Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “communication delay”

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 NTRSDate not supplied

Uncrewed Lunar Surface Operations and Support Activities

Sustained human presence on the surface of the Moon and future missions to Mars require increased independence from surface crews and Earth-based mission control to operate efficiently, safely, and reliably. The time for surface crews to perform tasks will be limited. Extravehicular activities by surface personnel are burdensome and time-consuming, even when a continuous human presence on the surface occurs. Identifying and balancing human/automation roles and tasks and infusing automation and autonomy practices early in a system’s lifecycle will be essential to achieve mission objectives. Among these objectives are attaining a sustained human presence, improving performance and mission effectiveness, reducing operations and maintenance (O&M) costs, and ensuring operations that are robust to communication delays. To achieve these objectives, an operational shift toward increased automation and autonomy with less reliance on humans is needed. Uncrewed lunar surface operations and support activities occur when surface crews are not present or are independent of surface crew timeline activities requiring no surface crew oversight or intervention. These uncrewed surface opportunities can also be planned to minimize crew workload that avoids routine maintenance and support tasks, thus maximizing crew exploration time. Uncrewed preparations such as staging and prepositioning equipment and materials before the crew arrives could improve crew task efficiency. Additional opportunities exist to conduct uncrewed science, exploration, and utilization. Uncrewed surface architecture functions can include science and exploration; habitation; launch and landing support; surface communication and navigation; surface power generation and distribution; human surface mobility; lifting, handling, manipulating; excavation, construction, and site preparation; logistics management; maintenance and repair; surface resource utilization; integrated site operations and shared support services (e.g., site scheduling/prioritization, dust mitigation/contamination control, and surface safety). Early robotic lunar surface campaigns will provide information on the availability of resources, such as oxygen and water, and demonstrate surface-based technologies. After the Artemis III human lunar return mission, a series of landers will deliver surface systems, cargo, supplies, science packages, spare parts, and commodities. A balance of crewed and uncrewed surface operations will enable a sustained lunar surface presence at the South Pole of the Moon at a site that will be known as the Artemis Base Camp (ABC). It is envisioned that base camp operations on and around the Moon will then help prepare for the mission durations and activities needed to support the first human mission to Mars. Before long-duration crew missions to the base camp can occur, the necessary surface infrastructure will be pre-deployed and verified operational. Surface assets will be teleoperated and remotely managed from Earth. Additionally, robotic and short-duration crewed missions to the ABC will ensure the site’s merit to achieve long-term science objectives, availability of usable resources, and that terrain, seasonal variations, and illumination conditions are acceptable. ABC will consist of different areas where specific functions and services are rendered, including: • Launch and Landing Area • Habitation Area • Power Production Area • Resource Areas Launch and Landing Area—The launch and landing area will support associated functions for the arrival and departure of vehicles, such as crewed landing and ascent and uncrewed cargo deliveries and offloading. It will evolve from an unimproved site at the beginning of the exploration campaign to a more sustainable landing and launch area that can support repeated arrivals and departures. Initial uncrewed Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) surface operations may include emplacement of navigation beacons and communication equipment, real-time video and photography of landing/liftoff events, and element repositioning, such as portable utility power (PUP) (applicable for other landed assets at other areas). Site preparations, such as surface leveling, soil compaction, and berm/path construction, may be needed for a more sustainable launch and landing area capable of accommodating vehicles that are increasingly more reusable and reduce the effects of plume surface interactions and ejecta impacts on nearby surface assets. During the ABC missions, cargo and logistics will be delivered to the lunar surface via robotic cargo landers before the crew arrives. These shipments, which can arrive in pressurized logistics carriers, will deliver the logistics necessary to support a crewed mission and include items such as food, water, equipment spares, etc. Providing the capability to retrieve, offload, and transport the logistics closer to the ABC site before the arrival of the crew will increase the overall efficiency of crew operations once they arrive. In the sustained phase of exploration, other supporting services may be needed, such as lander propellant servicing, surface power services, commodity refreshes, and additional inspection, maintenance, and repair capabilities, to sustain a cadence of extended personnel stays and cargo arrivals and departures. Habitation Area—Uncrewed support to surface habitation could involve supporting activation and pre-entry operations of the habitat while the crew is in orbit at the Gateway outpost preparing for a surface landing. Surface Habitat (SH) uncrewed operations may include bringing the cabin environment to a habitable temperature and air mix and activating other critical crew support systems. Potential crop production uncrewed tasks in the SH could also include autonomous watering and tending. Additionally, when the crew departs, the SH enters dormancy for the long period of uncrewed operation. A logistical staging area could also be collocated near the SH. If so, staging operations for crew supplies, waste re-location, and recycling operations may be opportunities for uncrewed operations. Power Production Area—The Fission Surface Power (FSP) element and its supporting distribution equipment provide power to surface elements as needed across the ABC to supplement day-to-day operations and survive lunar nights. Uncrewed support of this power system includes any initial LTV-assisted deployments of cables and other distributed equipment, associated electrical connections, and system testing and activation operations. Robotically performing some inspections, maintenance, or repair tasks on the power distribution equipment could reduce the surface crew workload. Resource Area— Uncrewed resource prospecting, mapping, and characterizing possible resource sites is likely to be time-consuming and represents an opportunity for uncrewed operations between crewed missions. Uncrewed mobile equipment operations will be needed in the extreme environments of permanently shadowed locations where resource extractions occur. As In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) pilot plant operations begin, uncrewed surface support activities with available mobile and portable assets (LTV, PUP, etc.) will better support these operations. Any produced commodities can be stored at a centralized storage location for future use. Also associated with these operations is the use of mobile robotic excavators for resource acquisition and robotic/autonomous regolith processing. The waste tailings generated during excavation and regolith processing would also need to be transported and deposited at a dedicated location. Surface assets will continue operating between crew visits to maintain surface capabilities, conduct lunar surface science, technology demonstrations, and public outreach opportunities. Additionally, certain sustaining tasks that would consume valuable crew time could be performed before crew arrival, or after their departure. This capability may offer more affordable options to construct, activate, test, and maintain a broad set of surface assets. Telerobotically operated human surface mobility systems, such as the LTV and Pressurized Rover (PR), can be utilized for various tasks. Surface environmental conditions pose a distinct challenge for all these activities. Surface illumination and localized shadows are one such factor. Night-survival operations could consist of thermal management, battery pre-charging, and load shedding. Some surface systems may hibernate through the night and then awake and continue nominal operations. Uncrewed mobile assets may use a more adaptive approach to optimize their power and operations; one method is to follow the sunlight. Night-survival operations may be initiated remotely by teleoperation, automated, or accomplished by supervised autonomous operation. The ability to pre-deploy and control remote assets in orbit or on Mars before the arrival of the mission crew is a key capability that can be simulated on the moon. The base camp provides a venue where these advanced operational concepts, technologies, and autonomous methods and techniques, including the incorporation of time delays to simulate Earth-Mars latency can be replicated to help buy down future Mars mission risks. This paper will examine the evolution of uncrewed lunar surface operations and support activities. It will also discuss the lunar surface environmental conditions (thermal, lighting, terrain, topography, communications) along with the challenges they pose on uncrewed surface operations, and the performance of these activities with limited to minimal human interaction and/or teleoperation. Since lunar missions include Mars mission analogs, such investigation provides the framework for future uncrewed Mars mission support.

Mark E Lewis↗
NASA NTRS1992

Dynamic object management for distributed data structures

In distributed-memory multiprocessors, remote memory accesses incur larger delays than local accesses. Hence, insightful allocation and access of distributed data can yield substantial performance gains. The authors argue for the use of dynamic data management policies encapsulated within individual distributed data structures. Distributed data structures offer performance, flexibility, abstraction, and system independence. This approach is supported by data from a trace-driven simulation study of parallel scientific benchmarks. Experimental data on memory locality, message count, message volume, and communication delay suggest that data-structure-specific data management is superior to a single, system-imposed policy.

Totty, Brian K.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Autonomous Spacecraft Communication Interface for Load Planning

Ground-based controllers can remain in continuous communication with spacecraft in low Earth orbit (LEO) with near-instantaneous communication speeds. This permits near real-time control of all of the core spacecraft systems by ground personnel. However, as NASA missions move beyond LEO, light-time communication delay issues, such as time lag and low bandwidth, will prohibit this type of operation. As missions become more distant, autonomous control of manned spacecraft will be required. The focus of this paper is the power subsystem. For present missions, controllers on the ground develop a complete schedule of power usage for all spacecraft components. This paper presents work currently underway at NASA to develop an architecture for an autonomous spacecraft, and focuses on the development of communication between the Mission Manager and the Autonomous Power Controller. These two systems must work together in order to plan future load use and respond to unanticipated plan deviations. Using a nominal spacecraft architecture and prototype versions of these two key components, a number of simulations are run under a variety of operational conditions, enabling development of content and format of the messages necessary to achieve the desired goals. The goals include negotiation of a load schedule that meets the global requirements (contained in the Mission Manager) and local power system requirements (contained in the Autonomous Power Controller), and communication of off-plan disturbances that arise while executing a negotiated plan. The message content is developed in two steps: first, a set of rapid-prototyping "paper" simulations are preformed; then the resultant optimized messages are codified for computer communication for use in automated testing.

Controls↗
NASA NTRS2017

A Simulation Base Investigation of High Latency Space Systems Operations

NASA's human space program has developed considerable experience with near Earth space operations. Although NASA has experience with deep space robotic missions, NASA has little substantive experience with human deep space operations. Even in the Apollo program, the missions lasted only a few weeks and the communication latencies were on the order of seconds. Human missions beyond the relatively close confines of the Earth-Moon system will involve missions with durations measured in months and communications latencies measured in minutes. To minimize crew risk and to maximize mission success, NASA needs to develop a better understanding of the implications of these types of mission durations and communication latencies on vehicle design, mission design and flight controller interaction with the crew. To begin to address these needs, NASA performed a study using a physics-based subsystem simulation to investigate the interactions between spacecraft crew and a ground-based mission control center for vehicle subsystem operations across long communication delays. The simulation, built with a subsystem modeling tool developed at NASA's Johnson Space Center, models the life support system of a Mars transit vehicle. The simulation contains models of the cabin atmosphere and pressure control system, electrical power system, drinking and waste water systems, internal and external thermal control systems, and crew metabolic functions. The simulation has three interfaces: 1) a real-time crew interface that can be use to monitor and control the vehicle subsystems; 2) a mission control center interface with data transport delays up to 15 minutes each way; 3) a real-time simulation test conductor interface that can be use to insert subsystem malfunctions and observe the interactions between the crew, ground, and simulated vehicle. The study was conducted at the 21st NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) mission between July 18th and Aug 3rd of year 2016. The NEEMO mission provides ideal conditions for this study with crew in the loop, an active control center, and real-time flow of high latency communications and data. NEEMO crew and ground support will work through procedures including activation of the transit vehicle power system, opening the hatch between the transit vehicle and a Mars ascent vehicle, transferring simulated crewmembers between vehicles, overcoming subsystem malfunctions, sending simulated crewmember on extra-vehicular activities, and other housekeeping activities. This study is enhancing the understanding of high latency operations and the advantages and disadvantages of different communication methods. It is also providing results that will help improve the design of simulation interfaces and inform the design of Mars transit vehicles.

Li, Zu Qun↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Extended Duration: The SIRIUS 21 Crew Perspective

The SIRIUS (Scientific International Research In a Unique terrestrial Station) missions represent a collaborative effort between NASA and Russia’s Institute for Biomedical Problems (IBMP) to conduct a series of long duration isolation and confinement spaceflight analog missions. Three missions of 17-day, 4-month, and 8-month duration (SIRIUS 17, 19, and 21) have been completed at IBMP’s Ground-Based Experimental Complex / Nazemnyy eksperimental'nyy kompleks (NEK) in Moscow, Russia. The international SIRIUS 21 crew comprising representatives from the United States, United Arab Emirates and Russia recently completed the 8-month analog lunar mission. The extended duration mission included simulated lunar transit, orbital, and surface operations with corresponding deep space communication delay, during which the crew participated in nearly 70 studies, eight of which were sponsored by NASA’s Human Research Program. The studies examined the effect of isolation and confinement on the behavioral health of research subjects, and investigated medical countermeasures, team performance, crew dynamics, crew autonomy, food system risks, consequences of confinement and associated physiological stressors. SIRIUS 21 crewmembers also participated in operational tasks such as Rover and CubeSat assembly, simulated lunar sample assessment, VR activities, robotic arm training, environmental systems monitoring, exercise, greenhouse maintenance and 3D printing. Communication with Mission Control was limited to 30-minute periods every two hours. Since access to the internet and email was restricted, simulated ground support provided the Crew’s primary source of daily news and mission information. This panel discussion will include presentations from the US SIRIUS 21 crewmembers – William Brown and Ashley Kowalski – about their experience participating in the mission and science. A facilitated question and answer session will follow with attendees encouraged to ask questions and join in discussion with the SIRIUS 21 crewmembers about their experiences. William Brown came to SIRIUS 21 with experience spread across multiple industries, including the military, defense contracting, healthcare consulting, software engineering, and logistics. He has lived in the Middle East, Central Asia, and Russia. A former Boren Scholar, Brown is fluent in Russian. He holds a Master of International Business degree from the University of South Carolina’s Darla Moore School of Business. Prior to that, he earned a bachelor’s degree in Russian language, literature, and culture from the University of South Carolina. There, he also completed additional undergraduate coursework in computer science. Ashley Kowalski is a Project Leader in The Aerospace Corporation’s International Partnerships Department, where she works with, represents, and provides technical support to the the U.S. Space Force Space Systems Command International Affairs (SSC/IA) office. Through her numerous national and international assignments (Russia, China, and Germany), she has worked on topics related to international space systems, national security space systems, civil systems (including human spaceflight and civil launch projects), space policy, satellite industry analysis, and satellite manufacturing start-ups. She is proficient in Russian and German, and fluent in Polish. Kowalski received her Bachelor of Science and Master of Science degrees in mechanical and aerospace engineering from George Washington University in 2011 and 2012, respectively.

S. E. Whiting↗
NASA NTRS2014

An Architecture to Enable Autonomous Control of Spacecraft

Autonomy is required for manned spacecraft missions distant enough that light-time communication delays make ground-based mission control infeasible. Presently, ground controllers develop a complete schedule of power modes for all spacecraft components based on a large number of factors. The proposed architecture is an early attempt to formalize and automate this process using on-vehicle computation resources. In order to demonstrate this architecture, an autonomous electrical power system controller and vehicle Mission Manager are constructed. These two components are designed to work together in order to plan upcoming load use as well as respond to unanticipated deviations from the plan. The communication protocol was developed using "paper" simulations prior to formally encoding the messages and developing software to implement the required functionality. These software routines exchange data via TCP/IP sockets with the Mission Manager operating at NASA Ames Research Center and the autonomous power controller running at NASA Glenn Research Center. The interconnected systems are tested and shown to be effective at planning the operation of a simulated quasi-steady state spacecraft power system and responding to unexpected disturbances.

space power systems↗
NASA NTRS1987

Contingent plan structures for spacecraft

Most current AI planners build partially ordered plan structures which delay decisions on action ordering. Such structures cannot easily represent contingent actions. A representation which can is presented. The representation has some other useful features: it provides a good account of the causal structure of a plan, can be used to describe disjunctive actions, and it offers a planner the opportunity of even less commitment than the classical partial order on actions. The use of this representation is demonstrated in an on-board spacecraft activity sequencing problem. Contingent plan execution in a spacecraft context highlights the requirements for a fully disjunctive representation, since communication delays often prohibit extensive ground-based accounting for remotely sensed information and replanning on execution failure.

Drummond, M.↗
NASA NTRS2020

Design of Autonomous Medical Response Agent (AMRA) Aggregate Information Dashboard (AID)

Future astronauts in deep space missions will rely on tools and technologies empowering them to self-diagnose and self-treat medical conditions. Given communications delays and limited bandwidth in future long-duration exploration missions (LDEMs), medical decision support technologies must empower the crew to manage routine medical activities, acute medical incidents, as well as emergency medical scenarios independently from ground support.The Autonomous Medical Response Agent (AMRA) is envisioned as a digital tool enabling crew to issue medical complaints and interact with a medical decision support algorithm which develops a differential diagnosis and recommends a treatment protocol for the condition. AMRA will draw from individual crew medical history in addition to crew symptoms to more efficiently identify high-risk medical conditions. A new symptom could be indicative of a chronic condition or a normal adaptation to long-duration spaceflight, but could just as easily be indicative of an adverse vehicle condition affecting the entire crew.While real-time communication with a flight surgeon may not possible, the crew will nonetheless require a means to communicate and document both routine and emergency medical incidents to ground support. Conversely, flight surgeons and medical specialists on the ground will need to understand information such as crew vitals or responses to medical check-ups and examinations within the larger context of crew schedule, mission activities, and vehicle performance. A user interface which establishes communication protocols between an individual crew member and AMRA, as well as ground support to the crew is a significant area of research demanding input and consideration.The design of AMRA AID is intended to: a) represent routine medical activities as well as new (unplanned) medical incidents within the larger context of crew schedule and mission activities, and b) increase confidence between ground support and crew members over the course of LDEMs. Maintaining situation awareness of unplanned medical incidents between ground and crew will be a critical element within LDEMs. Two medical incidents headache and difficulty breathing are being explored within a user interface prototype which captures communications protocols between crew members and mission control, human health monitoring, vehicle or environmental monitoring, as well as crew schedule and mission activities holistically.

Yashar, M.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Advancing Autonomy in Distributed Space Systems: Insights From on-Orbit Testing with the Starling 1.0 Mission

Autonomous decision-making is crucial for enhancing mission effectiveness in Distributed Space Systems (DSS), particularly in multi-spacecraft operations where communication constraints and mission complexity pose challenges. The Distributed Spacecraft Autonomy (DSA) team at NASA’s Ames Research Center is advancing autonomy in DSS through five key technical areas: distributed resource and task management, reactive operations, system modeling and simulation, human-swarm interaction, and ad hoc network communications. The DSA experiment onboard the Starling 1.0 Mission showcases collaborative resource allocation for multi-point science data collection with four small spacecraft. Autonomy in decision-making is highlighted as a crucial factor for multi-spacecraft missions, enabling spacecraft to operate independently, reducing reliance on ground control. This capability is particularly significant for future deep-space missions, where communication delays and limited data transmission capacity make traditional command and control approaches impractical. This demonstration focuses on a GPS Channel Selection Experiment, leveraging emergent capabilities like "shared sampling" and "simultaneous sampling" to optimize channel selection across the spacecraft swarm. The experiment aims to capture ionospheric phenomena such as the Equatorial Ionization Anomaly and Polar Patches. The DSA system's autonomous reconfiguration ability is showcased, emphasizing its adaptability to natural phenomena without significant integration efforts. The GPS Channel Selection Experiment utilizes a dual-band GPS receiver to estimate plasma density in the ionosphere. Explorative and exploitative channel selections are employed based on the nature of observed phenomena. The performance of DSA algorithms is evaluated in terms of optimal channel allocations and responsiveness to changes in observed features. The DSA Flight Software utilizes the Core Flight System (cFS) framework, ensuring compatibility with the Starling 1.0 flight mission software. DSA showcases results from RTI’s Connext DDS Micro communication middleware, enabling message routing over the Ad-Hoc Network of Starling 1.0. This paper provides a comprehensive overview of the DSA experiment's initial results, emphasizing the advancements in autonomy for Distributed Space Systems and the successful collaboration with the Starling 1.0 mission.

Caleb Ashmore Adams↗
NASA NTRS2016

International Space Station (ISS) Payload Autonomous Operations Past, Present and Future

Draper Laboratorys Timeliner is a scripting and automation system that runs onboard computers in the International Space Station (ISS). Timeliner is fully integrated with ISS and can be used to automate ISS operations tasks. Some of the most challenging aspects of operating a payload in low earth orbit are communication delays, ground equipment failures, and human errors. How does a Payload Developer (PD) know their equipment is operating nominally and collecting science in the most efficient way possible or even powered at any given time? During a ground Loss of Signal (LOS) data outage, PDs have no insight into their experiments state, and benefit greatly from Timeliner scripts executing on ISS to perform telemetry monitoring and commanding operations. This paper will discuss current software designs, and new operational uses for Timeliner. Existing Timeliner capabilities discussed will include: autonomous EXPRESS Rack activation and deactivation; autonomous science data downlinks; Minus Eighty Degree Freezer (MELFI) Dewar autonomous safing; JAXA and ESA module autonomous payload facility safing; as well as many others. New operational concepts discussed will include allowing Timeliner on the payload computer to issue core commands (Thermal, Power, Fire Detection), creation of new ground tools that will monitor the current status of Payload Racks as well as all the messaging from autonomous scripts executing, decreasing approval time for Timeliner bundles, and opening up the Payload MDM Enhanced Processor Integrated Communications Card (EPIC) interface. The EPIC interface could provide a new crew interface for PL Timeliner execution. The new interface could operate on either a Payload Computer System (PCS) or a Station Support Computer (SSC) that is plugged into either the Payload LAN or the Operations LAN which will make communicating to the PL MDM more flexible and greatly increase band width for communication.

Space Mission Automation↗
NASA NTRS2018

Low-Latency Teleoperations: Operational Implications for Human Space Exploration

Low-latency teleoperations (LLT) is envisioned to be an element of human exploration missions in a number of different applications. LLT can be broadly considered to encompass any remote operation of an asset with a communication delay that is less than the human response time to allow for what is effectively "real-time" or "near real-time" operations. This paper will explore motivations and operational implications for why and how LLT might be used for human exploration space missions. LLT analyses have been performed under the auspices of the NASA Human Spaceflight Architecture Team (HAT) and Evolvable Mars Campaign (EMC). The EMC created a flexible, evolvable, capability-driven architectural strategy to enable a sustainable long-term human presence at Mars. LLT is envisioned to be part of that strategy for both in-space and on-surface applications, and this paper will expand on operational considerations within that broader strategic context, as well additional contexts. Some operational implications explored in this paper, derived largely from previous work, are: (1) crew mission support, for which we will address roles for Mission Control on earth, balanced with the capability for crew and robotic assets to operate independently, (2) science operations, with a focus on "backroom" support, highly dynamic science, and enhanced science return and efficiency, and (3) operational efficiency at a deep-space destination such as Mars, including implications for communications infrastructures and how to leverage and balance system autonomy with crew operations, both of which can inform the overall operational "choreography" between crew members, multiple shifts, and exploration assets.

human spaceflight↗
NASA NTRS2017

Simulation Based Studies of Low Latency Teleoperations for NASA Exploration Missions

Human exploration of Mars will involve both crewed and robotic systems. Many mission concepts involve the deployment and assembly of mission support assets prior to crew arrival on the surface. Some of these deployment and assembly activities will be performed autonomously while others will be performed using teleoperations. However, significant communications latencies between the Earth and Mars make teleoperations challenging. Alternatively, low latency teleoperations are possible from locations in Mars orbit like Mars' moons Phobos and Deimos. To explore these latency opportunities, NASA is conducting a series of studies to investigate the effects of latency on telerobotic deployment and assembly activities. These studies are being conducted in laboratory environments at NASA's Johnson Space Center (JSC), the Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA) at JSC and the NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) underwater habitat off the coast of Florida. The studies involve two human-in-the-loop interactive simulations developed by the NASA Exploration Systems Simulations (NExSyS) team at JSC. The first simulation investigates manipulation related activities while the second simulation investigates mobility related activities. The first simulation provides a simple real-time operator interface with displays and controls for a simulated 6 degree of freedom end effector. The initial version of the simulation uses a simple control mode to decouple the robotic kinematic constraints and a communications delay to model latency effects. This provides the basis for early testing with more detailed manipulation simulations planned for the future. Subjects are tested using five operating latencies that represent teleoperation conditions from local surface operations to orbital operations at Phobos, Deimos and ultimately high Martian orbit. Subject performance is measured and correlated with three distance-to-target zones of interest. Each zone represents a target distance ranging from beyond 10m in Zone 1, through 1 cm to contact in Zone 5 with a step size factor of 10. Collected data consists of both objective simulation data (time, distance, hand controller inputs, velocity) and subjective questionnaire data. The second simulation provides a simple real-time operator interface with displays and control of a simulated surface rover. The rover traverses a synthetic Mars-like terrain and must be maneuvered to avoid obstacles while progressing to its destination. Like the manipulator simulation, subjects are tested using five operating latencies that represent teleoperation conditions from local surface operations to orbital operations at Phobos, Deimos and ultimately high Martian orbit. The rover is also operated at three different traverse speeds to assess the correlation between latency and speed. Collected data consisted of both objective simulation data (time, distance, hand controller inputs, braking) and subjective questionnaire data. These studies are exploring relationships between task complexity, operating speeds, operator efficiencies, and communications latencies for low latency teleoperations in support of human planetary exploration. This paper presents early results from these studies along with the current observations and conclusions. These and planned future studies will help to inform NASA on the potential for low latency teleoperations to support human exploration of Mars and inform the design of robotic systems and exploration missions.

Gernhardt, Michael L.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

OceanWATERS Lander Robotic Arm Operation

Ocean Worlds Autonomy Testbed for Exploration Research and Simulation (OceanWATERS) is an open-source simulator for developing onboard autonomy software for robotic exploration of ocean worlds, such as Europa, Enceladus, and Titan, built on the Robot Operating System (ROS) and Gazebo simulation environment. Inevitable ground communication delays increase demand for a high degree of autonomy during excavation, collection and transfer of samples to scientific instruments for in-situ analysis. This paper offers a detailed discussion of the robotic arm design and operation for such autonomous surface exploration, taking as reference the Europa Lander mission. The lander arm, which is designed primarily to acquire icy surface and subsurface samples within the arm’s workspace, is a 6-degree-of-freedom manipulator with two end effectors: a sample excavation tool and a trenching end-effector. The robotic arm’s modes and operations can be summarized as follows: stowed arm, intended as the lander arm default configuration characterized by zero-power consumption; un-stowed arm, target arm configuration after its first deployment; selection and deployment of the end-effector to use next; guarded move, to detect ground level at the desired trenching location; drill ice using the grinder; dig trench at a particular location using the scoop; deliver sample to the sample transfer dock; discard redundant samples. The motion planning tool used for the lander arm is MoveIt, a ROS package. MoveIt uses sampling-based planning and collision checking libraries to determine safe paths. The Rapidly Exploring Random Trees* (RRT*) has been chosen as default planning algorithm as it provides optimal plans with an exponential speed and is guaranteed to find a solution, if feasible solutions exist. Furthermore, this work quantifies and discusses the energy requirements for excavating and collecting samples. In OceanWATERS, force feedback from the terrain, which influences the arm dynamics, is modelled using a discrete element method (DEM) simulation. The DEM and Gazebo software run in parallel and communicate through a co-simulation plugin. This paper presents an analysis and comparison of three DEM open source software (YADE, ESyS-Particle, Project Chrono) for implementation in OceanWATERS and motivates the choice of YADE as most suitable candidate.

Damiana Catanoso↗
NASA NTRS2016

MarCO: Interplanetary Mission Development on a CubeSat Scale

Shortly after JPL’s Interior Exploration using Seismic Investigations, Geodesy and Heat Transport (InSight) mission launches, separates, and commences its cruise phase, two CubeSats will deploy from the launch vehicle’s upper stage and begin independent flight to Mars (Fig. 1). During InSight’s entry, descent, and landing (EDL) sequence, these twin Mars Cube One (MarCO) spacecraft will fly 3,500 km above the Martian surface, recording and relaying InSight UHF radio data to the Deep Space Network (DSN) on Earth1. MarCO is a twin CubeSat mission developed by the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) to accompany the InSight (Interior Exploration using Seismic Investigations, Geodesy and Heat Transport) Mars mission lander. MarCO's primary mission objective is to launch with InSight and independently fly to Mars to serve as a communications relay during InSight's entry, descent, and landing (EDL) phase. MarCO represents a new type of deep space mission: CubeSats at Mars. Building on the development of JPL's first interplanetary CubeSat project, the Interplanetary Nano-Spacecraft Pathfinder in Relevant Environment (INSPIRE), MarCO further refined the approach to hardware, software, and ground architecture development to solve the challenges of quickly building low-budget spacecraft to fly to Mars. The greatest constraint, beyond others typical of CubeSat missions, was time. The duration between MarCO's conception to completion of spacecraft assembly was less than two years - an unprecedented schedule for any planetary mission to date. Through necessity, MarCO has built on previous experience, procedures, systems, and development methodologies, defining a new niche for supporting larger primary missions. The MarCO spacecraft are poised to write a new chapter in deep space exploration. Originally slated to launch and reach Mars in 2016, the InSight mission schedule subsequently slipped to 2018. During the original landing of InSight, Earth would not be in view, and no orbiter around Mars would have been in position to both receive UHF EDL data and simultaneously relay it back to Earth. It was from this obstacle that MarCO was conceived. Regardless of any changes to InSight’s 2018 EDL configuration geometry, MarCO is still expected to fly and serve in the same capacity as originally designed: the first CubeSat mission to Mars. CubeSats have historically been firmly in the domain of universities and small companies. As first conceived, they served as a platform upon which to teach all aspects of the space mission lifecycle. JPL took on this mission type with Interplanetary Nano-Spacecraft Pathfinder in Relevant Environment2 (INSPIRE), moving the concept into a new domain: deep space. Building from the INSPIRE platform and lessons learned, MarCO addressed new challenges in the domain of planetary missions: independent interplanetary flight and navigation, integration with a large-scale mission, long-distance and long-delay communication, short development time, and a small development team. Of these, the greatest constraint was schedule: only 18 months passed from conception of mission concept until delivery of fully assembled and tested flight hardware. Careful selection of mission team, along with extensive use of off-the-shelf equipment, and streamlining automated processes, was essential. This achievement represents the next step in the evolution of CubeSats beyond low-Earth orbit.

Werne, Thomas↗
NASA NTRS2022

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

The Risk of Performance and Behavioral Health Decrements Due to Inadequate Cooperation, Coordination, Communication, and Psychosocial Adaptation within a Team (the Team Risk) is primarily performance-focused, with a secondary emphasis on behavioral health outcomes resulting from team performance and interpersonal interactions. Monitoring tools, measures, and countermeasures are aimed at enhancing team processes and team composition configurations to optimize team performance and functioning. Long-duration exploration missions (LDEMs) will include major challenges that could affect team performance, including social isolation, physical confinement, a small and diverse crew, communication delays between crew and ground, limited or no crew rotation or evacuation options, limited or no resupply, and a high-consequence environment. Each of these conditions will affect the crew’s coordination, cooperation, psychological well-being, and performance. Although the International Space Station (ISS) remains important for studies that require spaceflight testing and validation, the current conditions on the ISS do not adequately mimic the exploration environment that is required for National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) teams research, and thus access to terrestrial or ground-based analogs of LDEM conditions is paramount. The emphasis on analogs for research is reflected in this updated evidence review of the Team Risk, and includes data from studies conducted at isolated, confined, extreme (ICE) environments (e.g., Antarctic stations), and from several mission simulation analogs such as the Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA) (HERA Experiment Information Package, 2014), also known as isolated, confined, controlled (ICC) environments. These studies have characterized many team factors regarding LDEMs, and the Team Risk has now matured from risk characterization to focusing more on countermeasure development. Because spaceflight evidence for team-level research is lacking, no reliable data is available to quantify the impact of team-level variables on individual and team-level outcomes during spaceflight missions. Until recently, no systematic attempt had been undertaken to measure the performance effects of team cohesion, team composition, team training, or team-related psychosocial adaptation during spaceflight. The Team Risk is a relatively young research area for NASA, with substantial growth only since the 2000s, and with limited access to spaceflight performance data. As a result, spaceflight evidence is lacking to identify specifically what team composition, level of training, amount of cohesion, or quality of psychosocial adaptation is necessary to reduce the risk of performance errors in space. However, astronaut journals and interviews and reports from spaceflight subject matter experts (SMEs) provide testimonies that team performance during spaceflight is important for mission success and to maintain crew health. Team spaceflight data is now being collected as part of the Spaceflight Standard Measures task (Clement, 2021)—a set of core measurements related to many human spaceflight risks that are collected from astronauts before, during, and after long-duration missions. The team-related standard measures focus on team cohesion, team performance, group living, team climate, and team processes. Collection of standard measures data is ongoing and published data is not yet available. Finally, although spaceflight evidence is lacking, evidence gleaned from ground studies and spaceflight analog studies will help close the gaps outlined in the Team Risk. Ground-based studies provide quantitative evidence for team functioning in ICE environments. Academic research on teams has produced dozens of meta-analyses that can be used to understand the general relationships among team inputs (e.g., team member characteristics and skills, job context), team processes, and emergent states (e.g., coordination, communication, cooperation, cohesion, trust, shared cognition), and team outcomes (e.g., effectiveness, errors, adaptation). Teams are complex, incorporating individual characteristics of team members, but also existing at a level that is greater than the sum of its parts. Therefore, the Team Risk must be integrated with other individual-focused NASA Human Research Program (HRP) risks, including Behavioral Medicine (BMed), Sleep, and Human-Systems Integration Architecture (HSIA), and emerging research indicates more integration may needed between the Team Risk and the physiologically oriented risks. Much of this integration occurs through the Human Systems Risk Board (HSRB). A lack of team functioning may be a stressor in some circumstances, but the team often acts as a countermeasure. For example, support for team leaders and teammates can facilitate individual functioning and encourage psychological and physically healthy behaviors and attitudes. However, more research is needed regarding teams during LDEMs and the remaining gaps in the research are described in the current report.

Lauren Blackwell Landon↗
NASA NTRS1972

Manual control theory applied to air traffic controller-pilot cooperation

Reduced runway separation standards are among the means which have been proposed for increasing airport capacity. The probability of a blunder will dominate the calculation of safe separation standards. Then the determinant of safe system performance will be the system reaction time comprised of the air traffic controller's detection, decision and communication delays, and the response times of the pilot and aircraft in executing a collision avoidance manuever. Estimates of these times, based on existing data, show that the delays ascribable to the human portions of the man-machine system are comparatively unimportant. New developments in radar, computers, and data links will be required to provide any substantial improvement of the existing system, and the goal of 2500 ft of separation may not be achievable.

Graham, D.↗
NASA NTRS1980

Problem solving in a distributed environment

Distributed problem solving is anayzed as a blend of two disciplines: (1) problem solving and ai; and (2) distributed systems (monitoring). It may be necessary to distribute because the application itself is one of managing distributed resources (e.g., distributed sensor net) and communication delays preclude centralized processing, or it may be desirable to distribute because a single computational engine may not satisfy the needs of a given task. In addition, considerations of reliability may dictate distribution. Examples of multi-process language environment are given.

Rashid, R. F.↗
NASA NTRS1980

Attitude control fault protection - The Voyager experience

The length of the Voyager mission and the communication delay caused by the distances involved made fault protection a necessary part of the Voyager Attitude and Articulation Control Subsystem (AACS) design. An overview of the Voyager attitude control fault protection is given and flight experiences relating to fault protection are provided.

Litty, E. C.↗