SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “science objectives”
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.
Artemis III Science Objectives
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Science Objectives of the Aerosols, Clouds, Convection, and Precipitation Millimeter- and Submillimeter-wave Radiometers
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Utilizing Mobile Instrument Suites to meet high priority lunar science objectives
No abstract provided
Science Objectives and Investigations for the Lunar GNSS Receiver Experiment (LuGRE)
A resurgence in lunar activity is taking place, and the pace of Moon-bound launches is only expected to increase. While a dozen missions have already launched to the Moon in this new era, there are now more than 80 government space agencies and an increasing number of private space companies, many of which are planning missions to the Moon. From a navigation perspective, the goals of these future missions are ambitious (e.g., the 2018 Global Exploration Roadmap identified 100-meter position accuracy as a performance target for precision landing) but will not all be able to rely on a human-in-the-loop approach—and the sheer volume of planned missions makes ground-based tracking impractical.
Science Objectives and Investigations for the Lunar GNSS Receiver Experiment (LuGRE)
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Mars Sample Return Campaign Science Objectives for the MSR Sample Receiving Project
The joint NASA/ESA Mars Sample Return (MSR) Campaign has a goal of returning a carefully selected cache of samples collected from Jezero crater, Mars. These samples are currently being collected by the Mars 2020 mission Perseverance rover (the first flight element of MSR).
Science Objectives and Investigations for the Lunar GNSS Receiver Experiment (LuGRE)
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
An Experimental Approach to Inform Venus Astrobiology Mission Design and Science Objectives
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Scientific Investigations Associated with the Human Exploration of Mars in the Next 35 Years
A human mission to Mars would present an unprecedented opportunity to investigate the earliest history of the solar system. This history that has largely been overwritten on Earth by active geological processing throughout its history, but on Mars, large swaths of the ancient crust remain exposed at the surface, allowing us to investigate martian processes at the earliest time periods when life first appeared on the Earth. Mars' surface has been largely frozen in place for 4 billion years, and after losing its atmosphere and magnetic field what re-mains is an ancient landscape of former hydrothermal systems, river beds, volcanic eruptions, and impact craters. This allows us to investigate scientific questions ranging from the nature of the impact history of the solar system to the origins of life. We present here a summary of the findings of the Human Science Objectives Science Analysis Group, or HSO-SAG chartered by MEPAG in 2015 to address science objectives and landing site criteria for future human missions to Mars (Niles, Beaty et al. 2015). Currently, NASA's plan to land astronauts on Mars in the mid 2030's would allow for robust human exploration of the surface in the next 35 years. We expect that crews would be able to traverse to sites up to 100 km away from the original landing site using robust rovers. A habitat outfitted with state of the art laboratory facilities that could enable the astronauts to perform cutting edge science on the surface of Mars. Robotic/human partnership during exploration would further enhance the science return of the mission.
Europa Explorer - An Exceptional Mission Using Existing Technology
A mission to Europa has been identified as a high priority by the science community for several years. The difficulty of an orbital mission, primarily due to the propulsive requirements and Jupiter's trapped radiation, led to many studies which investigated various approaches to meeting the science goals. The Europa Orbiter Mission studied in the late 1990's only met the most fundamental science objectives. The science objectives have evolved with the discoveries from the Galileo mission. JPL studied one concept, Europa Explorer, for a Europa orbiting mission which could meet a much expanded set of science objectives. A study science group was formed to verify that the science objectives and goals were being adequately met by the resulting mission design concept. The Europa Explorer design emerged primarily from two key self-imposed constraints: 1) meet the full set of identified nonlander science objectives and 2) use only existing technology.
SIR-C/X-SAR free flyer concept
Viewgraphs on Spaceborne Imaging Radar (SAR) - C/X- Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Free Flyer concept are presented. An overview, science objectives, science rationale, geophysical parameters from SAR, programmatic goals, concept description, and a candidate mission description are included.
Galileo: The Earth encounter
The following subject areas are covered: Galileo Veega trajectory to Jupiter; lunar science objectives; Earth science objectives; Santa 2 data flow; Galileo - the U.S./Canada connections and European connections; UV spectrometer observations during close encounter periods; phase angle and cone angle of the Earth during the Earth encounters; Lunar orbit traverse at EGA1; Moon imaging - EGA1; Galileo imaging Earth after EGA1; and Earth 1 flyby geometry.
Life science research objectives and representative experiments for the space station
A workshop was convened to develop hypothetical experiments to be used as a baseline for space station designer and equipment specifiers to ensure responsiveness to the users, the life science community. Sixty-five intra- and extramural scientists were asked to describe scientific rationales, science objectives, and give brief representative experiment descriptions compatible with expected space station accommodations, capabilities, and performance envelopes. Experiment descriptions include hypothesis, subject types, approach, equipment requirements, and space station support requirements. The 171 experiments are divided into 14 disciplines.
Evolution of NASA's Earth Science Digital Object Identifier Registration System
NASA's Earth Science Data and Information System (ESDIS) Project has implemented a fully automated system for assigning Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) to Earth Science data products being managed by its network of 12 distributed active archive centers (DAACs). A key factor in the successful evolution of the DOI registration system over last 7 years has been the incorporation of community input from three focus groups under the NASA's Earth Science Data System Working Group (ESDSWG). These groups were largely composed of DOI submitters and data curators from the 12 data centers serving the user communities of various science disciplines. The suggestions from these groups were formulated into recommendations for ESDIS consideration and implementation. The ESDIS DOI registration system has evolved to be fully functional with over 5,000 publicly accessible DOIs and over 200 DOIs being held in reserve status until the information required for registration is obtained. The goal is to assign DOIs to the entire 8000+ data collections under ESDIS management via its network of discipline-oriented data centers. DOIs make it easier for researchers to discover and use earth science data and they enable users to provide valid citations for the data they use in research. Also for the researcher wishing to reproduce the results presented in science publications, the DOI can be used to locate the exact data or data products being cited.
An Optimization Approach to Support Science Decision Making for Lunar Surface Exploration
Introduction: Scientific exploration is one of the three pillars of NASA’s Moon2Mars architecture, with crew surface extra vehicular activities (EVA) serving a critical enabling function. Development of surface EVA operational planning and execution, specifically integrating science and flight control teams (FCT), is currently being explored through analog scenarios. This integration, exercised, for example, through the Joint EVA and Hu-man Surface Mobility Test Team (JETT), allows for science input on EVA activities in near real-time through a Science Evaluation Room (SER), or Arte-mis science backroom, which integrates with the broader FCT through the Science Officer. The SER works within the FCT to support dynamic EVA planning in response to changes in operational constraints as well as science opportunities and re-prioritization, increasing the mission science return and accelerating the accomplishment of the Moon2Mars science objectives. The SER works within the FCT to provide recommendations to traverse execution in near real-time. One challenge is the requirement to deliver SER inputs to the FCT on operationally relevant timelines. Failure to do so may result in suboptimal execution of science exploration EVAs or even loss of key science objectives. To close this gap, we present a network optimization tool to allow the SER to provide rapid input to the FCT in response to changes in operational constraints or science opportunities. Inputs are predicated on approved science objectives, and clear rationale must be provided to the FCT for any requested change. Accordingly, this tool incorporates the Science Traceability Matrix (STM), SER prioritization scheme, and station characterization and action planning with operational constraints such as duration, traverse speed, and distance to maximize science objectives based on SER priorities, consistent with FCT operational requirements. Method: As a proof of concept, we used an existing linear programing software package used to simulate optimal routes through cellular metabolism. We built a Demonstrative Model with three STM objectives and four stations on a region of the Moon. The objectives were given an arbitrary prioritization and mapped to the stations through four possible crew actions. (Figs. 1 and 2). This station to STM mapping is consistent with the method used by the JETT5 Science Team to develop analog surface EVA science planning. We used a grid system with the landing site at the origin and the four stations placed across the positive x,y quadrant. Actions were assigned to each station and the accomplishment of those actions resulted in a numerical “reward” based on the ability of that action to achieve science objectives. The aggregate reward from each individual STM objective contributes to a global score (Science Yield), weighted by its priority. Operational constraints included a requirement to start and end at the landing site, 5 minutes each for initial station characterization and “clean up,” and variable total EVA time, traverse rate (fixed to 0.5 meters per second in our example), and time to perform each action (10, 5, 7, and 15 min for actions 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively). Additional constraints and variables will be added in the future (e.g., sample mass, number of stations, traverse route constraints, illumination). Optimization. We converted the connections (arcs) between these stations (nodes) into a mixed integer linear programming optimization problem (arcs = constraints, nodes = variables) with the objective to maximize Science Yield. For any action, the Science Yield is equal to the relevance of that action to an STM objective [3, 2, and 1 point(s) for High, Med., and Low relevance, respectively], multiplied by the STM Objective Priority [3, 2, and 1 point(s) for High, Med., and Low priority, respectively]. This resulted in a model that computes the optimal station and action combination to maximize the Science Yield. These weightings can be adjusted by the SER as desired. Results: We explored three test cases for the Demonstrative Model. First, we set the maximum EVA duration to 120 minutes and computed the optimal route (Fig. 3A). The model suggested per-forming Actions 1 and 2 at Station P01, followed by Actions 1 and 2 at Station P02, and finally Actions 1 and 3 at Station P04 before returning to the Landing Site. Second, we adjusted the STM Objective Priori-ty order and computed the new optimal route (Fig. 3B). Under this situation, the model suggested per-forming all Actions at Station P02 followed by all Actions at Station P03. The previous test cases were relevant to SER planning activities. Next, we explored providing mid-EVA replanning input to the FCT. Scenario: While executing the Route in Fig. 3A the crew finishes at Station P01 and FCT decides that the EVA needs to finish in 45 minutes back at the Landing Site. FCT asks SER to recommend changes to the plan to accommodate this operation-al change. Using the model and incorporating these new constraints (start at Station P01, max. time of 45 min), the model suggested performing Actions 2 and 4 at Station P03 (Fig. 4), requiring 41 minutes to complete and return to the Landing Site. Interestingly, Station 3 was not part of the original route. Using the model, we determined the EVA would need 66 minutes, instead of 45, in order for the original Station P04 to yield a larger Science Yield than Station P03. The parametrization and simulation was per-formed in less than a minute, demonstrating the operational relevance of the approach. Future Efforts: The results from the Demonstrative Model suggest this tool can accelerate SER decision making on operationally relevant timelines. Use in analog activities, such as JETT5 or follow-ons, which have over a dozen stations for a crew to explore and over a dozen actions per station, will provide needed validation of the utility of this tool for planning EVAs, replanning mid-EVA, or planning follow-on EVAs based on previous results. Further integration with FCT execution monitoring tools may provide additional efficiency gains, al-lowing rapid and iterative exploration of operation-al and science decision space by the FCT and SER.
Spectra, composition and interactions of nuclei above 10 TeV using magnet-interferometric chambers (SCIN/MAGIC)
Initial definition studies were performed for the SCIN/MAGIC experiment selected as an Astromag investigation on Space Station Freedom. The study focused on Science Objectives and Science Requirement, Accommodation on both the STS and the Astromag facility, Data extraction techniques and Background Studies. The detectors are emulsion chambers which will be exposed for approximately 90 days and then recovered from orbit for subsequent processing and analysis in the laboratory. Such a technique is the only means to obtain information on the ultrahigh energy cosmic rays and their nuclear interactions. The SCIN/MAGIC investigation can supply unique data in relatively unexplored energy region and address many of the fundamental questions in particle astrophysics.