Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “GN&C”

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.

At least 91 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2010

Present Challenges, Critical Needs, and Future Technological Directions for NASA's GN and C Engineering Discipline

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is currently undergoing a substantial redirection. Notable among the changes occurring within NASA is the stated emphasis on technology development, integration, and demonstration. These new changes within the Agency should have a positive impact on the GN&C discipline given the potential for sizeable investments for technology development and in-space demonstrations of both Autonomous Rendezvous & Docking (AR&D) systems and Autonomous Precision Landing (APL) systems. In this paper the NASA Technical Fellow for Guidance, Navigation and Control (GN&C) provides a summary of the present technical challenges, critical needs, and future technological directions for NASA s GN&C engineering discipline. A brief overview of the changes occurring within NASA that are driving a renewed emphasis on technology development will be presented as background. The potential benefits of the planned GN&C technology developments will be highlighted. This paper will provide a GN&C State-of-the-Discipline assessment. The discipline s readiness to support the goals & objectives of each of the four NASA Mission Directorates is evaluated and the technical challenges and barriers currently faced by the discipline are summarized. This paper will also discuss the need for sustained investments to sufficiently mature the several classes of GN&C technologies required to implement NASA crewed exploration and robotic science missions.

Dennehy, Cornelius J.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Model-Based GN and C Simulation and Flight Software Development for Orion Missions beyond LEO

For Orion missions beyond low Earth orbit (LEO), the Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C) system is being developed using a model-based approach for simulation and flight software. Lessons learned from the development of GN&C algorithms and flight software for the Orion Exploration Flight Test One (EFT-1) vehicle have been applied to the development of further capabilities for Orion GN&C beyond EFT-1. Continuing the use of a Model-Based Development (MBD) approach with the Matlab®/Simulink® tool suite, the process for GN&C development and analysis has been largely improved. Furthermore, a model-based simulation environment in Simulink, rather than an external C-based simulation, greatly eases the process for development of flight algorithms. The benefits seen by employing lessons learned from EFT-1 are described, as well as the approach for implementing additional MBD techniques. Also detailed are the key enablers for improvements to the MBD process, including enhanced configuration management techniques for model-based software systems, automated code and artifact generation, and automated testing and integration.

Odegard, Ryan↗
NASA NTRS2001

Testing Status of the X-38 Large Parafoil Autonomous GN and C System

This paper shall review the status, progress and results made in testing of the GN&C software and supporting avionics designed for the control of a large parafoil in support of the X-38 Program. This will include a high level overview of the GN&C design selected for use on the X-38 orbital return test article, as well as an overview of the requirements and test objectives for the parafoil flight portion of the orbital return flight, and of the testing results to date. These flight objectives will be mapped into flight and ground testing requirements and test beds currently in use by the X-38 Program, building sufficient confidence in the selected parafoil GN&C system, in order to proceed with the flight of the orbital test article. The X-38 Program itself is a NASA led technology development and demonstration program with its premier goal being the development and orbital return flight test of an emergency Crew Return Vehicle (CRV) prototype for the International Space Station.

Strahan, Alan↗
NASA NTRS2010

Recent Experiences of the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) GN and C Technical Discipline Team (TDT)

The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC), initially formed in 2003, is an independently funded NASA Program whose dedicated team of technical experts provides objective engineering and safety assessments of critical, high risk projects. The GN&C Technical Discipline Team (TDT) is one of fifteen such discipline-focused teams within the NESC organization. The TDT membership is composed of GN&C specialists from across NASA and its partner organizations in other government agencies, industry, national laboratories, and universities. This paper will briefly define the vision, mission, and purpose of the NESC organization. The role of the GN&C TDT will then be described in detail along with an overview of how this team operates and engages in its objective engineering and safety assessments of critical NASA projects. This paper will then describe selected recent experiences, over the period 2007 to present, of the GN&C TDT in which they directly performed or supported a wide variety of NESC assessments and consultations.

Dennehy, Cornelius J.↗
NASA NTRS2008

The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) GN and C Technical Discipline Team (TDT): Its Purpose, Practices and Experiences

This paper will briefly define the vision, mission, and purpose of the NESC organization. The role of the GN&C TDT will then be described in detail along with an overview of how this team operates and engages in its objective engineering and safety assessments of critical NASA projects. This paper will then describe key issues and findings from several of the recent GN&C-related independent assessments and consultations performed and/or supported by the NESC GN&C TDT. Among the examples of the GN&C TDT s work that will be addressed in this paper are the following: the Space Shuttle Orbiter Repair Maneuver (ORM) assessment, the ISS CMG failure root cause assessment, the Demonstration of Autonomous Rendezvous Technologies (DART) spacecraft mishap consultation, the Phoenix Mars lander thruster-based controllability consultation, the NASA in-house Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) Smart Buyer assessment and the assessment of key engineering considerations for the Design, Development, Test & Evaluation (DDT&E) of robust and reliable GN&C systems for human-rated spacecraft.

Dennehy, Cornelius J.↗
NASA NTRS2010

The Orion GN and C Data-Driven Flight Software Architecture for Automated Sequencing and Fault Recovery

The Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle (CET) is being designed to include significantly more automation capability than either the Space Shuttle or the International Space Station (ISS). In particular, the vehicle flight software has requirements to accommodate increasingly automated missions throughout all phases of flight. A data-driven flight software architecture will provide an evolvable automation capability to sequence through Guidance, Navigation & Control (GN&C) flight software modes and configurations while maintaining the required flexibility and human control over the automation. This flexibility is a key aspect needed to address the maturation of operational concepts, to permit ground and crew operators to gain trust in the system and mitigate unpredictability in human spaceflight. To allow for mission flexibility and reconfrgurability, a data driven approach is being taken to load the mission event plan as well cis the flight software artifacts associated with the GN&C subsystem. A database of GN&C level sequencing data is presented which manages and tracks the mission specific and algorithm parameters to provide a capability to schedule GN&C events within mission segments. The flight software data schema for performing automated mission sequencing is presented with a concept of operations for interactions with ground and onboard crew members. A prototype architecture for fault identification, isolation and recovery interactions with the automation software is presented and discussed as a forward work item.

King, Ellis↗
NASA NTRS2010

Demonstration of an Aerocapture GN and C System Through Hardware-in-the-Loop Simulations

Aerocapture is an orbit insertion maneuver in which a spacecraft flies through a planetary atmosphere one time using drag force to decelerate and effect a hyperbolic to elliptical orbit change. Aerocapture employs a feedback Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C) system to deliver the spacecraft into a precise postatmospheric orbit despite the uncertainties inherent in planetary atmosphere knowledge, entry targeting and aerodynamic predictions. Only small amounts of propellant are required for attitude control and orbit adjustments, thereby providing mass savings of hundreds to thousands of kilograms over conventional all-propulsive techniques. The Analytic Predictor Corrector (APC) guidance algorithm has been developed to steer the vehicle through the aerocapture maneuver using bank angle control. Through funding provided by NASA's In-Space Propulsion Technology Program, the operation of an aerocapture GN&C system has been demonstrated in high-fidelity simulations that include real-time hardware in the loop, thus increasing the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of aerocapture GN&C. First, a non-real-time (NRT), 6-DOF trajectory simulation was developed for the aerocapture trajectory. The simulation included vehicle dynamics, gravity model, atmosphere model, aerodynamics model, inertial measurement unit (IMU) model, attitude control thruster torque models, and GN&C algorithms (including the APC aerocapture guidance). The simulation used the vehicle and mission parameters from the ST-9 mission. A 2000 case Monte Carlo simulation was performed and results show an aerocapture success rate of greater than 99.7%, greater than 95% of total delta-V required for orbit insertion is provided by aerodynamic drag, and post-aerocapture orbit plane wedge angle error is less than 0.5 deg (3-sigma). Then a real-time (RT), 6-DOF simulation for the aerocapture trajectory was developed which demonstrated the guidance software executing on a flight-like computer, interfacing with a simulated IMU and simulated thrusters, with vehicle dynamics provided by an external simulator. Five cases from the NRT simulations were run in the RT simulation environment. The results compare well to those of the NRT simulation thus verifying the RT simulation configuration. The results of the above described simulations show the aerocapture maneuver using the APC algorithm can be accomplished reliably and the algorithm is now at TRL-6. Flight validation is the next step for aerocapture technology development.

Masciarelli, James↗
NASA NTRS2003

Satellite GN and C Anomaly Trends

On-orbit anomaly records for satellites launched from 1990 through 2001 are reviewed to determine recent trends of un-manned space mission critical failures. Anomalies categorized by subsystems show that Guidance, Navigation and Control (GN&C) subsystems have a high number of anomalies that result in a mission critical failure when compared to other subsystems. A mission critical failure is defined as a premature loss of a satellite or loss of its ability to perform its primary mission during its design life. The majority of anomalies are shown to occur early in the mission, usually within one year from launch. GN&C anomalies are categorized by cause and equipment type involved. A statistical analysis of the data is presented for all anomalies compared with the GN&C anomalies for various mission types, orbits and time periods. Conclusions and recommendations are presented for improving mission success and reliability.

Robertson, Brent↗
NASA NTRS2002

ISS GN and C - First Year Surprises

Assembly of the International Space Station (ISS) began in late 1998 with the joining of the first two US and Russ ian elements. For more than two years, the outpost was served by two Russian Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C) systems. The station requires orbital translation and attitude control functions for its 100+ configurations, from the nascent two-module station to the half million kilogram completed station owned and operated by seventeen nations. With the launch of the US Laboratory module in February 2001, the integration of the US GN&C system with its Russian counterpart laid the foundation for such a robust system. In its first year of combined operation, the ISS GN&C system has performed admirably, even better than many expected, but there have been surprises. Loss of command capability, loss of communication between segments, a control system force-fight, and "non-propulsive vents" that weren't - such events have repeatedly underscored the importance of thorough program integration, testing, and operation, both across subsystem boundaries and across international borders.

Begley, Michael↗
NASA NTRS2011

Recent Experiences of the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) Guidance Navigation and Control (GN and C) Technical Discipline Team (TDT)

The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) is an independently funded NASA Program whose dedicated team of technical experts provides objective engineering and safety assessments of critical, high risk projects. NESC's strength is rooted in the diverse perspectives and broad knowledge base that add value to its products, affording customers a responsive, alternate path for assessing and preventing technical problems while protecting vital human and national resources. The Guidance Navigation and Control (GN&C) Technical Discipline Team (TDT) is one of fifteen such discipline-focused teams within the NESC organization. The TDT membership is composed of GN&C specialists from across NASA and its partner organizations in other government agencies, industry, national laboratories, and universities. This paper will briefly define the vision, mission, and purpose of the NESC organization. The role of the GN&C TDT will then be described in detail along with an overview of how this team operates and engages in its objective engineering and safety assessments of critical NASA.

Dennehy, Cornelius J.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Entry Atmospheric Flight Control Authority Impacts on GN and C and Trajectory Performance for Orion Exploration Flight Test 1

One of the key design objectives of NASA's Orion Exploration Flight Test 1 (EFT-1) is to execute a guided entry trajectory demonstrating GN&C capability. The focus of this paper is the ight control authority of the vehicle throughout the atmospheric entry ight to the target landing site and its impacts on GN&C, parachute deployment, and integrated performance. The vehicle's attitude control authority is obtained from thrusting 12 Re- action Control System (RCS) engines, with four engines to control yaw, four engines to control pitch, and four engines to control roll. The static and dynamic stability derivatives of the vehicle are determined to assess the inherent aerodynamic stability. The aerodynamic moments at various locations in the entry trajectory are calculated and compared to the available torque provided by the RCS system. Interaction between the vehicle's RCS engine plumes and the aerodynamic conditions are considered to assess thruster effectiveness. This document presents an assessment of Orion's ight control authority and its effectiveness in controlling the vehicle during critical events in the atmospheric entry trajectory.

McNamara, Luke W.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Orion Pad Abort 1 GN and C Design and Development

The first flight test of the Orion Abort Flight Test project is scheduled to launch in Spring 2010. This flight test is known as Pad Abort 1 (PA-1) and it is intended to accomplish a series of flight test objectives, including demonstrating the capability of the Launch Abort System (LAS) to propel the Crew Module (CM) to a safe distance from a launch vehicle during a pad abort. The PA-1 Flight Test Article (FTA) is actively controlled by a guidance, navigation, and control (GN&C) system for much of its flight. The purpose of this paper is to describe the design, development, and analysis of the PA-1 GN&C system. A description of the technical solutions that were developed to meet the challenge of satisfying many competing requirements is presented. A historical perspective of how the Orion LAV compares to the Apollo Launch Escape Vehicle (LEV) design will also be included.

Medina, Edgar A.↗
NASA NTRS2016

GN and C Subsystem Concept for Safe Precision Landing of the Proposed Lunar MARE Robotic Science Mission

The Lunar MARE (Moon Age and Regolith Explorer) Discovery Mission concept targets delivery of a science payload to the lunar surface for sample collection and dating. The mission science is within a 100-meter radius region of smooth lunar maria terrain near Aristarchus crater. The location has several small, sharp craters and rocks that present landing hazards to the spacecraft. For successful delivery of the science payload to the surface, the vehicle Guidance, Navigation and Control (GN&C) subsystem requires safe and precise landing capability, so design infuses the NASA Autonomous precision Landing and Hazard Avoidance Technology (ALHAT) and a gimbaled, throttleable LOX/LCH4 main engine. The ALHAT system implemented for Lunar MARE is a specialization of prototype technologies in work within NASA for the past two decades, including a passive optical Terrain Relative Navigation (TRN) sensor, a Navigation Doppler Lidar (NDL) velocity and range sensor, and a Lidar-based Hazard Detection (HD) sensor. The landing descent profile is from a retrograde orbit over lighted terrain with landing near lunar dawn. The GN&C subsystem with ALHAT capabilities will deliver the science payload to the lunar surface within a 20-meter landing ellipse of the target location and at a site having greater than 99% safety probability, which minimizes risk to safe landing and delivery of the MARE science payload to the intended terrain region.

MARE (Moon Age and Regolith Explorer)↗
NASA NTRS2013

Orion MPCV GN and C End-to-End Phasing Tests

End-to-end integration tests are critical risk reduction efforts for any complex vehicle. Phasing tests are an end-to-end integrated test that validates system directional phasing (polarity) from sensor measurement through software algorithms to end effector response. Phasing tests are typically performed on a fully integrated and assembled flight vehicle where sensors are stimulated by moving the vehicle and the effectors are observed for proper polarity. Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) Pad Abort 1 (PA-1) Phasing Test was conducted from inertial measurement to Launch Abort System (LAS). Orion Exploration Flight Test 1 (EFT-1) has two end-to-end phasing tests planned. The first test from inertial measurement to Crew Module (CM) reaction control system thrusters uses navigation and flight control system software algorithms to process commands. The second test from inertial measurement to CM S-Band Phased Array Antenna (PAA) uses navigation and communication system software algorithms to process commands. Future Orion flights include Ascent Abort Flight Test 2 (AA-2) and Exploration Mission 1 (EM-1). These flights will include additional or updated sensors, software algorithms and effectors. This paper will explore the implementation of end-to-end phasing tests on a flight vehicle which has many constraints, trade-offs and compromises. Orion PA-1 Phasing Test was conducted at White Sands Missile Range (WSMR) from March 4-6, 2010. This test decreased the risk of mission failure by demonstrating proper flight control system polarity. Demonstration was achieved by stimulating the primary navigation sensor, processing sensor data to commands and viewing propulsion response. PA-1 primary navigation sensor was a Space Integrated Inertial Navigation System (INS) and Global Positioning System (GPS) (SIGI) which has onboard processing, INS (3 accelerometers and 3 rate gyros) and no GPS receiver. SIGI data was processed by GN&C software into thrust magnitude and direction commands. The processing changes through three phases of powered flight: pitchover, downrange and reorientation. The primary inputs to GN&C are attitude position, attitude rates, angle of attack (AOA) and angle of sideslip (AOS). Pitch and yaw attitude and attitude rate responses were verified by using a flight spare SIGI mounted to a 2-axis rate table. AOA and AOS responses were verified by using a data recorded from SIGI movements on a robotic arm located at NASA Johnson Space Center. The data was consolidated and used in an open-loop data input to the SIGI. Propulsion was the Launch Abort System (LAS) Attitude Control Motor (ACM) which consisted of a solid motor with 8 nozzles. Each nozzle has active thrust control by varying throat area with a pintle. LAS ACM pintles are observable through optically transparent nozzle covers. SIGI movements on robot arm, SIGI rate table movements and LAS ACM pintle responses were video recorded as test artifacts for analysis and evaluation. The PA-1 Phasing Test design was determined based on test performance requirements, operational restrictions and EGSE capabilities. This development progressed during different stages. For convenience these development stages are initial, working group, tiger team, Engineering Review Team (ERT) and final.

Neumann, Brian C.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Preliminary Design of the Guidance, Navigation, and Control System of the Altair Lunar Lander

Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C) is the measurement and control of spacecraft position, velocity, and attitude in support of mission objectives. This paper provides an overview of a preliminary design of the GN&C system of the Lunar Lander Altair. Key functions performed by the GN&C system in various mission phases will first be described. A set of placeholder GN&C sensors that is needed to support these functions is next described. To meet Crew safety requirements, there must be high degrees of redundancy in the selected sensor configuration. Two sets of thrusters, one on the Ascent Module (AM) and the other on the Descent Module (DM), will be used by the GN&C system. The DM thrusters will be used, among other purposes, to perform course correction burns during the Trans-lunar Coast. The AM thrusters will be used, among other purposes, to perform precise angular and translational controls of the ascent module in order to dock the ascent module with Orion. Navigation is the process of measurement and control of the spacecraft's "state" (both the position and velocity vectors of the spacecraft). Tracking data from the Earth-Based Ground System (tracking antennas) as well as data from onboard optical sensors will be used to estimate the vehicle state. A driving navigation requirement is to land Altair on the Moon with a landing accuracy that is better than 1 km (radial 95%). Preliminary performance of the Altair GN&C design, relative to this and other navigation requirements, will be given. Guidance is the onboard process that uses the estimated state vector, crew inputs, and pre-computed reference trajectories to guide both the rotational and the translational motions of the spacecraft during powered flight phases. Design objectives of reference trajectories for various mission phases vary. For example, the reference trajectory for the descent "approach" phase (the last 3-4 minutes before touchdown) will sacrifice fuel utilization efficiency in order to provide landing site visibility for both the crew and the terrain hazard detection sensor system. One output of Guidance is the steering angle commands sent to the 2 degree-of-freedom (dof) gimbal actuation system of the descent engine. The engine gimbal actuation system is controlled by a Thrust Vector Control algorithm that is designed taking into account the large quantities of sloshing liquids in tanks mounted on Altair. In this early design phase of Altair, the GN&C system is described only briefly in this paper and the emphasis is on the GN&C architecture (that is still evolving). Multiple companion papers will provide details that are related to navigation, optical navigation, guidance, fuel sloshing, rendezvous and docking, machine-pilot interactions, and others. The similarities and differences of GN&C designs for Lunar and Mars landers are briefly compared.

Lee, Allan Y.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Configuring the Orion Guidance, Navigation, and Control Flight Software for Automated Sequencing

The Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle is being designed with greater automation capabilities than any other crewed spacecraft in NASA s history. The Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C) flight software architecture is designed to provide a flexible and evolvable framework that accommodates increasing levels of automation over time. Within the GN&C flight software, a data-driven approach is used to configure software. This approach allows data reconfiguration and updates to automated sequences without requiring recompilation of the software. Because of the great dependency of the automation and the flight software on the configuration data, the data management is a vital component of the processes for software certification, mission design, and flight operations. To enable the automated sequencing and data configuration of the GN&C subsystem on Orion, a desktop database configuration tool has been developed. The database tool allows the specification of the GN&C activity sequences, the automated transitions in the software, and the corresponding parameter reconfigurations. These aspects of the GN&C automation on Orion are all coordinated via data management, and the database tool provides the ability to test the automation capabilities during the development of the GN&C software. In addition to providing the infrastructure to manage the GN&C automation, the database tool has been designed with capabilities to import and export artifacts for simulation analysis and documentation purposes. Furthermore, the database configuration tool, currently used to manage simulation data, is envisioned to evolve into a mission planning tool for generating and testing GN&C software sequences and configurations. A key enabler of the GN&C automation design, the database tool allows both the creation and maintenance of the data artifacts, as well as serving the critical role of helping to manage, visualize, and understand the data-driven parameters both during software development and throughout the life of the Orion project.

Odegard, Ryan G.↗
NASA NTRS2008

GN and C Fault Protection Fundamentals

This is a companion presentation for a paper by the same name for the same conference. The objective of this paper is to shed some light on the fundamentals of fault tolerant design for GN&C. The common heritage of ideas behind both faulted and normal operation is explored, as is the increasingly indistinct line between these realms in complex missions. Techniques in common practice are then evaluated in this light to suggest a better direction for future efforts.

fault protection↗
NASA NTRS2019

Adaptations of guidance, navigation, and control verification and validation philosophies for small spacecraft

Decades of experience developing increasingly capable and more complex space-craft have resulted in a set of accepted practices and philosophies to verify and validate (V&V) guidance, navigation, and control (GN&C) subsystems. Until recently, small, low-cost spacecraft have had very simple or non-existent GN&C subsystems requiring minimal or no subsystem testing. As the next generation of small spacecraft take on more challenging GN&C requirements, the GN&C community is struggling with how to scale the subsystem V&V effort to produce spacecraft approaching the reliability of flagship-class missions while staying within the reduced resources of a small satellite project.For this paper, we will examine five aspects of GN&C V&V (requirements definition, software testing and analysis, hardware component testing, integrated vehicle testing, and in-flight V&V) and compare the V&V campaign of a flagship-class mission (Mars 2020) to that of two recent, successful CubeSat missions: ASTERIA and MarCO. Experiences from the development of these CubeSats yield valuable lessons learned and guidelines for future small spacecraft designers.

Chen, George T.↗