Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “robotic architecture planning execution”

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.

65 records · Page 4

Towards an Open, Distributed Software Architecture for UxS Operations

To address the growing need to evaluate, test, and certify an ever expanding ecosystem of UxS platforms in preparation of cultural integration, NASA Langley Research Center's Autonomy Incubator (AI) has taken on the challenge of developing a software framework in which UxS platforms developed by third parties can be integrated into a single system which provides evaluation and testing, mission planning and operation, and out-of-the-box autonomy and data fusion capabilities. This software framework, named AEON (Autonomous Entity Operations Network), has two main goals. The first goal is the development of a cross-platform, extensible, onboard software system that provides autonomy at the mission execution and course-planning level, a highly configurable data fusion framework sensitive to the platform's available sensor hardware, and plug-and-play compatibility with a wide array of computer systems, sensors, software, and controls hardware. The second goal is the development of a ground control system that acts as a test-bed for integration of the proposed heterogeneous fleet, and allows for complex mission planning, tracking, and debugging capabilities. The ground control system should also be highly extensible and allow plug-and-play interoperability with third party software systems. In order to achieve these goals, this paper proposes an open, distributed software architecture which utilizes at its core the Data Distribution Service (DDS) standards, established by the Object Management Group (OMG), for inter-process communication and data flow. The design decisions proposed herein leverage the advantages of existing robotics software architectures and the DDS standards to develop software that is scalable, high-performance, fault tolerant, modular, and readily interoperable with external platforms and software.

Cross, Charles D.↗

Very fast motion planning for highly dexterous-articulated robots

Due to the inherent danger of space exploration, the need for greater use of teleoperated and autonomous robotic systems in space-based applications has long been apparent. Autonomous and semi-autonomous robotic devices have been proposed for carrying out routine functions associated with scientific experiments aboard the shuttle and space station. Finally, research into the use of such devices for planetary exploration continues. To accomplish their assigned tasks, all such autonomous and semi-autonomous devices will require the ability to move themselves through space without hitting themselves or the objects which surround them. In space it is important to execute the necessary motions correctly when they are first attempted because repositioning is expensive in terms of both time and resources (e.g., fuel). Finally, such devices will have to function in a variety of different environments. Given these constraints, a means for fast motion planning to insure the correct movement of robotic devices would be ideal. Unfortunately, motion planning algorithms are rarely used in practice because of their computational complexity. Fast methods have been developed for detecting imminent collisions, but the more general problem of motion planning remains computationally intractable. However, in this paper we show how the use of multicomputers and appropriate parallel algorithms can substantially reduce the time required to synthesize paths for dexterous articulated robots with a large number of joints. We have developed a parallel formulation of the Randomized Path Planner proposed by Barraquand and Latombe. We have shown that our parallel formulation is capable of formulating plans in a few seconds or less on various parallel architectures including: the nCUBE2 multicomputer with up to 1024 processors (nCUBE2 is a registered trademark of the nCUBE corporation), and a network of workstations.

Challou, Daniel J.↗

Integrated Planning for Telepresence with Time Delays

Teleoperation of remote robotic systems over time delays in the range of 2-10 seconds poses a unique set of challenges. In the context of a supervisory control system for the JSC Robonaut humanoid robot, we have developed an 'intelligent assistant' that integrates an Artificial Intelligence planner (JSHOP2) with execution monitoring of the state of both the human supervisor and the remote robot. The assistant reasons simultaneously about the world state on both sides of the time delay, which represents a novel application of this technology. The purpose of the assistant is to provide advice to the human supervisor about current and future activities, derived from a sequence of high-level goals to be achieved. To do this, the assistant must simultaneously monitor and react to various data sources, including actions taken by the supervisor who is issuing commands to the robot (e.g. with a data glove), actions taken by the robot, and the environment of the robot, both as currently perceived over the time delay, along with the current sequence of goals. We have developed a 'leader/follower' software architecture to handle the dual time-shifted streams of execution feedback. In this paper we describe the integrated planner and its executive, and how it operates in normal and anomaly situations.

remote robotic systems↗

CARACaS multi-agent maritime autonomy for unmanned surface vehicles in the Swarm II harbor patrol demonstration

This paper describes new autonomy technology that enabled a team of unmanned surface vehicles (USVs) to execute cooperative behaviors in the USV Swarm II harbor patrol demonstration and provides a description of autonomy performance in the event. The new developments extend the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory’s CARACaS (Control Architecture for Robotic Agent Command and Sensing) autonomy architecture, which pro- vides foundational software infrastructure, core executive functions, and several default robotic technology mod- ules. In Swarm II, CARACaS demonstrated higher levels of autonomy and more complex cooperation than previous on-water exercises, using full-sized vehicles and real-world sensing and communication. The core au- tonomous behaviors to support the harbor patrol scenario included Patrol, Track, Inspect, and Trail, providing the capability of finding all vessels entering the patrol area, keeping track of them, inspecting them to infer intent, and trailing suspect vessels. Significantly, CARACaS assumed responsibility for not only executing tasks safely and efficiently but also recognizing what tasks needed to be accomplished, given the current state of the world. Since the heterogeneous USV teams shared world model that evolved, such as due to (dis)appearance of vessels in the area or a change in health or availability of a USV, CARACaS replanned to generate and reallocate the new task list. Thus, human intervention was never required in the loop to task USVs during mission execution, though a supervisory role was supported in the autonomy system for mission monitoring and exception handling. Finally, CARACaS also ensured the USVs avoided hazards and obeyed the applicable rules of the road, using its local motion planning modules.

Sandoval, Michael↗

Multi-Sensor Testing for Automated Rendezvous and Docking Sensor Testing at the Flight Robotics Laboratory

The Exploration Systems Architecture defines missions that require rendezvous, proximity operations, and docking (RPOD) of two spacecraft both in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and in Low Lunar Orbit (LLO). Uncrewed spacecraft must perform automated and/or autonomous rendezvous, proximity operations and docking operations (commonly known as AR&D). The crewed missions may also perform rendezvous and docking operations and may require different levels of automation and/or autonomy, and must provide the crew with relative navigation information for manual piloting. The capabilities of the RPOD sensors are critical to the success of the Exploration Program. NASA has the responsibility to determine whether the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) contractor proposed relative navigation sensor suite will meet the requirements. The relatively low technology readiness level of AR&D relative navigation sensors has been carried as one of the CEV Project's top risks. The AR&D Sensor Technology Project seeks to reduce the risk by the testing and analysis of selected relative navigation sensor technologies through hardware-in-the-loop testing and simulation. These activities will provide the CEV Project information to assess the relative navigation sensors maturity as well as demonstrate test methods and capabilities. The first year of this project focused on a series of"pathfinder" testing tasks to develop the test plans, test facility requirements, trajectories, math model architecture, simulation platform, and processes that will be used to evaluate the Contractor-proposed sensors. Four candidate sensors were used in the first phase of the testing. The second phase of testing used four sensors simultaneously: two Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Advanced Video Guidance Sensors (AVGS), a laser-based video sensor that uses retroreflectors attached to the target vehicle, and two commercial laser range finders. The multi-sensor testing was conducted at MSFC's Flight Robotics Laboratory (FRL) using the FRL's 6-DOF gantry system, called the Dynamic Overhead Target System (DOTS). The target vehicle for "docking" in the laboratory was a mockup that was representative of the proposed CEV docking system, with added retroreflectors for the AVGS. The multi-sensor test configuration used 35 open-loop test trajectories covering three major objectives: (1) sensor characterization trajectories designed to test a wide range of performance parameters; (2) CEV-specific trajectories designed to test performance during CEV-like approach and departure profiles; and (3) sensor characterization tests designed for evaluating sensor performance under more extreme conditions as might be induced during a spacecraft failure or during contingency situations. This paper describes the test development, test facility, test preparations, test execution, and test results of the multi-sensor series of trajectories.

Brewster, L.↗

Multi-Sensor Testing for Automated Rendezvous and Docking Sensor Testing at the Flight Robotics Lab

The Exploration Systems Architecture defines missions that require rendezvous, proximity operations, and docking (RPOD) of two spacecraft both in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and in Low Lunar Orbit (LLO). Uncrewed spacecraft must perform automated and/or autonomous rendezvous, proximity operations and docking operations (commonly known as AR&D). The crewed missions may also perform rendezvous and docking operations and may require different levels of automation and/or autonomy, and must provide the crew with relative navigation information for manual piloting. The capabilities of the RPOD sensors are critical to the success ofthe Exploration Program. NASA has the responsibility to determine whether the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) contractor-proposed relative navigation sensor suite will meet the requirements. The relatively low technology readiness level of AR&D relative navigation sensors has been carried as one of the CEV Project's top risks. The AR&D Sensor Technology Project seeks to reduce the risk by the testing and analysis of selected relative navigation sensor technologies through hardware-in-the-Ioop testing and simulation. These activities will provide the CEV Project information to assess the relative navigation sensors maturity as well as demonstrate test methods and capabilities. The first year of this project focused on a series of "pathfinder" testing tasks to develop the test plans, test facility requirements, trajectories, math model architecture, simulation platform, and processes that will be used to evaluate the Contractor-proposed sensors. Four candidate sensors were used in the first phase of the testing. The second phase of testing used four sensors simultaneously: two Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Advanced Video Guidance Sensors (AVGS), a laser-based video sensor that uses retroreflectors attached to the target vehicle, and two commercial laser range finders. The multi-sensor testing was conducted at MSFC's Flight Robotics Laboratory (FRL) using the FRL's 6-DOF gantry system, called the Dynamic Overhead Target System (DOTS). The target vehicle for "docking" in the laboratory was a mockup that was representative of the proposed CEV docking system, with added retroreflectors for the AVGS.' The multi-sensor test configuration used 35 open-loop test trajectories covering three major objectives: (l) sensor characterization trajectories designed to test a wide range of performance parameters; (2) CEV-specific trajectories designed to test performance during CEV-like approach and departure profiles; and (3) sensor characterization tests designed for evaluating sensor performance under more extreme conditions as might be induced during a spacecraft failure or during contingency situations. This paper describes the test development, test facility, test preparations, test execution, and test results of the multisensor series oftrajectories

Brewster, Linda L.↗

Desert Research and Technology Studies (D-RATS) 2022 Quicklook Report

This report summarizes the Desert Research and Technology Studies (D-RATS) 2022 analog tests. BACKGROUND - Artemis Challenges – NASA’s concept of operations (ConOps) for the Artemis mission architecture brings new challenges for human exploration of the lunar surface, including: (1) Low-angle, natural lighting at lunar poles; and (2) Exploration sites that challenge communication with Earth. - International Partner Involvement – NASA is working with the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) to scope mission & functional requirements for an Artemis Pressurized Rover (PR), which JAXA may provide. - Charter – HQ Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate (ESDMD) Moon to Mars Architecture Development Office (M2MADO) Strategy and Architectures (SA) chartered the Human-in-the-Loop (HITL) test team to investigate Artemis architectural questions related to pressurized rover ConOps. - Rationale – to inform the NASA/JAXA pressurized rover study-agreement. PLAN - Objectives – Analog tests conducted in October 2022 by the D-RATS team addressed three high-level objectives: 1. Investigate pressurized rover (PR) ConOps and capabilities for Artemis exploration 2. Integrate with JAXA engineers & astronauts and incorporate JAXA PR design elements into testing. 3. Re-establish analog field-testing skills & capabilities with rovers to investigate Artemis architecture ConOps. - Secondary Objectives – Work with other groups to leverage D-RATS field test for additional objectives. 4. Work with the Public Affairs Office (PAO) to perform D-RATS public outreach activities. 5. Coordinate with the Human Physiology Performance Protection & Operations (H-3PO) team to facilitate in-field evaluation of human health and performance (HHP) objectives. 6. Share D-RATS field-site and assets with Lunar LTE Studies (Lunar LiTES) team, to aid their study of the use of 4G/LTE communication protocols and devices for astronauts and robotic nodes on the lunar surface. - Team – Fully integrated test team comprised of members from 5 NASA centers, JAXA, and the United States Geological Survey (USGS) - Location – Black Point Lava Flow, ~40 miles north of Flagstaff, AZ HIGH-LEVEL OBJECTIVES ACCOMPLISHED - Investigated Pressurized Rover ConOps & Capabilities for Artemis Exploration (Objective 1) - Completed testing with 4 crew pairs, each spending 3 days and 2 nights in the rover conducting Artemis PR dayin-the-life activities (2 JAXA astronauts, 2 JAXA engineers, 1 NASA astronaut, 3 NASA engineers). - Collected detailed objective & subjective data supporting 10 strategic questions related to Artemis PR operations. - Field geologists present in field observed rover operations & EVAs. - Science team in Houston MCC communicated directly with crew. - Demonstrated crew-led and MCC-led PR teleoperation use cases during EVAs. - Integrated with JAXA Engineers & Astronauts and Incorporated JAXA PR Design Elements into Testing (Objective 2) - NASA & JAXA engineers, flight controllers, scientists, roboticists, and astronauts directly participated in and/or observed testing both in field and in MCC-Houston. - Incorporated JAXA PR design elements into both integrated and standalone testing at JSC and in the field. - Re-established Analog Field-Testing Skills & Capabilities with Rovers to Investigate Artemis Architecture ConOps (Objective 3) - Multiple teams successfully worked to establish and manage field-test base camp, monitor and maintain the rover, and plan and execute 2 weeks of consecutive field-testing with little to no breaks between crews. TEST OUTCOMES - Results will inform Artemis architecture ConOps & capabilities related to pressurized rover operations (see sections 2 for more details) - Summary and team detailed reports will be posted on the D-RATS 2022 wiki

Analog↗

Enabling New Operations Concepts for Lunar and Mars Exploration

The planning and scheduling of human space activities is an expensive and time-consuming task that seldom provides the crew with the control, flexibility, or insight that they need. During the past thirty years, scheduling software has seen only incremental improvements; however, software limitations continue to prevent even evolutionary improvements in the operations concept that is used for human space missions. Space missions are planned on the ground long before they are executed in space, and the crew has little input or influence on the schedule. In recent years the crew has been presented with a job jar of activities that they can do whenever they have time, but the contents of the jar is limited to tasks that do not use scarce shared resources and do not have external timing constraints. Consequently, the crew has no control over the schedule of the majority of their own tasks. As humans venture farther from earth for longer durations, it will become imperative that they have the ability to plan and schedule not only their own activities, but also the unattended activities of the systems, equipment, and robots on the journey with them. Significant software breakthroughs are required to enable the change in the operations concept. The crew does not have the time to build or modify the schedule by hand. They only need to issue a request to schedule a task and the system should automatically do the rest. Of course, the crew should not be required to build the complete schedule. Controllers on the ground should contribute the models and schedules where they have the better knowledge. The system must allow multiple simultaneous users, some on earth and some in space. The Mission Operations Laboratory at NASA's Marshall Space flight Center has been researching and prototyping a modeling schema, scheduling engine, and system architecture that can enable the needed paradigm shift - it can make the crew autonomous. This schema and engine can be the core of a planning and scheduling system that would enable multiple planners, some on the earth and some in space, to build one integrated timeline. Its modeling schema can capture all the task requirements; its scheduling engine can build the schedule automatically, and its architecture can allow those (on earth and in space) with the best knowledge of the tasks to schedule them. This paper describes the enabling technology and proposes an operations concept for astronauts autonomously scheduling their activities and the activities around them.

Jaap, John↗

Aerobot Autonomy Architecture

An architecture for autonomous operation of an aerobot (i.e., a robotic blimp) to be used in scientific exploration of planets and moons in the Solar system with an atmosphere (such as Titan and Venus) is undergoing development. This architecture is also applicable to autonomous airships that could be flown in the terrestrial atmosphere for scientific exploration, military reconnaissance and surveillance, and as radio-communication relay stations in disaster areas. The architecture was conceived to satisfy requirements to perform the following functions: a) Vehicle safing, that is, ensuring the integrity of the aerobot during its entire mission, including during extended communication blackouts. b) Accurate and robust autonomous flight control during operation in diverse modes, including launch, deployment of scientific instruments, long traverses, hovering or station-keeping, and maneuvers for touch-and-go surface sampling. c) Mapping and self-localization in the absence of a global positioning system. d) Advanced recognition of hazards and targets in conjunction with tracking of, and visual servoing toward, targets, all to enable the aerobot to detect and avoid atmospheric and topographic hazards and to identify, home in on, and hover over predefined terrain features or other targets of scientific interest. The architecture is an integrated combination of systems for accurate and robust vehicle and flight trajectory control; estimation of the state of the aerobot; perception-based detection and avoidance of hazards; monitoring of the integrity and functionality ("health") of the aerobot; reflexive safing actions; multi-modal localization and mapping; autonomous planning and execution of scientific observations; and long-range planning and monitoring of the mission of the aerobot. The prototype JPL aerobot (see figure) has been tested extensively in various areas in the California Mojave desert.

Elfes, Alberto↗

The Jet Propulsion Laboratory shared control architecture and implementation

A hardware and software environment for shared control of telerobot task execution has been implemented. Modes of task execution range from fully teleoperated to fully autonomous as well as shared where hand controller inputs from the human operator are mixed with autonomous system inputs in real time. The objective of the shared control environment is to aid the telerobot operator during task execution by merging real-time operator control from hand controllers with autonomous control to simplify task execution for the operator. The operator is the principal command source and can assign as much autonomy for a task as desired. The shared control hardware environment consists of two PUMA 560 robots, two 6-axis force reflecting hand controllers, Universal Motor Controllers for each of the robots and hand controllers, a SUN4 computer, and VME chassis containing 68020 processors and input/output boards. The operator interface for shared control, the User Macro Interface (UMI), is a menu driven interface to design a task and assign the levels of teleoperated and autonomous control. The operator also sets up the system monitor which checks safety limits during task execution. Cartesian-space degrees of freedom for teleoperated and/or autonomous control inputs are selected within UMI as well as the weightings for the teleoperation and autonmous inputs. These are then used during task execution to determine the mix of teleoperation and autonomous inputs. Some of the autonomous control primitives available to the user are Joint-Guarded-Move, Cartesian-Guarded-Move, Move-To-Touch, Pin-Insertion/Removal, Door/Crank-Turn, Bolt-Turn, and Slide. The operator can execute a task using pure teleoperation or mix control execution from the autonomous primitives with teleoperated inputs. Presently the shared control environment supports single arm task execution. Work is presently underway to provide the shared control environment for dual arm control. Teleoperation during shared control is only Cartesian space control and no force-reflection is provided. Force-reflecting teleoperation and joint space operator inputs are planned extensions to the environment.

Backes, Paul G.↗

Cislunar Near Rectilinear Halo Orbit for Human Space Exploration

In order to conduct sustained human exploration beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO), spacecraft systems are designed to operate in a series of missions of increasing complexity. Regardless of the destination, Moon, Mars, asteroids or beyond, there is a substantial set of common objectives that must be met. Many orbit characterization studies have endeavored to evaluate the potential locations in cislunar space that are favorable for meeting common human exploration objectives in a stepwise approach. Multiple studies, by both NASA and other international space agencies, have indicated that Earth-­‐moon libration point orbits are attractive candidates for staging operations in the proving ground and beyond. In particular, the Near Rectilinear Orbit (NRO) has been demonstrated to meet multi-­‐mission and multi-­‐destination architectural constraints. However, a human mission to a selected NRO presents a variety of new challenges for mission planning. While a growing number of robotic missions have completed successful operations to various specific libration point orbits, human missions have never been conducted to orbits of this class. Human missions have unique challenges that differ significantly from robotic missions, including a lower tolerance for mission risk and additional operational constraints that are associated only with human spacecraft. In addition, neither robotic nor human missions have been operated in the NRO regime specifically, and NROs exhibit dynamical characteristics that can differ significantly as compared to other halo orbits. Finally, multi-­‐body orbits, such as libration point orbits, are identified to exist in a simplified orbit model known as the Circular Restricted Three Body Problem (CRTBP) and must then be re-­‐solved in the full ephemeris model. As a result, the behavior of multi-­‐body orbits cannot be effectively characterized within the classical two-­‐body orbit dynamics framework more familiar to the human spaceflight community. In fact, a given NRO is not identified by a set of Keplerian orbit parameters, and a valid epoch specific state vector must be first obtained from a multi-body dynamical model. In this paper, the significant performance and operational challenges of conducting human missions to the NRO are evaluated. First, a systematic process for generating full ephemeris based ballistic NROs of various families is outlined to demonstrate the relative ease in which a multi-­‐revolution orbit can be found for any epoch and for various orbit geometries. In the Earth-­‐Moon system, NROs, which are halo orbits with close passage over a lunar pole, can exist with respect to libration point 1 (L1) or libration point 2 (L2) and are either from a North or South family orbit class with respect to the ecliptic. Second, the ability to maintain the orbit over the lifetime of a habitat mission by applying a reliable station-keeping strategy is investigated. The NRO, while similar to the quasi-­‐halo orbits that the Artemis mission flew, requires an updated station keeping strategy. This is due to several dynamical differences such as the increased relative stability of the NRO compared to other halo orbits and the close passage over the lunar surface as shown in Figure 1. Multiple station-keeping strategies are being investigated to ensure a human spacecraft remains on a predictable path. As the NRO is not described in simple two-­‐body parameters, analysis must determine the best strategy for targeting a reference NRO as well as how closely a future state should be constrained. In addition, costs will be minimized by determining maneuver directionality based on an identified pattern in the optimal station-keeping solutions or an analytically derived relationship. The candidate station-keeping algorithm must be stable and robust to environmental and vehicle uncertainties as well to navigation estimation and flight control execution errors. To that end, navigation accuracies, the impact on the station-keeping execution errors as well as other vehicle uncertainties need to be assessed. Starting with Orion, current navigation accuracies are evaluated and then navigation requirements are derived assuming a desired station-keeping propellant budget. Third, the performance requirements to and from the NRO are evaluated. Important parameters for developing expected propellant costs include epoch of operation, size and type of NRO, Earth departure and return constraints, as well as abort or early-­‐return capability. Finally, rendezvous and proximity operations are vital aspects of multi-­‐mission human exploration endeavors. The ability to conduct rendezvous and the associated propellant costs are assessed as well as the impacts of various profile assumptions including the location within the NRO the rendezvous is performed. The results of these studies will influence plans for international cooperation on both nearer term proving ground missions and beyond.

Whitley, Ryan↗