Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Sensor & Control Upgrades”

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.

61 records · Page 4

SRMS History, Evolution and Lessons Learned

Early in the development of the Space Shuttle, it became clear that NASA needed a method of deploying and retrieving payloads from the payload bay. The Shuttle Remote Manipulator System (SRMS) was developed to fill this need. The 50 foot long robotic arm is an anthropomorphic design consisting of three electromechanical joints, six degrees of freedom, and two boom segments. Its composite boom construction provided a light weight solution needed for space operations. Additionally, a method of capturing payloads with the arm was required and a unique End Effector was developed using an electromechanical snare mechanism. The SRMS is operated using a Displays and Controls Panel and hand controllers located within the aft crew compartment of the shuttle. Although the SRMS was originally conceived to deploy and retrieve payloads, its generic capabilities allowed it to perform many other functions not originally conceived of. Over the years it has been used for deploying and retrieving constrained and free flying payloads, maneuvering and supporting EVA astronauts, satellite repair, International Space Station construction, and as a viewing aid for on-orbit International Space Station operations. After the Columbia accident, a robotically compatible Orbiter Boom Sensor System (OBSS) was developed and used in conjunction with the SRMS to scan the Thermal Protection System (TPS) of the shuttle. These scans ensure there is not a breach of the TPS prior to shuttle re-entry. Ground operations and pre mission simulation, analysis and planning played a major role in the success of the SRMS program. A Systems Engineering Simulator (SES) was developed to provide a utility complimentary to open loop engineering simulations. This system provided a closed-loop real-time pilot-driven simulation giving visual feedback, display and control panel interaction, and integration with other vehicle systems, such as GN&C. It has been useful for many more applications than traditional training. Evolution of the simulations, guided by the Math Model Working Group, showed the utility of input from multiple modeling groups with a structured forum for discussion.There were many unique development challenges in the areas of hardware, software, certification, modeling and simulation. Over the years, upgrades and enhancements were implemented to increase the capability, performance and safety of the SRMS. The history and evolution of the SRMS program provided many lessons learned that can be used for future space robotic systems.

Jorgensen, Glenn↗

Experimental Capabilities and Achievements of the Space Environment Dynamometer (SED)

The Space Environment Dynamometer (SED) chamber was designed to conduct research in cryobotics; an area of study that focuses on robotic systems and rotating machinery operating in extreme cold environments including Earth, low Earth orbit, Mars, Moon, asteroids, Solar orbit, planetary orbit, or those encountered during travel among these destinations. The test chamber incorporates a modular dynamometer, consisting of a variety of brakes, torque sensors and motors to be easily interchanged between tests. Each test employs a unique test profile that incorporates different setpoints of applied torques and velocities for a given period or number of rev- olutions. The modularity of the dynamometer setup allows for any combination of motor, gearbox to be tested. This chamber is one of a kind and resides at the Swamp Works facility within the Granular Mechanics and Regolith Operations laboratory (GMRO) at NASA Kennedy Space Center. Other cold chambers exist, however they are project specific and do not simultaneously output real time torque, temperature and efficiency data. The modularity of this extreme cold environment test chamber, coupled with the custom software and instrumentation, makes it one of a kind. The chamber is capable of stabilizing cryogenic temperatures and pressures to commensurate moon environments. Tests have successfully been conducted on motors and gearboxes for various cryogenic temperature set points, torques, and angular velocities. Relevant internal temperatures of the test article and chamber were recorded using a variety of temperature sensors. The temperature setpoints, on the motors and gearboxes tested, were stabilized by using PID gain scheduling of the PWM signal for the various heaters. The heat removal for the motor was provided by creating a thermally conductive path from a cryohead directly to the test article using copper straps. A variety of strainwave gears (SWGs), also known as Harmonic drives, planetary gear systems and DC motor actuator configurations have been tested in the chamber. The experiments performed were for various projects including Bulk Metallic Glass Gears (BMGG), Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover (VIPER), In-Situ Resource Utilization Pilot Excavator (IPEX) . Various upgrades have been made to the extreme cold environment test chamber for the use of cryobotic research. These upgrades greatly increased the autonomous capabilities of the test set up by providing redundancies in the hardware and software. The redundancies were primarily added to protect the integrity of the cryohead. A new strapping and insulation method was performed to create the thermal conductive path from the actuators to the cryohead. The software was upgraded to include temperature setpoint control, further increasing the autonomous capabilities of the test. This paper goes into detail regarding the upgrades made to the extreme cold environment test chamber, as well as highlights the results from a COLDArm acceptance test.

Casey J. Clark↗

Sensory Motor Coordination in Robonaut

As a participant of the year 2000 NASA Summer Faculty Fellowship Program, I worked with the engineers of the Dexterous Robotics Laboratory at NASA Johnson Space Center on the Robonaut project. The Robonaut is an articulated torso with two dexterous arms, left and right five-fingered hands, and a head with cameras mounted on an articulated neck. This advanced space robot, now driven only teleoperatively using VR gloves, sensors and helmets, is to be upgraded to a thinking system that can find, interact with and assist humans autonomously, allowing the Crew to work with Robonaut as a (junior) member of their team. Thus, the work performed this summer was toward the goal of enabling Robonaut to operate autonomously as an intelligent assistant to astronauts. Our underlying hypothesis is that a robot can develop intelligence if it learns a set of basic behaviors (i.e., reflexes - actions tightly coupled to sensing) and through experience learns how to sequence these to solve problems or to accomplish higher-level tasks. We describe our approach to the automatic acquisition of basic behaviors as learning sensory-motor coordination (SMC). Although research in the ontogenesis of animals development from the time of conception) supports the approach of learning SMC as the foundation for intelligent, autonomous behavior, we do not know whether it will prove viable for the development of autonomy in robots. The first step in testing the hypothesis is to determine if SMC can be learned by the robot. To do this, we have taken advantage of Robonaut's teleoperated control system. When a person teleoperates Robonaut, the person's own SMC causes the robot to act purposefully. If the sensory signals that the robot detects during teleoperation are recorded over several repetitions of the same task, it should be possible through signal analysis to identify the sensory-motor couplings that accompany purposeful motion. In this report, reasons for suspecting SMC as the basis for intelligent behavior will be reviewed. A robot control system for autonomous behavior that uses learned SMC will be proposed. Techniques for the extraction of salient parameters from sensory and motor data will be discussed. Experiments with Robonaut will be discussed and preliminary data presented.

Peters, Richard Alan, II↗

NASA Tech Briefs, January 2005

Topics covered include: Fiber-Optic Sensor Would Monitor Growth of Polymer Film; Sensors for Pointing Moving Instruments Toward Each Other; Pd/CeO2/SiC Chemical Sensors; Microparticle Flow Sensor; Scattering-Type Surface-Plasmon-Resonance Biosensors; Diode-Laser-Based Spectrometer for Sensing Gases; Improved Cathode Structure for a Direct Methanol Fuel Cell; X-Band, 17-Watt Solid-State Power Amplifier; Improved Anode for a Direct Methanol Fuel Cell; Tools for Designing and Analyzing Structures; Interactive Display of Scenes with Annotations; Solving Common Mathematical Problems; Tools for Basic Statistical Analysis; Program Calculates Forces in Bolted Structural Joints; Integrated Structural Analysis and Test Program; Molybdate Coatings for Protecting Aluminum Against Corrosion; Synthesizing Diamond from Liquid Feedstock; Modifying Silicates for Better Dispersion in Nanocomposites; Powder-Collection System for Ultrasonic/Sonic Drill/Corer; Semiautomated, Reproducible Batch Processing of Soy; Hydrogen Peroxide Enhances Removal of NOx from Flue Gases; Subsurface Ice Probe; Real-Time Simulation of Aeroheating of the Hyper-X Airplane; Using Laser-Induced Incandescence To Measure Soot in Exhaust; Method of Real-Time Principal-Component Analysis; Insect-Inspired Flight Control for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles; Domain Compilation for Embedded Real-Time Planning; Semantic Metrics for Analysis of Software; Simulation of Laser Cooling and Trapping in Engineering Applications; Large Fluvial Fans and Exploration for Hydrocarbons; Doping-Induced Interband Gain in InAs/AlSb Quantum Wells; Development of Software for a Lidar-Altimeter Processor; Upgrading the Space Shuttle Caution and Warning System; and Fractal Reference Signals in Pulse-Width Modulation.

Source record↗

Lunar rovers and local positioning system

Telerobotic rovers equipped with adequate actuators and sensors are clearly necessary for extraterrestrial construction. They will be employed as substitutes for humans, to perform jobs like surveying, sensing, signaling, manipulating, and the handling of small materials. Important design criteria for these rovers include versatility and robustness. They must be easily programmed and reprogrammed to perform a wide variety of different functions, and they must be robust so that construction work will not be jeopardized by parts failures. The key qualities and functions necessary for these rovers to achieve the required versatility and robustness are modularity, redundancy, and coordination. Three robotic rovers are being built by CSC as a test bed to implement the concepts of modularity and coordination. The specific goal of the design and construction of these robots is to demonstrate the software modularity and multirobot control algorithms required for the physical manipulation of constructible elements. Each rover consists of a transporter platform, bus manager, simple manipulator, and positioning receivers. These robots will be controlled from a central control console via a radio-frequency local area network (LAN). To date, one prototype transporter platform frame was built with batteries, motors, a prototype single-motor controller, and two prototype internal LAN boards. Software modules were developed in C language for monitor functions, i/o, and parallel port usage in each computer board. Also completed are the fabrication of half of the required number of computer boards, the procurement of 19.2 Kbaud RF modems for inter-robot communications, and the simulation of processing requirements for positioning receivers. In addition to the robotic platform, the fabrication of a local positioning system based on infrared signals is nearly completed. This positioning system will make the rovers into a moving reference system capable of performing site surveys. In addition, a four degree mechanical manipulator especially suited for coordinated teleoperation was conceptually designed and is currently being analyzed. This manipulator will be integrated into the rovers as their end effector. Twenty internal LAN cards fabricated by a commercial firm are being used, a prototype manipulator and a range finder for a positioning system were built, a prototype two-motor controller was designed, and one of the robots is performing its first telerobotic motion. In addition, the robots' internal LAN's were coordinated and tested, hardware design upgrades based on fabrication and fit experience were completed, and the positioning system is running. The rover system is able to perform simple tasks such as sensing and signaling; coordination systems which allow construction tasks to begin were established, and soon coordinated teams of robots in the laboratory will be able to manipulate common objects.

Avery, James↗

A Notional Artemis Lunar Surface Exploration Package (ArLSEP) based on the Gandalf Staff Platform

Introduction: The Artemis program is planning to deliver crew and cargo to the lunar surface, but there is no current package for supporting lunar in-struments and experiments similar to the Apollo Lunar Surface Exploration Package (ALSEP). This abstract provides a possible concept for such a package using the Gandalf Staff Platform as a common core. Gandalf Staff: The Gandalf Staff is an early prototype system developed over FY’21/FY’22 using NASA Science Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) Center Information Fund (CIF) grants to de-sign, build and test “proof-of-concept” components. These components include a 24v battery powered monopole that powers a suite of subsystems, including a Graphical User Interface (GUI) for crew, surface voice and data communications, Lunar Search and Rescue (LunaSAR) navigation and communications, LiDAR, field site external lighting, 360-degree camera, and a geothermal instrument for measuring sub-surface temperature gradient. The staff can be carried independently by an Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA) astronaut, or can be mounted into a tripod for “hands free” support at a surface site being investigated. The staff can be attached to an external solar array and power storage system for long-duration operations. [1,2] ALSEP: An ASLEP flew on each mission Apollo 12 to Apollo 17. For Apollo 11, a simplified packaged called the Early Apollo Scientific Experiments Pack-age (EASEP) was flown. Each package included a “Central Station” that provided the power and communications connected to a variety of instruments and sensors. The power was provided by a Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator (RTG) fueled by Plutoni-um-238 generating 70 watts of power (initially, decayed over time) [3]. The communications system provide for direct to Earth data transfer from the lunar surface. Each pack-age was stowed externally in the Lunar Module (LM) Scientific Equipment (SEQ) bay with a mass up to 163 kg (Apollo 17). The crew unloaded the ALSEP from the LM and deployed the instruments on the lunar surface. Although designed to operate for only 1 year, many sites operated for up to 8 years successfully [4]. The Active Seismic Experiment (ASE) included 3 geophones for detecting seismic waves created by mortars and thumpers deployed by the crew. Other active experiments measured the lunar atmosphere, the heat flow in the subsurface, the lunar gravity and potential gravity waves, the lunar magnetic field, the solar wind and plasma interactions in cislunar space. Passive experiments included collectors for dust and cosmic rays, and retroreflectors for precise measurements of distance using a laser from Earth. The ALSEP program continues to generate insights into lunar formation and evolution. ArLSEP Concepts: The lunar surface science package for the Artemis program will hopefully exceed the capability of the ALSEP. There are multiple issues for discussion leading to the design of a new ArLSEP, needing requirements definition from the science community, NASA mission architecture, and NASA budget planners. 1. Delivery Mechanism Two possible projects currently provide capability to deliver scientific cargo to the lunar surface: 1) the Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) [5] and the Human Landing System (HLS) [6, 7]. Each project is controlled by a different organization within NASA and budgeted with different criteria although both support lunar exploration. The HLS system delivers crew (and potentially cargo) to human landing sites. If an ArLSEP is “predeployed” to such a site, the design must include power (either from the vehicle or independently) to keep the electronics functioning until deployed by the crew. If an ArLSEP is delivered on a vehicle after the crew is present on the lunar surface, safety protocols require adequate distance from the humans for impact from descent propelled sur-face regolith ejecta. This distance can not exceed the capability of the crew to walk (if no rover) to the vehicle for ArLSEP deployment. 2. Overall Guidelines The general design of ArLSEP will likely follow the ALSEP with a common system for communications and power; however, significant architecture differences between Apollo and Artemis exist. Power: The RTG will not be available for early Artemis missions nor likely follow-on Lunar Exploration Transportation Services (LETS) missions [8]. Thus, ArLSEP power must be supplied by solar arrays with sufficient battery capability to “keep alive” necessary electronics during any lunar surface eclipse period. Communication: The Artemis program is developing a series of communications satellites for lunar orbit to provide surface transmission of data and voice to Earth. Called “LunaNET”, this network is component useful for ArLSEP since south polar locations may not always have direct “line-of-sight” to Earth [9]. 3. Concept of Operations (ConOps) The general ConOps for ArLSEP is to deliver the package to lunar surface before the crew arrives, and then have the crew deploy the package after some period of time. This requires coordinated design (for power systems) and launch window (for schedule) on both the cargo and crew missions. Once the ArLSEP is deployed, it will operate autonomously for a number of years. It should be designed to be EVA compatible for crew maintenance and upgrade. 4. Notional Design (for discussion purpose only) The landing site near the South Pole is expected to have no eclipse cycle exceeding 5 days, so the “keep alive” power is 144 hours (6 days to include margin). A 12v ArLSEP will use rechargeable LiFePO4 cells, which are common in the Electric Vehicle (EV) industry. With a current of 5 amps and a 125 watt system, the mass is about 90kg. The comm. system and structure adds another 10kg, thus the “Central Station” is approximately 100kg. The solar power is collected on four arrays (each 2m above the surface), and the entire ArLSEP is designed to stow in a 2m x 1m x 1m volume. The experiment and instrument design will vary for each installation and add mass to the total (although they are expected to fit within the 2m3 volume). Seismic wave generation will likely not be provided with mortars, thus an electric “thumper” will be required. Active instruments such as imaging systems and sensing instruments will benefit from the additional power and communication capability provided by ArLSEP. Passive systems such as retroreflectors, witness plates, and cosmic dust collectors can be added to either the landing vehicle and/or the ArLSEP. With repeated HLS missions to the same human site, the ArLSEP can be expanded and easily maintained for long duration science collection on the lunar surface.

ALSEP↗

Autonomous Ocean World Exploration: Advancement of a Virtual Testbed

The search for life (extinct or extant) and potentially habitable bodies in our solar system and beyond is one of the 12 priority science questions outlined in the National Acadamies’ 2022 decadal survey [5]. Extraterrestrial destinations containing liquid water present an opportunity to search for life as we know it, and in recent years an increasing number of such locations have been discovered within our solar system. Several Jovian moons—Europa, Ganymede, and Callisto [10]—and the Saturnian moons Enceladus [8] and Titan [9] are known or suspected to harbor massive subsurface oceans. Of these "ocean worlds", Europa is the focus of at least one planned NASA orbiter mission, Europa Clipper [4], and an early lander mission concept, the Europa Lander [2, 3]. Whereas most robotic missions to the Moon and Mars (e.g. orbiters, rovers, landers) to date have had ground controllers on Earth tightly involved in mission operations, missions to more distant worlds will require a high degree of onboard autonomy due to long communication lags and blackouts, harsh environments (radiation, cold), and more limited battery and hardware life. The past decade has seen great advances in both AI technologies and computing scalability and performance that offer promising solutions for spacecraft autonomy and motivate the software system and research programs described in this paper. The Ocean Worlds Autonomy Testbed for Exploration, Research, and Simulation (OceanWATERS) [1], which has been in development at the NASA Ames Research Center since 2018, is a virtual environment for testing lander autonomy solutions. It is built on the Robot Operating System (ROS), runs on consumer-grade Linux workstations, and was released as open source in 2020. OceanWATERS provides a physical and visual simulation of a prototypical lander in a Europa-like environment (Figure 1). The lander was modeled after requirements and specifications made in JPL’s Europa Lander Study of 2016 [3]. Simulated lander systems include stereo cameras and spotlights mounted on an antenna mast that pans and tilts, a 6 degrees of freedom (DoF) robotic arm with a force-torque sensor and two interchangeable end effectors, and a battery pack power system. The environment consists of multiple terrain models including a highly detailed model sourced from the FROST dataset [11], simulation of surrounding planetary bodies based on an ephemeris model, and lighting from the sun with associated surface illumination, reflectance, and shadows. Operations supported by OceanWATERS include panoramic and directed imaging of the environment and lander workspace, Cartesian and joint-level arm commanding, grinding of the terrain surface (e.g. digging a trench), and scooping of ground material (Figure 2) which can be discarded or collected as science samples in a receptacle that can be emptied (science operations themselves are not simulated). These operations are realized as ROS Actions and are complimented by a wide selection of telemetry that is continually produced by each lander subsystem. The power system model is driven by the open-source Generic Software Architecture for Prognostics (GSAP) [11] that predicts the battery’s remaining useful life and other characteristics. As a testbed for high-level autonomy, OceanWATERS provides an execution framework based on PLEXIL [12], an open-source plan specification language and execution engine developed largely at Ames. NASA's initial development of OceanWATERS, as well the Ocean Worlds Lander Autonomy Testbed (OWLAT) [6], a complimentary physical testbed developed at JPL, was the first step in a plan for realizing candidate onboard autonomy solutions for such planetary landers. In 2020 NASA solicited applications for its Autonomous Robotics Research for Ocean Worlds (ARROW) program, and in 2021 the similar Concepts for Ocean worlds Life Detection Technology (COLDTech) program. Collectively six research teams, based in universities and companies across the United States, were awarded grants to develop and demonstrate autonomy solutions on OceanWATERS and OWLAT. These 1–2-year projects have now finished or are nearing completion, and a wide variety of autonomy challenges in ocean world surface missions were addressed. Prototyped and demonstrated solutions have included autonomous discovery, response and adaptation to system faults and unexpected environmental events, world model synthesis through perception, plan synthesis using learned models, methods to optimize sample target selection and prioritize science data transmission, extension of PLEXIL for stochastic decision-making, and an integration of a model of JPL’s mission-ready COLDArm [7]. Technologies used in these projects include many forms of machine learning, causal reasoning, automated planning, Markov decision processes, formal methods, and other advanced techniques. A more detailed summary of the ARROW and COLDTech projects is given herein. OceanWATERS has had significant enhancements since its open-source release in 2020. Many of its new features were driven or shaped by feedback from the ARROW and COLDTech teams and requirements of their projects. In support of enabling autonomous adaptation to spacecraft faults (a specific capability solicited by both programs), a fault injection and detection framework was developed that supports a wide and growing range of fault types such as locked joints, image loss, and battery failures. The power system model was completed and integrated into the simulator, starting as a single-cell battery model and later upgraded to a multi-cell model with associated faults such as cell disconnection. Arm/terrain interaction was improved by adding a force-torque sensor and associated faults, and an analytic dig force model based on the Balovnev bucket force equations. Environment fidelity was increased by modeling terrain deformation resulting from digging and scooping; visual improvements were made in textures, lighting, and shadows. To facilitate interoperation with OWLAT, a unified command and telemetry interface between the testbeds was developed at the ROS level, along with a PLEXIL interface. The number of lander operations was greatly expanded (e.g. with Cartesian-based arm and antenna movement), and a framework was designed for users to build their own lander actions. A GUI for PLEXIL plan selection was created (Figure 3), and an expansive set of plans were added, such as those that illustrate patterns for fault handling. This paper provides a self-contained high-level description of OceanWATERS, focusing on more detailed coverage of the aforementioned enhancements. It provides a high-level summary of the projects undertaken by participants in the ARROW and COLDTech programs and how these efforts have helped shape OceanWATERS. Finally, potential future work and directions for the testbed are listed, as likely informed by the recent planetary science decadal survey [5].

K Michael Dalal↗