Results for “New Millenium Program” — Page 4

NASA NTRS1996

Lithium-Ion Battery Program Status

The objective of this program is to develop rechargeable Li-ion cells for future NASA missions. Applications that would benefit from this project are: new millenium spacecraft; rovers; landers; astronaut equipment; and planetary orbiters. The approach of this program is: select electrode materials and electrolytes; identify failure modes and mechanisms and enhance cycle life; demonstrate Li-ion cell technology with liquid electrolyte; select candidate polymer electrolytes for Li-ion polymer cells; and develop Li-ion polymer cell technology.

Surampudi, S.↗

NASA NTRS1996

Chip-on-Board Technology 1996 Year-end Report (Design, Manufacturing, and Reliability Study)

The major impetus for flight qualifying Chip-On-Board (COB) packaging technology is the shift in emphasis for space missions to smaller, better, and cheaper spacecraft and satellites resulting from the NASA New Millenium initiative and similar requirements in DoD-sponsored programs. The most important benefit that can potentially be derived from miniaturizing spacecraft and satellites is the significant cost saving realizable if a smaller launch vehicle may be employed. Besides the program cost saving, there are several other advantages to building COB-based space hardware. First, once a well-controlled process is established, COB can be low cost compared to standard Multi-Chip Module (MCM) technology. This cost competitiveness is regarded as a result of the generally greater availability and lower cost of Known Good Die (KGD). Coupled with the elimination of the first level of packaging (chip package), compact, high-density circuit boards can be realized with Printed Wiring Boards (PWB) that can now be made with ever-decreasing feature size in line width and via hole. Since the COB packaging technique in this study is based mainly on populating bare dice on a suitable multi-layer laminate substrate which is not hermetically sealed, die coating for protection from the environment is required. In recent years, significant improvements have been made in die coating materials which further enhance the appeal of COB. Hysol epoxies, silicone, parylene and silicon nitride are desirable because of their compatible Thermal Coefficient of Expansion (TCE) and good moisture resistant capability. These die coating materials have all been used in the space and other industries with varying degrees of success. COB technology, specifically siliconnitride coated hardware, has been flown by Lockheed on the Polar satellite. In addition, DARPA has invested a substantial amount of resources on MCM and COB-related activities recently. With COB on the verge of becoming a dominant player in DoD programs, DARPA is increasing its support of the availability of KGDs which will help decrease their cost. Aside from the various major developments and trends in the space and defense industries that are favorable to the acceptance and widespread use of'COB packaging technology, implementing COB can be appealing in other aspects. Since the interconnection interface is usually the weak link in a system, the overall circuit or system reliability may actually be improved because of the elimination of a level of interconnect/packaging at the chip. With COB, mixing packaging technologies is possible. Because some devices are only available in commercial plastic packages, populating a multi-layer laminate substrate with both bare dice and plastic-package parts is inevitable. Another attractive feature of COB is that re-workability is possible if die coating is applied only on the die top. This method allows local replacement of individual dice that were found to be defective instead of replacing an entire board. In terms of thermal management, unpackaged devices offer a shorter thermal resistance path than their packaged counterparts thereby improving thermal sinking and heat removal from the parts.

Le, Binh Q.↗

NASA NTRS2000

Autonomy Architectures for a Constellation of Spacecraft

Until the past few years, missions typically involved fairly large expensive spacecraft. Such missions have primarily favored using older proven technologies over more recently developed ones, and humans controlled spacecraft by manually generating detailed command sequences with low-level tools and then transmitting the sequences for subsequent execution on a spacecraft controller. This approach toward controlling a spacecraft has worked spectacularly on previous missions, but it has limitations deriving from communications restrictions - scheduling time to communicate with a particular spacecraft involves competing with other projects due to the limited number of deep space network antennae. This implies that a spacecraft can spend a long time just waiting whenever a command sequence fails. This is one reason why the New Millennium program has an objective to migrate parts of mission control tasks onboard a spacecraft to reduce wait time by making spacecraft more robust. The migrated software is called a "remote agent" and has 4 components: a mission manager to generate the high level goals, a planner/scheduler to turn goals into activities while reasoning about future expected situations, an executive/diagnostics engine to initiate and maintain activities while interpreting sensed events by reasoning about past and present situations, and a conventional real-time subsystem to interface with the spacecraft to implement an activity's primitive actions. In addition to needing remote planning and execution for isolated spacecraft, a trend toward multiple-spacecraft missions points to the need for remote distributed planning and execution. The past few years have seen missions with growing numbers of probes. Pathfinder has its rover (Sojourner), Cassini has its lander (Huygens), and the New Millenium Deep Space 3 (DS3) proposal involves a constellation of 3 spacecraft for interferometric mapping. This trend is expected to continue to progressively larger fleets. For example, one mission proposed to succeed DS3 would have 18 spacecraft flying in formation in order to detect earth-sized planets orbiting other stars. A proposed magnetospheric constellation would involve 5 to 500 spacecraft in Earth orbit to measure global phenomena within the magnetosphere. This work describes and compares three autonomy architectures for a system that continuously plans to control a fleet of spacecraft using collective mission goals instead of goals or command sequences for each spacecraft. A fleet of self-commanding spacecraft would autonomously coordinate itself to satisfy high level science and engineering goals in a changing partially-understood environment making feasible the operation of tens or even a hundred spacecraft (such as for interferometry or plasma physics missions). The easiest way to adapt autonomous spacecraft research to controlling constellations involves treating the constellation as a single spacecraft. Here one spacecraft directly controls the others as if they were connected. The controlling "master" spacecraft performs all autonomy reasoning, and the slaves only have real-time subsystems to execute the master's commands and transmit local telemetry/observations. The executive/diagnostics module starts actions and the master's real-time subsystem controls the action either locally or remotely through a slave. While the master/slave approach benefits from conceptual simplicity, it relies on an assumption that the master spacecraft's executive can continuously monitor the slaves' real-time subsystems, and this relies on high-bandwidth highly-reliable communications. Since unintended results occur fairly rarely, one way to relax the bandwidth requirements involves only monitoring unexpected events in spacecraft. Unfortunately, this disables the ability to monitor for unexpected events between spacecraft and leads to a host of coordination problems among the slaves. Also, failures in the communications system can result in losing slaves. The other two architectures improve robustness while reducing communications by progressively distributing more of the other three remote agent components across the constellation. In a teamwork architecture, all spacecraft have executives and real-time subsystems - only the leader has the planner/scheduler and mission manager. Finally, distributing all remote agent components leads to a peer-to-peer approach toward constellation control.

Barrett, Anthony↗