human habitation is considered a future customer of space resources. NextSTEP Habitation Development: NASA is closely working with commercial partners under its NextSTEP Appendix A model to advance habitation systems in the arena of inflatable and composite habitation structures. Such efforts promise efficiencies in volumetric packaging and overall spacecraft mass respectively. Recent testing by commercial partners have helped to quantify possible failure mechanisms for inflatable structures while advancing their technology towards eventual flight certification. The advancement of such Class II habitation structures, in which the habitat is only fully deployed once in-space or on a planetary surface [3], is critical to providing increased habitable volume for long-duration missions with no additional mass penalties. The progression of such technology is infused into NASA’s government reference concepts for notional deep space habitation concepts. Current Government Reference Concepts: To best inform the formulation of future collaborative solicitations, NASA employs the practice of internally developing reference concepts for future exploration elements. These concepts aid in identifying the functions and capabilities needed to complete NASA missions as well as feasible solutions within the timeframe needed. Government reference concepts for a lunar Surface Habitat, Mars Transit Habitat, and Mars Sur-face Habitat are continuously being developed and updated to better guide the Agency’s overall exploration architecture. Lunar Surface Habitat. As NASA returns to the Moon, it is evaluating possible lunar surface habitation concepts. The Surface Habitat (SH) reference concept entails a hybrid metallic-inflatable structure capable of initially housing two crew for surface stays of up to 30 days in duration [4]. While initial missions may span ~7 days in duration, consideration is being given to expanding SH’s capability to support a crew of four for up to 60 days over its 15-year design life [5]. Functionally, the SH serves as a ‘hub’ for all Artemis crewed surface operations, providing internal volume for maintenance, medical, logistics, science utilization, and extravehicular activity (EVA) support in addition to core habitation functionality such as environmental control and life support (ECLS) and power generation and distribution among many others. Additionally, NASA has entered a study agreement with the Italian Space Agency (Agenzia Spaziale Italiana – ASI) to investigation a possible Multi-Purpose Habitat (MPH) as an additional or augmenting habit-able element for the lunar surface [6]. Mars Transit Habitat. NASA’s current architectural concept for initial human missions to Mars entails the utilization of a transit habitat (TH) to transport a four-person crew to and from Mars orbit, departing from and returning to a lunar near-rectilinear halo orbit (NRHO), over the course of a ~1,200-day mission [5]. While holding a similar 15-year design lifetime, TH will also support a series of analog mission activities in NRHO to gradually test the systems and interaction with lunar surface elements, some of which may be adapted for Mars surface exploration. Holding similar functional capabilities as SH, TH is sized to support much longer durations in space and greater logistical independence. Mars Surface Habitat. NASA is still exploring the concept of operations for initial crewed missions to Mars. As such, the Mars Surface Habitat (MSH) concept is still in its infancy as options for mobile, pressurized habitation and stationary habitats are being explored. It is expected MSH will leverage heavily from the lunar SH and possible lunar pressurized rover, however the very different Martian environment will likely necessitate modifications. ISRU Opportunities: Despite the advancements under NASA’s NextSTEP habitation work and continually optimized reference concepts, NASA is facing near-term mass and power challenges that may create opportunities to the ISRU community by providing yet another possible customer for space resources. While NASA desires to use regenerative ECLS systems (ECLSS) for all habitation concepts, their operation comes with initial mass penalties and maintenance overheads when compared to simpler open-loop architectures. Because of this, NASA is currently pro-posing an open-loop, consumables-based architecture for its surface habitats to achieve initial launch and delivery lander mass targets while scarring for the in-corporation of regenerative ECLSS to meet longer mission durations and sustained presence. With such an architecture, oxygen and potable water are needed consumables, which initial ISRU systems may be able to provide in a pilot capacity. Although the TH is expecting to utilize regenerative ECLSS, advancements in lunar surface-based ISRU and possible re-supply of spacecraft in lunar or Mars orbit could significantly reduce the logistical need for ECLSS related spares on TH and possibly allow a similar open-loop and consumables-based architecture. Table 1 Notional ECLSS consumables per mission use for SH and TH [5]. SH (28-day) Open Loop: Water (kg) 288 | Oxygen (kg) 30 TH (1110-day) Closed-Loop: Water (kg) 182 | Oxygen (kg) 123 In addition to ECLSS mass concerns, the SH is facing challenges with energy storage to support operations over periods of darkness exceeding 100 hours. Both battery and fuel cell-based power architectures are being traded, opening options for external power generation and energy storage. One possibility is ISRU-produced H2 and O2 feeding external primary fuel cell systems which could supplement habitation power generation while reducing initial mass and volume until much more powerful fission power systems might be deployed. Conclusion: Significant advancements are being made in evolvable habitation concepts that span from near-term technologies, such as inflatable structures under NextSTEP, to potentially revolutionary capabilities like the lunar surface construction as funded through the Moon-to-Mars Planetary Autonomous Construction Technologies (MMPACT) project [7]. As NASA investigates both heritage capabilities and rap-idly advancing, disruptive technologies, there are likely many near-term opportunities for initial ISRU capabilities to significantly aid human habitation and increase self-sufficiency beyond Earth.

habitation↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Solid-state Architecture Batteries for Enhanced Rechargeability and Safety (SABERS) for Extended Deep Space Applications

Extended duration deep space missions as well as permanent space habitats face numerous technical challenges, key among them is energy generation and energy storage. There are considerable monetary and technical barriers to the generation of power in space. Therefore, it is important to store and be able to access power in an efficient and safe manner over a large number of cycles. Energy storage and in particular, batteries, are vital to the operation of next-generation extraterrestrial shuttles, rovers, habitats and extravehicular activity (EVA) space suits. The performance metrics for extended duration space missions are at least 2 times greater than those set for terrestrial applications such as electric automobiles. Furthermore, safety is essential for operation of space missions particularly involving astronauts such as shuttles, habitats and EVA space suits. Preliminary systems level analysis has indicated that there are five key properties which must be optimized for successful implementation of battery systems. Those five key criteria are: safety, energy density, power, packaging design and scalability. Current state-of-the-art (SOA) lithium-ion batteries can meet or exceed the requirements for certain space applications in the areas of power and scalability, yet are insufficient in the key performance criteria of energy, safety and packaging design. The SABERS concept proposes a battery that meets all five key performance criteria through development of a solid-state architecture battery utilizing high capacity sulfur-selenium cathode and lithium metal anode. The combination of sulfur and selenium offers a balanced energy-to-power density ratio, which can be tailored to the specific application by altering the stoichiometric ratios of sulfur to selenium. This hybrid cathode will be developed by implementing NASA patented holey graphene technology as a highly conductive, ultra-lightweight electrode scaffold. A solid-state electrolyte will be used as a safe, non-flammable replacement to the highly flammable liquid organic electrolytes currently used in SOA lithium-ion batteries. This solid-state lithium-sulfur/selenium cell will be designed into a serial stacking configuration to enable dense packaging of the battery cells. The serial stacking configuration is termed a bipolar stack, which has the advantages of reducing overall cell weight, simplifying the interfaced connections for the cell, and minimizing the cooling requirements for the cell. Lastly, optimization of battery components will occur through a robust and rigorous combination of various computational modeling techniques covering multiple length scales. The expected result will be a fully solid-state battery with operational temperatures up to 150 °C which provides the required energy density, discharge rates, and inherent safety to meet the strict space mission performance criteria. In particular, the wide operational temperature window is required for the large temperature ranges which are experienced across a broad range of potential space missions. This presentation will show initial results that demonstrate the SABERS team has developed a composite carbon-sulfur cathode which exceeds 1100 Wh/kg at a discharge rate of 0.4C, and 804 Wh/kg at a discharge rate of 1C. Additionally, this presentation will show the SABERS team multiscale computational modeling approach and has produced a novel particle dynamics method called Solid Electrolyte Sphere Approximation Model (SESAM). SESAM is on the 1-10 µm scale and provides electromechanical and grain interactions for predictive design guidelines for the experimental team to follow.

Urban Air Mobility (UAM) Vehicles↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Optimization Approach to Support Science Decision Making for Lunar Surface Exploration

Introduction: Scientific exploration is one of the three pillars of NASA’s Moon2Mars architecture, with crew surface extra vehicular activities (EVA) serving a critical enabling function. Development of surface EVA operational planning and execution, specifically integrating science and flight control teams (FCT), is currently being explored through analog scenarios. This integration, exercised, for example, through the Joint EVA and Hu-man Surface Mobility Test Team (JETT), allows for science input on EVA activities in near real-time through a Science Evaluation Room (SER), or Arte-mis science backroom, which integrates with the broader FCT through the Science Officer. The SER works within the FCT to support dynamic EVA planning in response to changes in operational constraints as well as science opportunities and re-prioritization, increasing the mission science return and accelerating the accomplishment of the Moon2Mars science objectives. The SER works within the FCT to provide recommendations to traverse execution in near real-time. One challenge is the requirement to deliver SER inputs to the FCT on operationally relevant timelines. Failure to do so may result in suboptimal execution of science exploration EVAs or even loss of key science objectives. To close this gap, we present a network optimization tool to allow the SER to provide rapid input to the FCT in response to changes in operational constraints or science opportunities. Inputs are predicated on approved science objectives, and clear rationale must be provided to the FCT for any requested change. Accordingly, this tool incorporates the Science Traceability Matrix (STM), SER prioritization scheme, and station characterization and action planning with operational constraints such as duration, traverse speed, and distance to maximize science objectives based on SER priorities, consistent with FCT operational requirements. Method: As a proof of concept, we used an existing linear programing software package used to simulate optimal routes through cellular metabolism. We built a Demonstrative Model with three STM objectives and four stations on a region of the Moon. The objectives were given an arbitrary prioritization and mapped to the stations through four possible crew actions. (Figs. 1 and 2). This station to STM mapping is consistent with the method used by the JETT5 Science Team to develop analog surface EVA science planning. We used a grid system with the landing site at the origin and the four stations placed across the positive x,y quadrant. Actions were assigned to each station and the accomplishment of those actions resulted in a numerical “reward” based on the ability of that action to achieve science objectives. The aggregate reward from each individual STM objective contributes to a global score (Science Yield), weighted by its priority. Operational constraints included a requirement to start and end at the landing site, 5 minutes each for initial station characterization and “clean up,” and variable total EVA time, traverse rate (fixed to 0.5 meters per second in our example), and time to perform each action (10, 5, 7, and 15 min for actions 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively). Additional constraints and variables will be added in the future (e.g., sample mass, number of stations, traverse route constraints, illumination). Optimization. We converted the connections (arcs) between these stations (nodes) into a mixed integer linear programming optimization problem (arcs = constraints, nodes = variables) with the objective to maximize Science Yield. For any action, the Science Yield is equal to the relevance of that action to an STM objective [3, 2, and 1 point(s) for High, Med., and Low relevance, respectively], multiplied by the STM Objective Priority [3, 2, and 1 point(s) for High, Med., and Low priority, respectively]. This resulted in a model that computes the optimal station and action combination to maximize the Science Yield. These weightings can be adjusted by the SER as desired. Results: We explored three test cases for the Demonstrative Model. First, we set the maximum EVA duration to 120 minutes and computed the optimal route (Fig. 3A). The model suggested per-forming Actions 1 and 2 at Station P01, followed by Actions 1 and 2 at Station P02, and finally Actions 1 and 3 at Station P04 before returning to the Landing Site. Second, we adjusted the STM Objective Priori-ty order and computed the new optimal route (Fig. 3B). Under this situation, the model suggested per-forming all Actions at Station P02 followed by all Actions at Station P03. The previous test cases were relevant to SER planning activities. Next, we explored providing mid-EVA replanning input to the FCT. Scenario: While executing the Route in Fig. 3A the crew finishes at Station P01 and FCT decides that the EVA needs to finish in 45 minutes back at the Landing Site. FCT asks SER to recommend changes to the plan to accommodate this operation-al change. Using the model and incorporating these new constraints (start at Station P01, max. time of 45 min), the model suggested performing Actions 2 and 4 at Station P03 (Fig. 4), requiring 41 minutes to complete and return to the Landing Site. Interestingly, Station 3 was not part of the original route. Using the model, we determined the EVA would need 66 minutes, instead of 45, in order for the original Station P04 to yield a larger Science Yield than Station P03. The parametrization and simulation was per-formed in less than a minute, demonstrating the operational relevance of the approach. Future Efforts: The results from the Demonstrative Model suggest this tool can accelerate SER decision making on operationally relevant timelines. Use in analog activities, such as JETT5 or follow-ons, which have over a dozen stations for a crew to explore and over a dozen actions per station, will provide needed validation of the utility of this tool for planning EVAs, replanning mid-EVA, or planning follow-on EVAs based on previous results. Further integration with FCT execution monitoring tools may provide additional efficiency gains, al-lowing rapid and iterative exploration of operation-al and science decision space by the FCT and SER.

Science Operations↗