Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Deep Space Exploration Computing Technologies”

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.

74 records · Page 5

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↗

Magnetohydrodynamics (MHD) Aerocapture System for Enabling Faster-Larger Planetary Science & Human Exploration Missions

Since our completing the NIAC Phase I NIAC on this Advanced Aerocapture System, NASA Langley Research Center has funded or supported a number of studies and code enhancements through its Center Innovation Fund (CIF) and NASA’s NSTGRO and Internship Programs to mature the analysis capabilities and quantify the merits of the MHD Aerocapture System technology. These efforts have resulted in a plug and play analysis capability for assessing MHD aerocapture system performance for arrival at many planetary bodies of interest. Our efforts have especially focused on the potential mass savings for improving the capacity for science observations at Neptune and Triton. A re-cent Forbes article published “‘Orbital mechanics is probably going to decide for us whether we go to Uranus or Neptune because we need to flyby Jupiter,’ said Kunio Sayanagi at Hampton University, Virginia, who also worked on the Neptune Odyssey proposal…. Exactly when a mission can be sent to Uranus, or Neptune, depends on the relative position of Jupiter, which can help give a spacecraft a gravitational slingshot. That drastically shortens the cruise phase.” [1] Since shortening the cruise phase is important for these science missions, any mass savings enabled by the MHD Aerocapture System could be reallocated to increasing Thermal Protection System mass to allow faster arrival speeds and/or for onboarding additional payloads such as science instruments, batteries, or propellant for conducting more science for longer durations in the desired orbits. The analysis steps and codes for conducting trades and sizing vehicles for aerocapture are as follows: Step 1 is to conduct aeroheating analysis using LAURA of the selected entry vehicle shape to identify locations on the forebody where ionization and flow velocity are sufficient for producing Lo-rentz forces. LAURA is a multiblock structured grid finite-volume CFD solver developed at the NASA Langley Research Center. [2] LAURA has been used for aerothermal analysis support of the entry, de-scent and landing (EDL) phase of interplanetary missions over the last three decades [3-7]. Step 2 is to port the LAURA results into CFDWARP to calcu-late electrical and thermal conductivities of ionized flow for sizing MHD patch system and calculating Lorentz forces needed for controls analysis. CFDWARP is a CFD code that uses advanced nu-merical methods that enable the simulation of the full coupling between the aerodynamics, the magne-tohydrodynamics, and the non-neutral plasma sheaths. CFDWARP has the unique capability to simulate efficiently the non-neutral sheaths (near the electrodes) in coupled form with the quasi-neutral bulk MHD flow [8-11]. Step 3 is to link re-sults from LAURA and CFDWARP into POST2 for calculating entry trajectories and comparing MHD control results with other aerodynamic control strategies. The Program to Optimize Simulated Tra-jectories II (POST2) is a generalized point mass, discrete parameter targeting and optimization pro-gram. POST2 provides the capability to target and optimize point mass trajectories for multiple pow-ered or un-powered vehicles near an arbitrary rotat-ing, oblate planet [12]. Step 4: TPS sizing was per-formed using the Fully Implicit Ablation and Ther-mal-response code (FIAT) tool which computes the transient one-dimensional thermal response and surface thermochemistry of a multilayer stackup of thermal protection, bonding, and structural materi-als subject to aeroheating on one surface [13]. The sizing and margining methodology used was based on the approach documented by Mahzari and Milos [14] for the dual-layered heatshield for extreme entry environment technology (DL-HEEET) TPS concept. TPS analysis utilizes trajectory information from POST2. Using this step-wise plug and play MHD Aerocapture performance assessment process, our analysis targets a Neptune aerocapture trajectory that will place the spacecraft in an observation orbit for Triton. [15]. Magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) control of a 4.5-meter diameter MSL-style capsule resulted in TPS mass savings of nearly 2000 kg when using an MHD system mass of under 200 kg. The flight path for a vehicle using the MHD control strategy has a much lower heat rate and heat load compared to the conventional aerodynamic aerocapture strategies known as bank angle con-trolled (BAC) and direct force controlled (DFC). Both BAC and DFC have heat rates significantly greater than 1500 W/cm2 typically used as an upper limit for PICA. Thus, DL-HEEET TPS concept was required for the BAC and DFC control strategies. However, considering the more benign environ-ments for the MHD case, additional TPS concepts with improved mass efficiency were also assessed. PICA was considered for the MHD controlled strat-egy since the maximum heat rate was well within the limits (<1500 W/cm2) of PICA. TPS sizing re-sulted in a significant mass reduction. The PICA layer for this sizing case was about 7.8 cm. As a point of reference, the Mars 2020 mission, which used this same PICA concept, had a PICA thickness of 3.18 cm [16]. The trajectories used for the TPS sizing originat-ed from the POST2 simulations. The current, I, to an electromagnet configuration can be manipulated to allow for active control of the vehicle. Manipula-tion of the current, I, changes the magnetic field, B, which affects the Lorentz force and therefore the MHD drag force on the vehicle. Our analysis in-cluded both open-loop and close-loop control. Closed-loop control will enable improved overall performance when taking into account mission level uncertainties, such as interplanetary delivery errors and atmospheric modeling uncertainties. The open-loop and closed-loop MHD control cases do not dip as deep into the atmosphere as the aerodynamic cases. Three types of aerodynamic-only approach-es are investigated: bank angle modulation (BAM), director force control (DFC), and Drag Modulated. BAM and DFC make use of vehicle aerodynamic angles to steer the vehicle. Thus, changing the aer-odynamic forces acting on the vehicle for control, aerodynamic drag modulated case requires a vary-ing drag area to modulate the drag force. The MHD drag modulated case modulates MHD generated drag force that adds to the aerodynamic drag. This higher atmospheric activation of drag forces by the MHD patch results in significantly less heat flux on the vehicle. The MHD technology will enable shorter cruise times and deceleration of larger payloads for increasing the capacity for science at the Ice Giants or for returning astronauts to Earth from cislunar space or from Mars. The purpose of this presentation is to provide more details about this work and to highlight plans for further research and development including a flight demonstration.

R. W. Moses↗