Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Guidance Navigation and Control (GNC)”

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 73 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2015

A Vehicle Management End-to-End Testing and Analysis Platform for Validation of Mission and Fault Management Algorithms to Reduce Risk for NASAs Space Launch System

The engineering development of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) new Space Launch System (SLS) requires cross discipline teams with extensive knowledge of launch vehicle subsystems, information theory, and autonomous algorithms dealing with all operations from pre-launch through on orbit operations. The nominal and off-nominal characteristics of SLS's elements and subsystems must be understood and matched with the autonomous algorithm monitoring and mitigation capabilities for accurate control and response to abnormal conditions throughout all vehicle mission flight phases, including precipitating safing actions and crew aborts. This presents a large and complex systems engineering challenge, which is being addressed in part by focusing on the specific subsystems involved in the handling of off-nominal mission and fault tolerance with response management. Using traditional model-based system and software engineering design principles from the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Systems Modeling Language (SysML), the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms for the vehicle are crafted and vetted in Integrated Development Teams (IDTs) composed of multiple development disciplines such as Systems Engineering (SE), Flight Software (FSW), Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) and the major subsystems and vehicle elements such as Main Propulsion Systems (MPS), boosters, avionics, Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC), Thrust Vector Control (TVC), and liquid engines. These model-based algorithms and their development lifecycle from inception through FSW certification are an important focus of SLS's development effort to further ensure reliable detection and response to off-nominal vehicle states during all phases of vehicle operation from pre-launch through end of flight. To test and validate these M&FM algorithms a dedicated test-bed was developed for full Vehicle Management End-to-End Testing (VMET). For addressing fault management (FM) early in the development lifecycle for the SLS program, NASA formed the M&FM team as part of the Integrated Systems Health Management and Automation Branch under the Spacecraft Vehicle Systems Department at the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). To support the development of the FM algorithms, the VMET developed by the M&FM team provides the ability to integrate the algorithms, perform test cases, and integrate vendor-supplied physics-based launch vehicle (LV) subsystem models. Additionally, the team has developed processes for implementing and validating the M&FM algorithms for concept validation and risk reduction. The flexibility of the VMET capabilities enables thorough testing of the M&FM algorithms by providing configurable suites of both nominal and off-nominal test cases to validate the developed algorithms utilizing actual subsystem models such as MPS, GNC, and others. One of the principal functions of VMET is to validate the M&FM algorithms and substantiate them with performance baselines for each of the target vehicle subsystems in an independent platform exterior to the flight software test and validation processes. In any software development process there is inherent risk in the interpretation and implementation of concepts from requirements and test cases into flight software compounded with potential human errors throughout the development and regression testing lifecycle. Risk reduction is addressed by the M&FM group but in particular by the Analysis Team working with other organizations such as S&MA, Structures and Environments, GNC, Orion, Crew Office, Flight Operations, and Ground Operations by assessing performance of the M&FM algorithms in terms of their ability to reduce Loss of Mission (LOM) and Loss of Crew (LOC) probabilities. In addition, through state machine and diagnostic modeling, analysis efforts investigate a broader suite of failure effects and associated detection and responses to be tested in VMET to ensure reliable failure detection, and confirm responses do not create additional risks or cause undesired states through interactive dynamic effects with other algorithms and systems. VMET further contributes to risk reduction by prototyping and exercising the M&FM algorithms early in their implementation and without any inherent hindrances such as meeting FSW processor scheduling constraints due to their target platform - the ARINC 6535-partitioned Operating System, resource limitations, and other factors related to integration with other subsystems not directly involved with M&FM such as telemetry packing and processing. The baseline plan for use of VMET encompasses testing the original M&FM algorithms coded in the same C++ language and state machine architectural concepts as that used by FSW. This enables the development of performance standards and test cases to characterize the M&FM algorithms and sets a benchmark from which to measure their effectiveness and performance in the exterior FSW development and test processes. This paper is outlined in a systematic fashion analogous to a lifecycle process flow for engineering development of algorithms into software and testing. Section I describes the NASA SLS M&FM context, presenting the current infrastructure, leading principles, methods, and participants. Section II defines the testing philosophy of the M&FM algorithms as related to VMET followed by section III, which presents the modeling methods of the algorithms to be tested and validated in VMET. Its details are then further presented in section IV followed by Section V presenting integration, test status, and state analysis. Finally, section VI addresses the summary and forward directions followed by the appendices presenting relevant information on terminology and documentation.

Trevino, Luis↗
NASA NTRS2015

A Vehicle Management End-to-End Testing and Analysis Platform for Validation of Mission and Fault Management Algorithms to Reduce Risk for NASA's Space Launch System

The engineering development of the new Space Launch System (SLS) launch vehicle requires cross discipline teams with extensive knowledge of launch vehicle subsystems, information theory, and autonomous algorithms dealing with all operations from pre-launch through on orbit operations. The characteristics of these spacecraft systems must be matched with the autonomous algorithm monitoring and mitigation capabilities for accurate control and response to abnormal conditions throughout all vehicle mission flight phases, including precipitating safing actions and crew aborts. This presents a large and complex system engineering challenge, which is being addressed in part by focusing on the specific subsystems involved in the handling of off-nominal mission and fault tolerance with response management. Using traditional model based system and software engineering design principles from the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Systems Modeling Language (SysML), the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms for the vehicle are crafted and vetted in specialized Integrated Development Teams (IDTs) composed of multiple development disciplines such as Systems Engineering (SE), Flight Software (FSW), Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) and the major subsystems and vehicle elements such as Main Propulsion Systems (MPS), boosters, avionics, Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC), Thrust Vector Control (TVC), and liquid engines. These model based algorithms and their development lifecycle from inception through Flight Software certification are an important focus of this development effort to further insure reliable detection and response to off-nominal vehicle states during all phases of vehicle operation from pre-launch through end of flight. NASA formed a dedicated M&FM team for addressing fault management early in the development lifecycle for the SLS initiative. As part of the development of the M&FM capabilities, this team has developed a dedicated testbed that integrates specific M&FM algorithms, specialized nominal and off-nominal test cases, and vendor-supplied physics-based launch vehicle subsystem models. Additionally, the team has developed processes for implementing and validating these algorithms for concept validation and risk reduction for the SLS program. The flexibility of the Vehicle Management End-to-end Testbed (VMET) enables thorough testing of the M&FM algorithms by providing configurable suites of both nominal and off-nominal test cases to validate the developed algorithms utilizing actual subsystem models such as MPS. The intent of VMET is to validate the M&FM algorithms and substantiate them with performance baselines for each of the target vehicle subsystems in an independent platform exterior to the flight software development infrastructure and its related testing entities. In any software development process there is inherent risk in the interpretation and implementation of concepts into software through requirements and test cases into flight software compounded with potential human errors throughout the development lifecycle. Risk reduction is addressed by the M&FM analysis group working with other organizations such as S&MA, Structures and Environments, GNC, Orion, the Crew Office, Flight Operations, and Ground Operations by assessing performance of the M&FM algorithms in terms of their ability to reduce Loss of Mission and Loss of Crew probabilities. In addition, through state machine and diagnostic modeling, analysis efforts investigate a broader suite of failure effects and associated detection and responses that can be tested in VMET to ensure that failures can be detected, and confirm that responses do not create additional risks or cause undesired states through interactive dynamic effects with other algorithms and systems. VMET further contributes to risk reduction by prototyping and exercising the M&FM algorithms early in their implementation and without any inherent hindrances such as meeting FSW processor scheduling constraints due to their target platform - ARINC 653 partitioned OS, resource limitations, and other factors related to integration with other subsystems not directly involved with M&FM such as telemetry packing and processing. The baseline plan for use of VMET encompasses testing the original M&FM algorithms coded in the same C++ language and state machine architectural concepts as that used by Flight Software. This enables the development of performance standards and test cases to characterize the M&FM algorithms and sets a benchmark from which to measure the effectiveness of M&FM algorithms performance in the FSW development and test processes.

Trevino, Luis↗
NASA NTRS2016

The Virtual Space Telescope: A New Class of Science Missions

Many science investigations proposed by GSFC require two spacecraft alignment across a long distance to form a virtual space telescope. Forming a Virtual Space telescope requires advances in Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC) enabling the distribution of monolithic telescopes across multiple space platforms. The capability to align multiple spacecraft to an intertial target is at a low maturity state and we present a roadmap to advance the system-level capability to be flight ready in preparation of various science applications. An engineering proof of concept, called the CANYVAL-X CubeSat MIssion is presented. CANYVAL-X's advancement will decrease risk for a potential starshade mission that would fly with WFIRST.

CubeSat↗
NASA NTRS2016

Simulation of Mission Phases

This position with the Simulation and Graphics Branch (ER7) at Johnson Space Center (JSC) provided an introduction to vehicle hardware, mission planning, and simulation design. ER7 supports engineering analysis and flight crew training by providing high-fidelity, real-time graphical simulations in the Systems Engineering Simulator (SES) lab. The primary project assigned by NASA mentor and SES lab manager, Meghan Daley, was to develop a graphical simulation of the rendezvous, proximity operations, and docking (RPOD) phases of flight. The simulation is to include a generic crew/cargo transportation vehicle and a target object in low-Earth orbit (LEO). Various capsule, winged, and lifting body vehicles as well as historical RPOD methods were evaluated during the project analysis phase. JSC core mission to support the International Space Station (ISS), Commercial Crew Program (CCP), and Human Space Flight (HSF) influenced the project specifications. The simulation is characterized as a 30 meter +V Bar and/or -R Bar approach to the target object's docking station. The ISS was selected as the target object and the international Low Impact Docking System (iLIDS) was selected as the docking mechanism. The location of the target object's docking station corresponds with the RPOD methods identified. The simulation design focuses on Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC) system architecture models with station keeping and telemetry data processing capabilities. The optical and inertial sensors, reaction control system thrusters, and the docking mechanism selected were based on CCP vehicle manufacturer's current and proposed technologies. A significant amount of independent study and tutorial completion was required for this project. Multiple primary source materials were accessed using the NASA Technical Report Server (NTRS) and reference textbooks were borrowed from the JSC Main Library and International Space Station Library. The Trick Simulation Environment and User Training Materials version 2013.0 release was used to complete the Trick tutorial. Multiple network privilege and repository permission requests were required in order to access previous simulation models. The project was also an introduction to computer programming and the Linux operating system. Basic C++ and Python syntax was used during the completion of the Trick tutorial. Trick's engineering analysis and Monte Carlo simulation capabilities were observed and basic space mission planning procedures were applied in the conceptual design phase. Multiple professional development opportunities were completed in addition to project duties during this internship through the System for Administration, Training, and Education Resources for NASA (SATERN). Topics include: JSC Risk Management Workshop, CCP Risk Management, Basic Radiation Safety Training, X-Ray Radiation Safety, Basic Laser Safety, JSC Export Control, ISS RISE Ambassador, Basic SharePoint 2013, Space Nutrition and Biochemistry, and JSC Personal Protective Equipment. Additionally, this internship afforded the opportunity for formal project presentation and public speaking practice. This was my first experience at a NASA center. After completing this internship I have a much clearer understanding of certain aspects of the agency's processes and procedures, as well as a deeper appreciation from spaceflight simulation design and testing. I will continue to improve my technical skills so that I may have another opportunity to return to NASA and Johnson Space Center.

Carlstrom, Nicholas Mercury↗
NASA NTRS2017

Linear Covariance Analysis for a Lunar Lander

A next-generation lunar lander Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC) system, which includes a state-of-the-art optical sensor suite, is proposed in a concept design cycle. The design goal is to allow the lander to softly land within the prescribed landing precision. The achievement of this precision landing requirement depends on proper selection of the sensor suite. In this paper, a robust sensor selection procedure is demonstrated using a Linear Covariance (LinCov) analysis tool developed by Draper.

Jang, Jiann-Woei↗
NASA NTRS2017

Time and Frequency-Domain Cross-Verification of SLS 6DOF Trajectory Simulations

The Space Launch System (SLS) Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC) team and its partners have developed several time- and frequency-based simulations for development and analysis of the proposed SLS launch vehicle. The simulations differ in fidelity and some have unique functionality that allows them to perform specific analyses. Some examples of the purposes of the various models are: trajectory simulation, multi-body separation, Monte Carlo, hardware in the loop, loads, and frequency domain stability analyses. While no two simulations are identical, many of the models are essentially six degree-of-freedom (6DOF) representations of the SLS plant dynamics, hardware implementation, and flight software. Thus at a high level all of those models should be in agreement. Comparison of outputs from several SLS trajectory and stability analysis tools are ongoing as part of the program's current verification effort. The purpose of these comparisons is to highlight modeling and analysis differences, verify simulation data sources, identify inconsistencies and minor errors, and ultimately to verify output data as being a good representation of the vehicle and subsystem dynamics. This paper will show selected verification work in both the time and frequency domain from the current design analysis cycle of the SLS for several of the design and analysis simulations. In the time domain, the tools that will be compared are MAVERIC, CLVTOPS, SAVANT, STARS, ARTEMIS, and POST 2. For the frequency domain analysis, the tools to be compared are FRACTAL, SAVANT, and STARS. The paper will include discussion of these tools including their capabilities, configurations, and the uses to which they are put in the SLS program. Determination of the criteria by which the simulations are compared (matching criteria) requires thoughtful consideration, and there are several pitfalls that may occur that can severely punish a simulation if not considered carefully. The paper will discuss these considerations and will present a framework for responding to these issues when they arise. For example, small event timing differences can lead to large differences in mass properties if the criteria are to measure those properties at the same time, or large differences in altitude if the criteria are to measure those properties when the simulation experiences a staging event. Similarly, a tiny difference in phase can lead to large gain margin differences for frequency-domain comparisons of gain margins.

Johnson, Matthew↗
NASA NTRS2017

Spacecraft Alignment Determination and Control for Dual Spacecraft Precision Formation Flying

Many proposed formation flying missions seek to advance the state of the art in spacecraft science imaging by utilizing precision dual spacecraft formation flying to enable a virtual space telescope. Using precision dual spacecraft alignment, very long focal lengths can be achieved by locating the optics on one spacecraft and the detector on the other. Proposed science missions include astrophysics concepts with spacecraft separations from 1000 km to 25,000 km, such as the Milli-Arc-Second Structure Imager (MASSIM) and the New Worlds Observer, and Heliophysics concepts for solar coronagraphs and X-ray imaging with smaller separations (50m-500m). All of these proposed missions require advances in guidance, navigation, and control (GNC) for precision formation flying. In particular, very precise astrometric alignment control and estimation is required for precise inertial pointing of the virtual space telescope to enable science imaging orders of magnitude better than can be achieved with conventional single spacecraft instruments. This work develops design architectures, algorithms, and performance analysis of proposed GNC systems for precision dual spacecraft astrometric alignment. These systems employ a variety of GNC sensors and actuators, including laser-based alignment and ranging systems, optical imaging sensors (e.g. guide star telescope), inertial measurement units (IMU), as well as microthruster and precision stabilized platforms. A comprehensive GNC performance analysis is given for Heliophysics dual spacecraft PFF imaging mission concept.

Virtual Telescope↗
NASA NTRS2017

Spacecraft Alignment Determination and Control for Dual Spacecraft Precision Formation Flying

Many proposed formation flying missions seek to advance the state of the art in spacecraft science imaging by utilizing precision dual spacecraft formation flying to enable a virtual space telescope. Using precision dual spacecraft alignment, very long focal lengths can be achieved by locating the optics on one spacecraft and the detector on the other. Proposed science missions include astrophysics concepts with spacecraft separations from 1000 km to 25,000 km, such as the Milli-Arc-Second Structure Imager (MASSIM) and the New Worlds Observer, and Heliophysics concepts for solar coronagraphs and X-ray imaging with smaller separations (50m 500m). All of these proposed missions require advances in guidance, navigation, and control (GNC) for precision formation flying. In particular, very precise astrometric alignment control and estimation is required for precise inertial pointing of the virtual space telescope to enable science imaging orders of magnitude better than can be achieved with conventional single spacecraft instruments. This work develops design architectures, algorithms, and performance analysis of proposed GNC systems for precision dual spacecraft astrometric alignment. These systems employ a variety of GNC sensors and actuators, including laser-based alignment and ranging systems, optical imaging sensors (e.g. guide star telescope), inertial measurement units (IMU), as well as micro-thruster and precision stabilized platforms. A comprehensive GNC performance analysis is given for Heliophysics dual spacecraft PFF imaging mission concept.

Formation flying↗
NASA NTRS2017

NASA Affordable Vehicle Avionics (AVA)

Small satellites are becoming ever more capable of performing valuable missions for both government and commercial customers. However, currently these satellites can be launched affordably only as secondary payloads. This makes it difficult for the small satellite mission to launch when needed, to the desired orbit, and with acceptable risk. What is needed is a class of low-cost launchers, so that launch costs to low-Earth orbit (LEO) are commensurate with payload costs. Several private and government-sponsored launch vehicle developers are working toward just that-the ability to affordably insert small payloads into LEO. But until now, cost of the complex avionics remained disproportionately high. AVA (Affordable Vehicle Avionics) solves this problem. Significant contributors to the cost of launching nanosatellites to orbit are the avionics and software systems that steer and control the launch vehicles, sequence stage separation, deploy payloads, and telemeter data. The high costs of these guidance, navigation and control (GNC) avionics systems are due in part to the current practice of developing unique, single-use hardware and software for each launch. High-performance, high-reliability inertial sensors components with heritage from legacy launchers also contribute to costs-but can low-cost commercial inertial sensors work just as well? NASA Ames Research Center has developed and tested a prototype low-cost avionics package for space launch vehicles that provides complete GNC functionality in a package smaller than a tissue box (100 millimeters by 120 millimeters by 69 millimeters; 4 inches by 4.7 inches by 2.7 inches), with a mass of less than 0.84 kilogram (2 pounds. AVA takes advantage of commercially available, low-cost, mass-produced, miniaturized sensors, filtering their more noisy inertial data with real-time GPS (Global Positioning Satellite) data. The goal of the AVA project is to produce and light-verify a common suite of avionics and software that deliver affordable, capable GNC and telemetry avionics with application to multiple nanolaunch vehicles at 1 percent of the cost of current state-of-the-art avionics.

space technology↗
NASA NTRS2018

Quantification of Dynamic Model Validation Metrics Using Uncertainty Propagation from Requirements

The Space Launch System, NASA's new large launch vehicle for long range space exploration, is presently in the final design and construction phases, with the first launch scheduled for 2019. A dynamic model of the system has been created and is critical for calculation of interface loads and natural frequencies and mode shapes for guidance, navigation, and control (GNC). Because of the program and schedule constraints, a single modal test of the SLS will be performed while bolted down to the Mobile Launch Pad just before the first launch. A Monte Carlo and optimization scheme will be performed to create thousands of possible models based on given dispersions in model properties and to determine which model best fits the natural frequencies and mode shapes from modal test. However, the question still remains as to whether this model is acceptable for the loads and GNC requirements. An uncertainty propagation and quantification (UP and UQ) technique to develop a quantitative set of validation metrics that is based on the flight requirements has therefore been developed and is discussed in this paper. There has been considerable research on UQ and UP and validation in the literature, but very little on propagating the uncertainties from requirements, so most validation metrics are "rules-of-thumb;" this research seeks to come up with more reason-based metrics. One of the main assumptions used to achieve this task is that the uncertainty in the modeling of the fixed boundary condition is accurate, so therefore that same uncertainty can be used in propagating the fixed-test configuration to the free-free actual configuration. The second main technique applied here is the usage of the limit-state formulation to quantify the final probabilistic parameters and to compare them with the requirements. These techniques are explored with a simple lumped spring-mass system and a simplified SLS model. When completed, it is anticipated that this requirements-based validation metric will provide a quantified confidence and probability of success for the final SLS dynamics model, which will be critical for a successful launch program, and can be applied in the many other industries where an accurate dynamic model is required.

Brown, Andrew M.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Rapid Development of the Seeker Free-Flying Inspector Guidance, Navigation, and Control System

Seeker is an automated extravehicular free-flying inspector CubeSat designed and built in-house at the Johnson Space Center (JSC). As a Class 1E project funded by the International Space Station (ISS) Program, Seeker had a streamlined process to flight certification, but the vehicle had to be designed, developed, tested, and delivered within approximately one year after authority to pro-ceed (ATP) and within a $1.8 million budget. These constraints necessitated an expedited Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC) development schedule, development began with a navigation sensor trade study using Linear Covariance (LinCov) analysis and a rapid sensor downselection process, resulting in the use of commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) sensors which could be procured quickly and subjected to in-house environmental testing to qualify them for flight. A neural network was used to enable a COTS camera to provide bearing measurements for visual navigation. The GNC flight software (FSW) algorithms utilized lean development practices and leveraged the Core Flight Software (CFS) architecture to rapidly develop the GNC system, tune the system parameters, and verify performance in simulation. This pace was anchored by several Hardware-Software Integration (HSI) milestones, which forced the Seeker GNC team to develop the interfaces both between hardware and software and between the GNC domains early in the project and to enable a timely delivery.

Sullivan, Jacob↗
NASA NTRS2019

Rapid Development of the Seeker Free-Flying Inspector Guidance, Navigation, and Control System

Seeker is an automated extravehicular free-flying inspector CubeSat designed and built in-house at the Johnson Space Center (JSC). As a Class 1E project funded by the International Space Station (ISS) Program, Seeker had a stream-lined process to flight certification, but the vehicle had to be designed, developed, tested, and delivered within approximately one year after authority to proceed (ATP) and within a $1.8 million budget. These constraints necessitated an expedited Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC) development schedule. Development began with a navigation sensor trade study using Linear Covariance (LinCov) analysis and a rapid sensor down-selection process, resulting in the use of commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) sensors which could be procured quickly and subjected to in-house environmental testing to qualify them for flight. A neural network was used to enable a COTS camera to provide bearing measure-ments for visual navigation. The GNC flight software (FSW) algorithms utilized lean development practices and leveraged the Core Flight Software (CFS) architecture to rapidly develop the GNC system, tune the system parameters, and verify performance in simulation. This pace was anchored by several Hardware-Software Integration (HSI) milestones, which forced the Seeker GNC team to develop the interfaces both between hardware and software and between the GNC domains early in the project and to enable a timely delivery.

Sullivan, Jake↗
NASA NTRS2017

Space Technology Game Changing Development: NASA Affordable Vehicle Avionics (AVA)

Common Modular Avionics System for Nanolaunchers Offering Affordable Access to Space Small satellites are becoming ever more capable of performing valuable missions for both government and commercial customers. However, currently these satellites can be launched affordably only as secondary payloads. This makes it difficult for the small satellite mission to launch when needed, to the desired orbit, and with acceptable risk. What is needed is a class of low-cost launchers, so that launch costs to low-Earth orbit (LEO) are commensurate with payload costs. Several private and government-sponsored launch vehicle developers are working toward just that—the ability to affordably insert small payloads into LEO. But until now, cost of the complex avionics remained disproportionately high. AVA solves this problem. Significant contributors to the cost of launching nanosatellites to orbit are the avionics and software systems that steer and control the launch vehicles, sequence stage separation, deploy payloads, and telemeter data. The high costs of these guidance, navigation and control (GNC) avionics systems are due in part to the current practice of developing unique, single use hardware and software for each launch. High-performance, high-reliability inertial sensors components with heritage from legacy launchers also contribute to costs—but can low-cost commercial inertial sensors work just as well?

Aquilina, Rudy↗
NASA NTRS2017

Guidance, Navigation and Control for the Entry, Descent, and Landing of the Mars 2020 Mission

This paper presents an overview of the Guidance, Navigation and Control (GNC) system for the Entry, Descent, and Landing (EDL) phases of the Mars 2020 Mission. The EDL GNC system adds Terrain Relative Navigation to the MSL EDL GNC system1 to enable landing on landing sites with landing hazards within the landing ellipse. This paper describes the GNC architecture, including sensors, actuators and algorithms, for the entry, parachute descent, and powered flight phases of the mission.

Brugarolas, Paul↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Navigation Doppler Lidar Performance at High Speed and Long Range

NASA is developing a Navigational Doppler LiDAR (NDL) for use in missions involving robotic and human landing scenarios on solar system bodies. The NDL provides unprecedented accuracy in position and velocity measurement for the guidance, navigation and control (GNC) subsystem of a spacecraft. NDL performance has been characterized over different phases of its development through ground tests, helicopter flight tests, and onboard rocket-powered test vehicles, however, none of these tests provided measurements over its full performance envelope. For this reason, a high speed rocket sled test was recently conducted to resolve both range and velocity up to the maximum limits of the NDL. This test campaign was performed at the Supersonic Naval Ordnance Research Tracks (SNORT) facility, Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake, as part of the Safe & Precise Landing and Integrated Capabilities Evolution (SPLICE) project.

Aram Gragossian↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Integrated Design Results for the MSR DAC-0.0 Mars Ascent Vehicle

The NASA Mars Sample Return (MSR) Campaign endeavors to return Martian regolith, rock, and atmospheric samples to Earth for scientific study. One of many significant challenges to overcome in the return of these samples lies in transporting them from the Martian surface to space. In order to surmount this challenge, the Campaign has conceptualized the need for a Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) to perform this function and deliver Martian samples to orbit. There, the samples will be ejected and captured by a separate spacecraft for return to Earth. Many concepts for a MAV have existed in the past, but it has not been until now that an integrated, detailed design solution has been developed and analyzed. Preliminary assessments of the initial architecture examined multiple methods of propulsion. The team ultimately determined that a Two Stage to Orbit (TSTO) solid propulsion vehicle would provide the most effective performance and be the most technologically ready to support this mission. Following the decision to adopt a TSTO solid propelled vehicle, the first official Design Analysis Cycle, DAC-0.0, was performed in Spring 2020 to formally advance the fidelity of the vehicle to a maturity level acceptable for NASA Key Decision Point A (KDP-A). This paper describes the resultant MAV design concept developed as part of the DAC-0.0 study by the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), in association with the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL). The TSTO vehicle features two solid rocket motors, one powering each stage. Their thrust vectors are controlled with Thrust Vector Control (TVC) systems consisting of independent electromechanical actuators acting on gimballed nozzles. The vehicle is designed to deliver up to 0.47kg of Martian samples to a Mars circular orbit of 343km at 27° inclination. Due to the unique environmental conditions that this vehicle is required to operate in, the subsystem design teams were compelled to develop creative and unorthodox designs to ensure a successful mission. The detailed design and analysis of these subsystems are discussed in this paper and include topics on the MAV Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC); structures and mechanisms; integrated vehicle thermal; avionics and flight software; a hydrazine-based Reaction Control System (RCS); aerosciences; and vehicle assembly, integration, and test (AI&T) considerations, among others. Following the conclusion of the MAV DAC-0.0, additional alternative architecture concepts were also studied to further reduce the mass of the overall system. The results of these studies will also be examined in this paper.

Darius Yaghoubi↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Integrated Design Results for the MSR DAC-0.0 Mars Ascent Vehicle

The NASA Mars Sample Return (MSR) Campaign endeavors to return Martian regolith, rock, and atmospheric samples to Earth for scientific study. One of many significant challenges to overcome in the return of thesesamples lies in transporting them from the Martian surface to space. In order to surmount this challenge, the Campaign has conceptualized the need for a Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) to perform this function and deliver Martian samples to orbit. There, the samples will be ejected and captured by a separate spacecraft for return to Earth. Many concepts for a MAV have existed in the past, but it has not been until now that an integrated, detailed design solution has been developed and analyzed. Preliminary assessments of the initial architecture examined multiple methods of propulsion. The team ultimately determined that a Two Stage to Orbit (TSTO) solid propulsion vehicle would provide the most effective performance and be the most technologically ready to support this mission. Following the decision to adopt a TSTO solid propelled vehicle, the first official Design Analysis Cycle, DAC-0.0, was performed in Spring 2020 to formally advance the fidelity of the vehicle to a maturity level acceptable for NASA Key Decision Point A (KDP-A). This paper describes the resultant MAV design concept developed as part of the DAC-0.0 study by the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), in association with the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL). The TSTO vehicle features two solid rocket motors, one powering each stage. Their thrust vectors are controlled with Thrust Vector Control (TVC) systems consisting of independent electromechanical actuators acting on gimballed nozzles. The vehicle is designed to deliver up to 0.47kg of Martian samples to a Mars circular orbit of 343km at 27° inclination. Due to the unique environmental conditions that this vehicle is required to operate in, the subsystem design teams were compelled to develop creative and unorthodox designs to ensure a successful mission. The detailed design and analysis of these subsystems are discussed in this paper and include topics on the MAV Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC); structures and mechanisms; integrated vehicle thermal; avionics and flight software; a hydrazine-based Reaction Control System (RCS); aerosciences; and vehicle assembly, integration, and test (AI&T) considerations, among others. Following the conclusion of the MAV DAC-0.0, additional alternative architecture concepts were also studied to further reduce the mass of the overall system.

Mars↗