Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “coordinated and multiple views”

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.

64 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2010

NASA Tech Briefs, March 2010

Topics covered include: Software Tool Integrating Data Flow Diagrams and Petri Nets; Adaptive Nulling for Interferometric Detection of Planets; Reducing the Volume of NASA Earth-Science Data; Reception of Multiple Telemetry Signals via One Dish Antenna; Space-Qualified Traveling-Wave Tube; Smart Power Supply for Battery-Powered Systems; Parallel Processing of Broad-Band PPM Signals; Inexpensive Implementation of Many Strain Gauges; Constant-Differential-Pressure Two-Fluid Accumulator; Inflatable Tubular Structures Rigidized with Foams; Power Generator with Thermo-Differential Modules; Mechanical Extraction of Power From Ocean Currents and Tides; Nitrous Oxide/Paraffin Hybrid Rocket Engines; Optimized Li-Ion Electrolytes Containing Fluorinated Ester Co-Solvents; Probabilistic Multi-Factor Interaction Model for Complex Material Behavior; Foldable Instrumented Bits for Ultrasonic/Sonic Penetrators; Compact Rare Earth Emitter Hollow Cathode; High-Precision Shape Control of In-Space Deployable Large Membrane/Thin-Shell Reflectors; Rapid Active Sampling Package; Miniature Lightweight Ion Pump; Cryogenic Transport of High-Pressure-System Recharge Gas; Water-Vapor Raman Lidar System Reaches Higher Altitude; Compact Ku-Band T/R Module for High-Resolution Radar Imaging of Cold Land Processes; Wide-Field-of-View, High-Resolution, Stereoscopic Imager; Electrical Capacitance Volume Tomography with High-Contrast Dielectrics; Wavefront Control and Image Restoration with Less Computing; Polarization Imaging Apparatus; Stereoscopic Machine-Vision System Using Projected Circles; Metal Vapor Arcing Risk Assessment Tool; Performance Bounds on Two Concatenated, Interleaved Codes; Parameterizing Coefficients of a POD-Based Dynamical System; Confidence-Based Feature Acquisition; Algorithm for Lossless Compression of Calibrated Hyperspectral Imagery; Universal Decoder for PPM of any Order; Algorithm for Stabilizing a POD-Based Dynamical System; Mission Reliability Estimation for Repairable Robot Teams; Processing AIRS Scientific Data Through Level 3; Web-Based Requesting and Scheduling Use of Facilities; AutoGen Version 5.0; Time-Tag Generation Script; PPM Receiver Implemented in Software; Tropospheric Emission Spectrometer Product File Readers; Reporting Differences Between Spacecraft Sequence Files; Coordinating "Execute" Data for ISS and Space Shuttle; Database for Safety-Oriented Tracking of Chemicals; Apparatus for Cold, Pressurized Biogeochemical Experiments; Growing B Lymphocytes in a Three-Dimensional Culture System; Tissue-like 3D Assemblies of Human Broncho-Epithelial Cells; Isolation of Resistance-Bearing Microorganisms; Oscillating Cell Culture Bioreactor; and Liquid Cooling/Warming Garment.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1991

A cost-effective intelligent robotic system with dual-arm dexterous coordination and real-time vision

Dexterous coordination of manipulators based on the use of redundant degrees of freedom, multiple sensors, and built-in robot intelligence represents a critical breakthrough in development of advanced manufacturing technology. A cost-effective approach for achieving this new generation of robotics has been made possible by the unprecedented growth of the latest microcomputer and network systems. The resulting flexible automation offers the opportunity to improve the product quality, increase the reliability of the manufacturing process, and augment the production procedures for optimizing the utilization of the robotic system. Moreover, the Advanced Robotic System (ARS) is modular in design and can be upgraded by closely following technological advancements as they occur in various fields. This approach to manufacturing automation enhances the financial justification and ensures the long-term profitability and most efficient implementation of robotic technology. The new system also addresses a broad spectrum of manufacturing demand and has the potential to address both complex jobs as well as highly labor-intensive tasks. The ARS prototype employs the decomposed optimization technique in spatial planning. This technique is implemented to the framework of the sensor-actuator network to establish the general-purpose geometric reasoning system. The development computer system is a multiple microcomputer network system, which provides the architecture for executing the modular network computing algorithms. The knowledge-based approach used in both the robot vision subsystem and the manipulation control subsystems results in the real-time image processing vision-based capability. The vision-based task environment analysis capability and the responsive motion capability are under the command of the local intelligence centers. An array of ultrasonic, proximity, and optoelectronic sensors is used for path planning. The ARS currently has 18 degrees of freedom made up by two articulated arms, one movable robot head, and two charged coupled device (CCD) cameras for producing the stereoscopic views, and articulated cylindrical-type lower body, and an optional mobile base. A functional prototype is demonstrated.

Marzwell, Neville I.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Risk of Performance and Behavioral Health Decrements Due to Inadequate Cooperation, Coordination, Communication, and Psychosocial Adaptation within a Team

A team is defined as: "two or more individuals who interact socially and adaptively, have shared or common goals, and hold meaningful task interdependences; it is hierarchically structured and has a limited life span; in it expertise and roles are distributed; and it is embedded within an organization/environmental context that influences and is influenced by ongoing processes and performance outcomes" (Salas, Stagl, Burke, & Goodwin, 2007, p. 189). From the NASA perspective, a team is commonly understood to be a collection of individuals that is assigned to support and achieve a particular mission. Thus, depending on context, this definition can encompass both the spaceflight crew and the individuals and teams in the larger multi-team system who are assigned to support that crew during a mission. The Team Risk outcomes of interest are predominantly performance related, with a secondary emphasis on long-term health; this is somewhat unique in the NASA HRP in that most Risk areas are medically related and primarily focused on long-term health consequences. In many operational environments (e.g., aviation), performance is assessed as the avoidance of errors. However, the research on performance errors is ambiguous. It implies that actions may be dichotomized into "correct" or "incorrect" responses, where incorrect responses or errors are always undesirable. Researchers have argued that this dichotomy is a harmful oversimplification, and it would be more productive to focus on the variability of human performance and how organizations can manage that variability (Hollnagel, Woods, & Leveson, 2006) (Category III1). Two problems occur when focusing on performance errors: 1) the errors are infrequent and, therefore, difficult to observe and record; and 2) the errors do not directly correspond to failure. Research reveals that humans are fairly adept at correcting or compensating for performance errors before such errors result in recognizable or recordable failures. Astronauts are notably adept high performers. Most failures are recorded only when multiple, small errors occur and humans are unable to recognize and correct or compensate for these errors in time to prevent a failure (Dismukes, Berman, Loukopoulos, 2007) (Category III). More commonly, observers record variability in levels of performance. Some teams commit no observable errors but fail to achieve performance objectives or perform only adequately, while other teams commit some errors but perform spectacularly. Successful performance, therefore, cannot be viewed as simply the absence of errors or the avoidance of failure Johnson Space Center (JSC) Joint Leadership Team, 2008). While failure is commonly attributed to making a major error, focusing solely on the elimination of error(s) does not significantly reduce the risk of failure. Failure may also occur when performance is simply insufficient or an effort is incapable of adjusting sufficiently to a contextual change (e.g., changing levels of autonomy).

Landon, Lauren Blackwell↗
NASA NTRS1997

A Cognitive System Model for Human/Automation Dynamics in Airspace Management

NASA has initiated a significant thrust of research and development focused on providing the flight crew and air traffic managers automation aids to increase capacity in en route and terminal area operations through the use of flexible, more fuel-efficient routing, while improving the level of safety in commercial carrier operations. In that system development, definition of cognitive requirements for integrated multi-operator dynamic aiding systems is fundamental. In order to support that cognitive function definition, we have extended the Man Machine Integrated Design and Analysis System (MIDAS) to include representation of multiple cognitive agents (both human operators and intelligent aiding systems) operating aircraft, airline operations centers and air traffic control centers in the evolving airspace. The demands of this application require representation of many intelligent agents sharing world-models, and coordinating action/intention with cooperative scheduling of goals and actions in a potentially unpredictable world of operations. The MIDAS operator models have undergone significant development in order to understand the requirements for operator aiding and the impact of that aiding in the complex nondeterminate system of national airspace operations. The operator model's structure has been modified to include attention functions, action priority, and situation assessment. The cognitive function model has been expanded to include working memory operations including retrieval from long-term store, interference, visual-motor and verbal articulatory loop functions, and time-based losses. The operator's activity structures have been developed to include prioritization and interruption of multiple parallel activities among multiple operators, to provide for anticipation (knowledge of the intention and action of remote operators), and to respond to failures of the system and other operators in the system in situation-specific paradigms. The model's internal representation has been be modified so that multiple, autonomous sets of equipment will function in a scenario as the single equipment sets do now. In order to support the analysis requirements with multiple items of equipment, it is necessary for equipment to access the state of other equipment objects at initialization time (a radar object may need to access the position and speed of aircraft in its area, for example), and as a function of perception and sensor system interaction. The model has been improved to include multiple world-states as a function of equipment am operator interaction. The model has been used -1o predict the impact of warning and alert zones in aircraft operation, and, more critic-ally, the interaction of flight-deck based warning mechanisms and air traffic controller action in response to ground-based conflict prediction and alerting systems. In this operation, two operating systems provide alerting to two autonomous, but linked sets of operators, whose view of the system and whose dynamics in response are radically different. System stability and operator action was predicted using the MIDAS model.

Corker, Kevin M.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Monitoring Airspace Complexity and Determining Contributing Factors

The national airspace has evolved over many years to accommodate increased traffic demand [1] while simultaneously maintaining one of the safest forms of transportation [2], [3]. One of the reasons for this success is the ability of the system and the operators to adapt and accommodate to situations that routinely disrupt optimal operations. These situations may include: adverse weather, delays, early arrivals, equipment outages, and other factors that are outside the operators ability to control. These factors can lead to states where automation is unable to properly handle these issues and therefore air traffic controllers and pilots have to intervene, ultimately increasing communication between operators resulting in higher workload. As controller workload increases to handle sub-optimal operating conditions this can be viewed as an increase in complexity. The reasoning for this is because humans are now required to make tactical decisions in response to external factors, resulting in a departure from the strategic plan where operations would be more efficiently managed. Human operators control airspace complexity under rigid regulations that are constantly changing. The airspace is divided into sectors and the number of aircraft assigned to each controller is limited for safe handling. There has been past work that devised airspace complexity metrics in commercial aviation and related these metrics to controller workload (e.g., [4],[5]). The upper bounds on the system load are pre-determined. Such bounds on complexity make for a safe system, but the system cannot scale and adapt to autonomous, dense, and heterogeneous traffic, including the many types of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) envisioned to be added to the operations. We hypothesize that, as traffic density and heterogeneity grow, and other key metrics change, there will be phase transitions at which the way traffic should be managed changes significantly [6]. We offer a method for in-time detection of contributing factors that lead to phase transitions, characterized by increased complexity. To the best of our knowledge, there is no tool similar to our proposed effort that identifies such contributing factors or precursor patterns. To define the scope we are proposing to measure complexity from the viewpoint of the Terminal Radar Approach Control Facilities (TRACON) controller’s perspective. In particular we are analyzing arrivals into KSFO. With safety as the top concern for airspace operators, it is important to recognize that as density and heterogeneity grow, the focus of the system will change. Times of the day when the airspace has low density and heterogeneity, the flights will follow more efficient paths where the aircraft move on established routes that are more or less directly to the destination. However, when density and heterogeneity increases, the system will begin changing focus to avoiding conflicts and collisions and route the flights in a more flexible way. Higher flexibility requires more communication and coordination between controllers and pilots which the current automation is unable to handle. This paper proposes a novel approach that monitors airspace complexity at multiple scales, uses a Machine Learning-based tool that predicts when operations will transition to a regime of greater complexity, and identifies actions that can reduce the complexity while still maintaining efficient and safe operations. We demonstrate our proposed approach using data from multiple complementary sources. This includes, but is not limited to: historical aircraft surveillance data from NASA’s Sherlock Data Warehouse [7], METAR weather data, and airport configuration data from Aviation System Performance Metrics (ASPM). The surveillance data flight paths are sampled at a variable sample rate — increasing as the aircraft approaches the airport. This is due to how Sherlock manages flight track stitching between different radar facilities which have different sampling rates. The weather and performance data are logged at defined intervals throughout the day at a courser refresh rate. In addition to the logged data and metrics, we leverage pre-defined Standard Terminal Arrival Routes (STARs) procedures to characterize the path of each flight. Each flight files for one of these routes in the flight plan well before entering the terminal airspace, and approximately follows the route until it leaves the STAR, typically on the final fix of a runway transition. However, most flights do not always fly the full STAR procedure to completion [8], but the majority do adhere to the fixes within the common route of the procedure. Our approach leverages fixes in the common route of each of the STARs to build a reference path to the airport. This allows us to characterize the flight paths in what we are defining as the “maneuvering area” (the airspace between the STAR and before the flight is lined up on the runway’s final approach) to determine how off nominal the flights are to calculate its complexity score. Determining airspace complexity is a concept that does not have a concrete answer. In designing this metric, we consider what increases the workload for the air traffic controllers. Consequently more specialized vectoring maneuvers results in higher workload. Accordingly, we start with a theory: each flight has a direct path it takes from the STAR’s common route to the final approach’s outer marker fix for the flight’s landing runway. It is important to note that the direct path is only used as a reference. If the majority of the flights have a large consistent offset as compared to other routes it does not necessarily mean that those flights have higher complexity. We are merely building a distribution based on this direct path for that particular STAR and runway pair to determine the normal mode of operations for that route. Flights that are in the upper tail of these distributions will result in higher complexity scores and flights that fly in the median will represent the normal mode of operations and therefore will have lower complexity scores. Since flights following each STAR route take different paths to the airport, we have a different distribution for each STAR route and therefore can model these distributions to compute a complexity score from their respective normalized distributions. To evaluate the effectiveness of our proposed airspace complexity metric we will compare against an established approach based on trajectory clustering [9]. This unsupervised learning technique consists of the following steps: (1) identify the general maneuvering areas (waypoints) by performing $\kappa$-means or DBSCAN clustering on locations where aircraft frequently turn based on the surveillance radar track data, (2) map flight trajectories onto sequences of waypoints, and (3) cluster the sequences based on their common subsequences. From a high-level perspective, this baseline model learns nominal operations in the airspace through the sequence of waypoints that are representative of where aircraft change direction and defines deviations from the nominal operations as “complex.” Therefore, more deviations from the nominal operations correspond to higher complexity values. For our validation, we re-implemented this technique and tune model hyper-parameters to correctly detect waypoints for the arrival traffic into the San Francisco bay area. We will compute the complexity measure over a one-year period using our proposed technique as well as the baseline. Our validation will be based on each technique’s ability to detect a set of undesirable outcomes (e.g., go-arounds, holding patterns, average time in the airspace, etc.). Since our current complexity metric is derived from the offset from the direct reference path, it’s important to understand what causes these offsets. In many of the flights with high offset distance, flights performing holding patterns and S turns can be observed. These maneuvering tactics are utilized to add distance between the aircraft and the destination runway to prevent multiple flights from having conflicting arrival times. In order to predict a rise in complexity (or the precursor to complexity), it’s necessary to be able to identify these potential conflicts (which in turn, result in higher offsets). To do this, we define a “representative flight” for each STAR route and runway pair. This flight is approximately the path the flight would take if there was a clear path with no other flights in the airspace — including the time remaining to the airport. We first identify the flights for a given STAR runway pair using the offset to the reference path distributions that fall between the 44-55 percentiles. This yields the flights that conform to the most normal mode of operation. Each of these flights is partitioned based on the percent complete from the entry point into the maneuvering areas from 0\% – 100\% complete. Then for each percent “bin”, we take the median value of the flight’s latitude/longitude coordinates, airspeed, and (non causal) time remaining to the airport to construct a lookup table for each percent complete bin on a given route. As a flight enters the maneuvering area, we can find the estimated arrival time of a flight to the airport by finding the closest point to the representative path’s percent complete bin (relative to the flight’s current position at any snapshot in the airspace) and therefore retrieve the corresponding remaining time left on the “representative path”. We assume that the flight will follow the representative path to completion when deriving these estimates. We can then compare these estimated arrival times against other flights for the same snapshot in time to identify potential conflicts. If more flights are estimated to arrive within a tolerance window than there are runways available, then we have a potential conflict. We can use this derived measure along with other factors expected to add disruption to the operation such as weather and runway configuration changes as an input to machine learning tools to detect precursors that increases in our complexity measure. This novel method will assist in uncovering insights into the contributing factors that lead to increased complexity that may allow for in-time responses to avoid reaching a high complexity state in the airspace.

complexity↗
DOE OSTI2026

Shock wave formation in the thermosphere by an earthgrazing fireball: Empirical evidence for volatile-enhanced hydrodynamic shielding

Hydrodynamic shielding is a theoretically well-established but observationally elusive and experimentally difficult-to-replicate phenomenon with implications that extend far beyond meteor physics. Rare earthgrazing meteoroids with infrasound signatures that penetrate to the ground can be used to probe hydrodynamic shielding that leads to strong shock formation at high altitude. Here, we report the first coordinated optical and multi-station infrasound observations of a centimeter-scale earthgrazing fireball that generated sustained cylindrical line shock at thermospheric altitudes near 92 km. The event was recorded by numerous optical stations and three infrasound arrays, allowing trajectory reconstruction, ablation behavior, acoustic source localization, and shock characteristics. Optical observations indicate early mechanical erosion and ablation/evaporation at exceptionally low dynamic pressure, consistent with a cometary or a porous, volatile-bearing CM chondritic object. Independent infrasound detections localize shock generation to multiple points along a 164 km trajectory segment near perigee. Weak-shock modeling yields a consistent blast radius of ∼30 m, implying an acoustic-equivalent source size far exceeding the physical dimensions of the ∼45 g nucleus. We demonstrate that classical gas dynamics and ablation-driven hydrodynamic shielding alone cannot account for these observations under ambient thermospheric conditions. We show that volatile release provides the additional flow-field density enhancement required to amplify hydrodynamic shielding, reduce the effective local Knudsen number, and sustain a shock envelope capable of radiating detectable infrasound. Furthermore, these results demonstrate that small, volatile-rich meteoroids can transiently establish continuum-like flow in rarefied environments.

Astrometry↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Genesis Solar Wind Sample Curation Documentation

Introduction: A scientist with experience as a sample science analyst, provider of flight hardware for multiple missions, and senior engineer in an ISO 2000-rated manufacturing plant has described the timeline of key participants in any PI-led sample return mission, the breadth of the organizations involved [1,2], and, of interest to this meeting, choosing the types of data to preserve and issues of future data accessibility. This work broadens that perspective by giving similar lessons from Genesis sample curation point-of-view. Curation participation regarding data gathering was part of the mission review process from the beginning. Genesis’ story illustrates outcome of several choices about types of data to record and preserve. Precision analysis of solar wind atoms captured in pure, ultraclean substrates is the driving science goal; therefore, detailed documentation was captured from all mission and curation phases and from investigator laboratories because these processes affect the final analytical results [3]. Pre-flight: Design and fabrication of the spacecraft. Like many modern small sample return missions, Genesis was a tightly managed team integrated across science, engineering and curation. Communication across the team was excellent, and, for the most part, the hands-on engineering technicians understood the impacts of “small choices” they routinely make, and the eyes-on oversight of manufacturing processes by scientists was mindful of details. The payload was designed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory and the spacecraft by Lockheed Martin. Solar wind collectors and instruments were fabricated by multiple vendors and laboratories. The main portion of the payload was assembled at JSC. Fabrication procedures and contamination-control data (with witness coupons) were stored primarily at JSC. The original composition, dimensions and configuration of components, results of thermal testing, etc. are still needed for interpretation of analytical data. At times, these must be estimated from secondary information acquired pre-flight. Moreover, some files (e.g., original 3-D models and early Powerpoint) cannot be opened using software. Archived curation data includes 2-D drawings, material usage lists, QA documentation and analyses of consumables used during fabrication. Important chemical information still resides in archived hardware, paints and lubricants, material coupons, cleaning coupons, environmental witness plates and reference materials from manufacturing facilities. Purity and cleanliness of collector substrates. Semi-conductor vendors provided surface cleanliness data and some purity data. Purity for specific elements of interest was verified by science team members in their laboratories [4]. Curation archived procurement and shipping records, analysis reports, and non-proprietary fabrication data. A physical archive of flight collector reference materials is maintained for future use so additional data can be collected as analytical techniques improve. These are of increased value due to the hard landing upon re-entry. Cleaning and cleanliness assessments of flight hardware. Cleaning of the science canister payload was performed at JSC in a dedicated ISO 4 cleanroom using ultrapure water (UPW). The cleanliness of this UPW was monitored throughout processing. The archive for the clean lab also includes airborne particle counts, airborne molecular and inorganic contamination measurements as well as cleanroom construction material coupons and witness coupons. Hardware cleanliness was assessed by particle counts in rinse water batches. This information is recorded in batch cleaning forms and logbooks, and are, perhaps, of decreased value due to the hard landing. Post-flight: Curation-generated data. The curation handling history of each Genesis sample is documented in a typical astromaterials sample database which captures sample location, physical description and characterization data. Samples have a “shelf life”. Crucial to the preservation of samples is ongoing documentation of the sample environment, initially under curatorial control but is now a separate facility function with requires coordination. PI-generated data. Data on sample characterization and cleaning techniques continues to be generated by sample users [5]. These are often captured in LPSC abstracts, but these “engineering” results often are not publishable as stand-alone papers. We are actively looking for ways to make this information more accessible to users. Ion implants into samples have aided science return and can be shared among investigators. These (and similar) materials should be added to the curatorial collection with appropriate process and characterization data generated externally. Summary: Complete data archives for returned astromaterial samples must be broad in types and formats, and inclusive of environmental monitoring.

Genesis↗
NASA NTRS2014

International Space Station Data Collection for Disaster Response

Natural disasters - including such events as tropical storms, earthquakes, floods, volcanic eruptions, and wildfires -effect hundreds of millions of people worldwide, and also cause billions of dollars (USD) in damage to the global economy. Remotely sensed data acquired by orbital sensor systems has emerged as a vital tool to identify the extent of damage resulting from a natural disaster, as well as providing near-real time mapping support to response efforts on the ground and humanitarian aid efforts. The International Space Station (ISS) is a unique terrestrial remote sensing platform for acquiring disaster response imagery. Unlike automated remote-sensing platforms it has a human crew; is equipped with both internal and externally-mounted remote sensing instruments; and has an inclined, low-Earth orbit that provides variable views and lighting (day and night) over 95 percent of the inhabited surface of the Earth. As such, it provides a useful complement to free-flyer based, sun-synchronous sensor systems in higher altitude polar orbits. While several nations have well-developed terrestrial remote sensing programs and assets for data collection, many developing nations do not have ready access to such resources. The International Charter, Space and Major Disasters (also known as the "International Disaster Charter", or IDC; http://www.disasterscharter.org/home) addresses this disparity. It is an agreement between agencies of several countries to provide - on a best-effort basis - remotely sensed data of natural disasters to requesting countries in support of disaster response. The lead US agency for interaction with the IDC is the United States Geological Survey (USGS); when an IDC request or "activation" is received, the USGS notifies the science teams for NASA instruments with targeting information for data collection. In the case of the ISS, the Earth Sciences and Remote Sensing (ESRS) Unit, part of the Astromaterials Research and Exploration Science Directorate and supporting the ISS Program Science Office at NASA's Johnson Space Center, receives notification from the USGS and coordinates targeting and data collection with the NASA ISS sensor teams. If data is collected, it is passed back to the USGS for posting on their Hazards Data Distribution System and made available for download. The ISS International Partners (CSA, ESA, JAXA, Roscosmos/Energia) have their own procedures for independently supporting IDC activations using their assets on ISS, and there is currently no joint coordination with NASA ISS sensor teams. Following completion of ISS assembly, NASA remote sensing assets began collecting IDC response data in May 2012. The initial NASA ISS sensor systems available to respond to IDC activations included the ISS Agricultural Camera (ISSAC), an internal multispectral visible-near infrared wavelength system mounted in the Window Observational Research Facility, or WORF; the Crew Earth Observations (CEO) Facility, where the crew collects imagery through Station windows using off-the-shelf handheld digital visible-wavelength cameras; and the Hyperspectral Imager for the Coastal Oceans (HICO), a visible to near-infrared system mounted externally on the Japan Experiment Module Exposed Facility. The ISSAC completed its primary mission and was removed from the WORF in January 2013. It was replaced by the very high resolution ISS SERVIR Environmental Research and Visualization System (ISERV) Pathfinder, a visible-wavelength digital camera, telescope, and pointing system. Since the start of IDC response by NASA sensors on the ISS in May 2012 and as of this report, there have been eighty IDC activations; NASA sensor systems have collected data for twenty-three of these events. Of the twenty-three successful data collections, five involved 2 or more ISS sensor systems responding to the same event. Data has also been collected by International Partners in response to natural disasters, most notably JAXA and Roscosmos/Energia through the Urugan program. Data collected in response to IDC activations is delivered by the ISS sensor teams to the ESRS for quality review and transfer to the USGS, where it is ingested into the Hazards Data Distribution System, or HDDS (https://hdds.usgs.gov/hdds2/; figure 1). This system allows the local agencies that issued the IDC activation request to review and download data. The data is then used to develop secondary products useful for humanitarian response such as flood maps. As of this report, approximately 1000 images collected by NASA ISS sensor systems have been downloaded from the HDDS, indicating that the ISS has assumed a valuable role in disaster response efforts. The ISS is also a unique platform in that it will have multiple users over its lifetime, and that no single remote sensing system has a permanent internal or external berth. This scheduled turnover provides for development of new remote sensing capabilities relevant to disaster response -as well as both research and applied science-and represents a significant contribution to continuance and enhancement of the NASA mission to investigate changes on our home planet.

Stefanov, William L.↗
DOE OSTI2023

S4PST: Sustainability for Programming Systems and Tools: May Workshop Report

The US Department of Energy (DOE) Exascale Computing Project (ECP) has fostered and strengthened the use of modern software engineering practices for developing applications and libraries, and this effort has resulted in the coordinated and interoperable E4S1 and xSDK2 ecosystems. Although this approach is cost-effective, it relies on robust programming systems and tools (PST) as the underlying foundation for our HPC software. At present, our primary PST stack consists of traditional high-performance computing (HPC) languages, namely Fortran, C, C++, and the popular Python language for data analysis and AI workflows. These languages support various programming frameworks and run-time abstractions that enable parallelism and concurrency across multiple node architectures and thousands of nodes through a variety of interconnect systems. However, to accommodate users’ diverse needs, certain aspects of the HPC ecosystem are delegated to vendor-specific or third-party implementations that extend beyond a particular scientific domain. This broader scope results in a multitude of specifications and variations, which leads to a complex orchestration of many-ecosystems. Unfortunately, this complexity in the ecosystem imposes additional overhead costs on consumers during the latter stages of the development cycle. In addition to the software ecosystem challenge, the upcoming conclusion of the ECP by December 2023 has raised significant concerns within the HPC programming systems community, from both the economic and social perspectives. The ECP has implemented a management structure for software development and funding decisions across all ECP participants by following a conventional hierarchical and centralized approach. However, this structure has prompted certain considerations within the community, particularly in anticipation of the Software Sustainability initiative by the DOE’s Advanced Scientific Computing Research Program (ASCR). For the success of this new initiative, it is of utmost importance to secure consistent funding and foster close engagement with researchers and core developers of existing programming-system products. This collaboration is vital to maintaining the critical capabilities of the current software during the transition phase while proactively adapting to future technology and workforce trends. The community recognizes the significance of adapting to emerging trends and is aware of the inherent fragility of the HPC software ecosystem, particularly in relation to programming systems that cater to all users. The ability to adapt and evolve is essential to staying relevant and effectively addressing these technical, economic, and social challenges. The S4PST team, which represents one of the six ASCR Software Sustainability seedling projects, is dedicated to tackling these challenges through community-based approaches that go beyond the scope of the DOE. This involves collaboration between national laboratories with academia, non-DOE institutions, hardware and system vendors, and international partners. By fostering these partnerships, we aim to create a robust and sustainable HPC software ecosystem that can effectively meet the needs of the community. This new community effort, driven by the eight DOE labs, will take on the responsibility of guiding funding decisions for programming-systems development and maintenance with transparency and consistency across all decisions. Additionally, the team will offer common technical services to the programming systems community, irrespective of their funding situations, and facilitate community-wide incubation to proactively nurture the software ecosystem. By actively engaging with stakeholders and employing a collaborative approach, we can collectively shape the future of programming systems and ensure a robust and thriving HPC software landscape. On May 11–12, 2023, the S4PST team conducted its inaugural kick-off workshop at the Innovative Computing Laboratory (ICL) in the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, hosted by Hartwig Anzt. The workshop encompassed various sessions dedicated to presentations and discussions, with the aim of comprehending the team members’ perspectives on the vision of software sustainability. Additionally, the workshop aimed to identify the technical, economic, and social requirements for sustaining the programming-systems community in the field of HPC. This report provides a summary of the S4PST effort by highlighting five major thrust areas discussed during the workshop: (i) community, (ii) technical support, (iii) training and diversity, (iv) verification, validation and correctness, and (v) emerging technologies. It also encompasses an overview of the presentations and discussions held throughout the event, our views and potential synergies with other seedling efforts, along with the outcomes and key takeaways from our initial discussions.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Investigating Low-Altitude Constellations of Ad-Hoc Lunar PNT System for Distributed Spacecraft Autonomy

In this study, we examine a low-altitude Lunar Position, Navigation, and Timing (LPNT) constellations and the localization performance of Centralized Extended Kalman Filter (CEKF) and Decentralized Extended Kalman Filter (DEKF) algorithms. The primary investigation involves a 100-node swarm operating at a 100 km altitude, in contrast to previous studies that examined a 21-node asset in a frozen-orbit at 5,500 km. The autonomous operation of large-scale swarm is based on two-way Inter-Satellite Link (ISL) measurements, which involve pseudoranges and relative velocities among swarm nodes. We perform a numerical assessment of the two filtering approaches, utilizing ‘fully sampled’ measurements from all available assets as well as ‘two ISL’ measurements where each spacecraft is restricted to only two antennas. This research includes an analysis of CEKF under 2-ISL constraints and evaluates the performance of DEKF in a 100-node swarm, which has not been explored in previous studies. In addition, we examine the impact of increasing the sampling frequency for DEKF, showing that the update cycle can be shortened from a 10-minute interval. A novel approach for ‘2-ISL limited’ DEKF will also be introduced, using a matching formulation that exhaustively enumerates all potential matches. This study provides valuable insights into large-scale distributed swarm operations, considering various filter configurations, sampling frequencies, matching strategies, and scalability of CEKF and DEKF for low-altitude LPNT applications. The Lunar PNT technology plays a key role in providing reliable and robust navigation services on the Moon's surface and the South pole, where the primary Lunar missions are planned. To support upcoming Lunar missions, including small satellites from NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services program, the Lunar PNT system must be adaptable to smaller platforms like CubeSats. Driven by the growing involvement of public and private exploration partnerships, the traditional low Earth orbit missions are shifting to beyond geosynchronous orbit [1]. These upcoming missions aim to foster a sustainable and innovative exploration program, in collaboration with commercial and international partners, to facilitate human expansion throughout the solar system and return new knowledge and opportunities to Earth [2]. As part of this trend, there are increasing efforts to utilize science missions in Lunar orbit to develop a non-dedicated and ad-hoc PNT network system. Two traditional approaches, the Deep Space Network (DSN) and the weak signal Global Positioning System (GPS), are established deep-space navigation technologies for missions beyond the geosynchronous orbit. Beginning in 1958, the DSN was developed to communicate with the Explorer 1 spacecraft based on the use of radiometric tracking in spacecraft navigation [3]. The DSN is capable of providing nearly unfettered coverage to spacecraft beyond low-Earth orbit (LEO), however, increased space mission volume has created concerns about future expectations of DSN usage for spacecraft navigation [4]. For cislunar mission applications, the position accuracy using DSN achieves 100 m (3σ) with at least three geometrically diverse ground stations when using radiometric tracking alone [5]. The DSN's dependence on Earth-based ground stations restricts its operational capabilities to periods of Earth visibility. This limitation, coupled with its poor localization performance, renders the DSN unsuitable for future lunar missions that demand continuous tracking and precise positioning. To satisfy the increasing requirements of DSN in Lunar applications, spacecrafts are also required to improve their onboard antenna power and efficiency of the transmission. However, there is an important aggregate cost trade between adding capabilities to every spacecraft and adding to a capacity on the ground that serves multiple spacecraft [6]. A weak GPS system can provide PNT service while the user spacecraft is bound to the Moon, leveraging a single, steerable high gain antenna with the relatively narrow beam which includes all the sources in its field of view [7]. However, the higher the altitude the receiver is above the GPS constellations, the poorer and the weaker are the relative geometry and the received signal powers, respectively, leading to a significant navigation accuracy reduction [8]. The transmitted power becomes weaker with increasing distance from the Earth as well as signals tracked from one of the side lobes of the GPS antenna pattern. As a results, the number of visible satellites and relative geometric condition of the GPS satellites at very high altitude drops dramatically and reduces the navigation solution accuracy. Therefore, the weak GPS system is also not an ideal way to provide PNT service to upcoming Lunar missions when considering its limited geometric condition and the recued navigation accuracy. Another navigation approach on the Moon is being developed, similar to the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) on Earth, aiming to offer navigation service with continuous 24/7 coverage across the entire Lunar surface. For example, lunar communications relay and navigation systems (LCRNS) by NASA and Lunar navigation satellite systems (LNSS) by JAXA are designed to serve as dedicated Position, Navigation, and Timing (PNT) systems for the Moon. However, designing a dedicated LNSS and PNT service involves additional challenges, which are unique to the lunar environment, including limited payload capacity for the CubeSat platform, i.e., the size, weight, and power (SWaP) of the onboard clock, limited lunar ground monitoring stations, and limited financial investment as compared to the legacy Earth-GPS [9]. NASA’s focus on utilizing CubeSat platforms on the Moon leads to an alternative Lunar navigation platform that leverages the existing Lunar science and exploration assets. The small satellites used in Lunar missions can be used to create a low-cost, autonomous, ad-hoc, and on-demand mission-centric Lunar PNT swarm capable of providing PNT services to these low-cost lunar missions [10]. As upcoming Lunar missions will often operate at low-altitude about 30 km to 100 km for scientific observations and mapping purposes, the low-altitude orbital constellations could be employed to create an ad-hoc Lunar PNT system. However, several issues must be addressed, such as the instability of these orbits, which often require maintenance or are only suitable for short-duration missions, operating for fewer than 90 days. Additionally, at an altitude of 100 km, the satellites have a limited period during which they are above the horizon and capable of providing PNT service to users. The implementation of a non-dedicated, ad-hoc Lunar navigation constellation facilitates on-demand PNT services. A preliminary study of ad-hoc Lunar PNT system was conducted using 21 spacecraft in 5,5000 km altitude frozen orbits to test its feasibility and a basic performance of orbital asset localization among ad-hoc Lunar constellations in small satellites format [10]. These swarm assets are designed for autonomous localization with minimal Earth interaction, reducing dependency on bandwidth and ground resources. The design in [10] demonstrated the feasibility of a decentralized PNT approach, specifically employing a DEKF approach for state estimation, which helps minimize onboard operating costs. The DEKF method distributes computation across individual satellites, which lightens the computational load while maintaining accuracy in orbit ephemeris and clock offsets, similar to centralized systems [11]. In a follow-on study [12], each spacecraft was limited to 2 communications antennae, forcing the selection of measurements and scheduling spacecraft activities to perform the measurements. A matching algorithm is implemented to select the best measurements and schedule position estimation updates. The decentralized localization performance is also investigated with increasing levels of network degradation for swarm assets considering the impact of intermittent and permanent communication failure, to demonstrate the robustness and fidelity of the decentralized Lunar PNT service [13]. This study confirmed that the ad-hoc PNT constellations in frozen orbit are highly robust and resilient to communication failures. However, unlike frozen orbit swarm assets, the low-altitude satellites have a limited ground view at an altitude of 100 km, where the ad-hoc Lunar constellation consists of 98 low-altitude satellites, evenly distributed across seven circular polar orbital planes, alongside two satellites in a frozen orbit at an altitude of 5,500 km (Figure 1). Therefore, the number of satellites visible to ground users is significantly limited in low-altitude orbit constellations. As each visibility of a spacecraft remains intact for only a few ticks before it moves out of the field of view, the ground user encounters challenges in maintaining continuous navigation service, resulting in sparse availability and provision of Lunar PNT system. Consequently, service availability is primarily restricted to the Lunar South Pole region (Figure 2). Given these limitations and concerns, the localization performance of low-altitude swarm assets will be assessed in this study. We focus on the investigation of the localization performance of low-altitude swarm assets and ground users near the Lunar South Pole. The overall flow of the Lunar PNT simulation incorporates the DEKF approach of asset localization and the weighted least-squares approach in user localization (Figure 3). The autonomous Lunar PNT simulation is primarily implemented in MATLAB, where the DEKF based on the matching scheduler is implemented with Google’s OR-tools as a model builder and Gurobi optimization tool as a backend solver. The General Mission Analysis Tool (GMAT) is utilized to generate ephemeris data for swarm assets, and accounts for satellite orbital details, mass, and perturbations like solar radiation pressure and drag coefficients. Each ephemeris dataset is produced in the Moon International Celestial Reference Frame (ICRF) inertial coordinate system. For state estimation, the distributed swarm assets rely on two-way Inter-Satellite Link (ISL) measurements, which involve tracking pseudoranges and relative velocities between visible satellites and anchor nodes during each observation. Numerical evaluations of the decentralized localization process are conducted to demonstrate the feasibility of the low-altitude PNT system in providing reliable navigation services. The main approach involves using DEKF and CEKF to localize 100 satellites in low-altitude constellations, where the CEKF is implemented to serve as a baseline for comparing the performance of distributed algorithms. In both cases, we evaluate ‘fully sampled’ measurements from all available assets, and ‘two ISL’ measurements when spacecraft are constrained to have only two antennas. We test four estimation techniques: CEKF fully sampled, CEKF two ISL, DEKF fully sampled, and DEKF two ISL filters. As the DEKF update cycle is comprised of network setup, communication, and computations, a global broadcast network and 2-way ISL network setup will take from 4 to 6 minutes as maximum [12]. In this simulation, the DEKF update cycle is set to 10 minutes, including a 4-minute latency for obtaining and computing the actual measurement updates. We experiment an increased update cycle to demonstrate the feasibility and evaluate the impact on localization performance using various tuning values for measurement noise covariances (Figures 4 and 5). By comparing centralized and decentralized approaches using a matching algorithm, we analyze the influence of cross-correlation factors in the covariance matrix, assuming 100% reliability of all assets and measurements. The increased frequency and the adjustments of tuning parameters reveal distinct error patterns between the two scenarios. The localization accuracy of the swarm assets and ground users is assessed by taking the median error across 100 assets and one ground user (84.9°S, 137.5°E) over 7-day simulation period (Table 1). Since the user localization accuracy is significantly affected by the performance of the swarm assets, it is crucial to maintain high localization accuracy within the swarm. This study will continue to explore decentralized filtering for autonomous LPNT operations, with further investigation of an 'iterative' matching approach which enumerates every valid matching pair, planned for the following month.

Yeji Kim↗