SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
This paper identifies the trade space but focuses on two alternate approaches: using less-expensive spacecraft and partnering with other missions. Less-expensive spacecraft can provide a platform for flying NMP subsystem technologies, and partnering with other missions can be a cost-effective approach for NMP system-level technology validations.
The Deep Space 4/Champollion mission is designed to test and validate technologies for landing on and anchoring to small bodies, and sample collection and transfer, in preparation for future sample return missions from comets, asteriods, and satellites.
Future missions is space will require controlling spacecraft which are both large and flexible. The limited inherent damping and the uncertain and changing dynamic characteristics of many of these vehicles, such as manned space stations and large antennas, will revolutionize spacecraft control requirements. In preparation for the time that such control systems are required, considerable research and technology development is necessary. A program is in place at NASA for the development of active control technology to support major initiatives for space station and advanced spacecraft. A number of key control technology program needs are cited in the paper as required for these and other future NASA missions together with an integrated controls/structures technology flight experiment to demonstrate and validate technology for large flexible structures.
The critical need is the need for funding and testing as bridging support for highly leveraged technology of Spacecraft 2000 to promote flight development introduction and acceptance. Critical needs are foreseen to augment these capabilities to satisfy specific enabling technology validation and to flight qualify selected technologies. Recommendations are summarized. This presentation is represented by figures.
The following subject areas are covered: hierarchy of civil space technology program; evolution of technology development; technology validation process; potential impacts; impacts of technology infusion into flight certifications; potential solutions; examples of current technology infusion into flight certification; OAET-CSTI health monitoring and controls; and challenges for future space vehicle propulsion systems.
The Office of Space Science (OSS) has initiated mission concept studies and associated technology roadmapping activities for future large space optical systems. The scientific motivation for these systems is the study of the origins of galaxies, stars, planetary systems and, ultimately, life. Collectively, these studies are part of the 'Astronomical Search for Origins and Planetary Systems Program' or 'Origins Program'. A series of at least three science missions and associated technology validation flights is currently envisioned in the time frame between the year 1999 and approximately 2020. These would be the Space Interferometry Mission (SIM), a 10-meter baseline Michelson stellar interferometer; the Next Generation Space Telescope (NGST), a space-based infrared optimized telescope with aperture diameter larger than four meters; and the Terrestrial Planet Finder (TPF), an 80-meter baseline-nulling Michelson interferometer described in the Exploration of Neighboring Planetary Systems (ExNPS) Study. While all of these missions include significant technological challenges, preliminary studies indicate that the technological requirements are achievable. However, immediate and aggressive technology development is needed. The Office of Space Access and Technology (OSAT) is the primary sponsor of NASA-unique technology for missions such as the Origins series. For some time, the OSAT Space Technology Program has been developing technologies for large space optical systems, including both interferometers and large-aperture telescopes. In addition, technology investments have been made by other NASA programs, including OSS; other government agencies, particularly the Department of Defense; and by the aerospace industrial community. This basis of prior technology investment provides much of the rationale for confidence in the feasibility of the advanced Origins missions. In response to the enhanced interest of both the user community and senior NASA management in large space optics, OSAT is moving to improve the focus of its sensor, spacecraft, and interferometer/telescope technology programs on the specific additional needs of the OSS Origins Program. To better define Origins mission technology and facilitate its development, OSAT and OSS called for a series of workshops with broad participation from industry, academia and the national laboratory community to address these issues. Responsibility for workshop implementation was assigned jointly to the two NASA field centers with primary Origins mission responsibility, the Goddard Space Flight Center and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. The Origins Technology Workshop, held at Dana Point, California between June 4 and 6, 1996 was the first in the series of comprehensive workshops aimed at addressing the broad technological needs of the Origins Program. It was attended by 64 individuals selected to provide technical expertise relevant to the technology challenges of the Origins missions. This report summarizes the results of that meeting. A higher level executive summary was considered inappropriate because of the potential loss of important context for the recommendations. Subsequent to the Origins Technology Workshop and prior to publication of this report, NASA Headquarters reorganized the activities of the Of fice of Space Access and Technology. It appears likely that responsibility for the technology programs recommended in this document will move to the Office of Space Science.
The Mars Microprobe Project is a technology validation mission in NASA's New Millennium Program. The project is developing a pair of small, two-piece probes for delivery to the surface of Mars in December of 1999.
Consideration is given to the following areas in which NASA may contribute to the technology of an advanced national aviation system: (1) quiet, safe, fuel-efficient aircraft; (2) low-cost, reliable, digital avionics; (3) integrated controls technology; (4) human factors in civil and general aviation; (5) aircraft system technology validation and demonstration; and (6) satellite systems technology applications. Such specific projects as the Terminal Configured Vehicle, the Global Positioning System, and the Search and Rescue Satellite System are described.
NASA is planning to fly a series of Space Environment Testbeds (SET) as part of the Living With A Star (LWS) Program. The goal of the testbeds is to improve and develop capabilities to mitigate and/or accommodate the affects of solar variability in spacecraft and avionics design and operation. This will be accomplished by performing technology validation in space to enable routine operations, characterize technology performance in space, and improve and develop models, guidelines and databases. The anticipated result of the LWS/SET program is improved spacecraft performance, design, and operation for survival of the radiation, spacecraft charging, meteoroid, orbital debris and thermosphere/ionosphere environments. The program calls for a series of NASA Research Announcements (NRAs) to be issued to solicit flight validation experiments, improvement in environment effects models and guidelines, and collateral environment measurements. The selected flight experiments may fly on the SET experiment carriers and flights of opportunity on other commercial and technology missions. This paper presents the status of the project so far, including a description of the types of experiments that are intended to fly on SET-1 and a description of the SET-1 carrier parameters.
Space Technology 5 (ST-5) is a three-satellite constellation, technology validation mission under the New Millennium Program at NASA to be launched in March 2006. One of the key technologies to be validated is a lights-out, model-based operations approach to be used for one week to control the ST-5 constellation with no manual intervention. The ground architecture features the GSFC Mission Services Evolution Center (GMSEC) middleware, which allows easy plugging in of software components and a standardized messaging protocol over a software bus. A predictive modeling tool built on MatLab's Simulink software package makes use of the GMSEC standard messaging protocol to interface to the Advanced Mission Planning System (AMPS) Scenario Scheduler which controls all activities, resource allocation and real-time re-profiling of constellation resources when non-nominal events occur. The key features of this system, which we refer to as the ST-5 Simulink system, are as follows: Original daily plan is checked to make sure that predicted resources needed are available by comparing the plan against the model. As the plan is run in real-time, the system re-profiles future activities in real-time if planned activities do not occur in the predicted timeframe or fashion. Alert messages are sent out on the GMSEC bus by the system if future predicted problems are detected. This will allow the Scenario Scheduler to correct the situation before the problem happens. The predictive model is evolved automatically over time via telemetry updates thus reducing the cost of implementing and maintaining the models by an order of magnitude from previous efforts at GSFC such as the model-based system built for MAP in the mid-1990's. This paper will describe the key features, lessons learned and implications for future missions once this system is successfully validated on-orbit in 2006.
Human spaceflight is a complex endeavor requiring multiple capabilities for transportation, crew health, scientific goals, and safe return to Earth. The difference between spaceflight proven capabilities and those needed for future exploration architectures is defined as a capability gap. Capability gaps are not technology specific. Each capability gap may be closed with a wide array of technologies that have unique benefits and challenges. Determining what a capability’s relevant and distinguishing key performance parameters (KPPs) are for a mission is critical. Mass, power, and volume are always constrained and important, but defining these in a way normalized by performance is very important. KPP definition for reliability, dormancy, and integration needs are hard to define but critical. Outside of technical considerations, the programmatic factors of the estimated time to develop the technology and how the technology validation objectives are matured are strong considerations in which technologies should be pursued and how they should leverage earlier mission elements. The Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLSS) and Crew Health and Performance (CHP) capability areas are decomposed to high level gaps. While KPPs should be technology agnostic, they can be used to both compare technologies and measure progress of technology development over time. KPPs help define when the gap is closed, and the core mission objectives can be accomplished. Proposed technology improvements to enhance a capability should balance improved KPPs and against investments in other capabilities that are not yet closed. A selection of gaps, KPPs, and validation objectives and their formulation, current state, and how they inform capability roadmap planning are discussed.
Human spaceflight is a complex endeavor requiring multiple capabilities for transportation, crew health, scientific goals, and safe return to Earth. The difference between spaceflight proven capabilities and those needed for future exploration architectures is defined as a capability gap. Capability gaps are not technology specific. Each capability gap may be closed with a wide array of technologies that have unique benefits and challenges. Determining what a capability’s relevant and distinguishing key performance parameters (KPPs) are for a mission is critical. Mass, power, and volume are always constrained and important, but defining these in a way normalized by performance is very important. KPP definition for reliability, dormancy, and integration needs are hard to define but critical. Outside of technical considerations, the programmatic factors of the estimated time to develop the technology and how the technology validation objectives are matured are strong considerations in which technologies should be pursued and how they should leverage earlier mission elements. The Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLSS) and Crew Health and Performance (CHP) capability areas are decomposed to high level gaps. While KPPs should be technology agnostic, they can be used to both compare technologies and measure progress of technology development over time. KPPs help define when the gap is closed, and the core mission objectives can be accomplished. Proposed technology improvements to enhance a capability should balance improved KPPs and against investments in other capabilities that are not yet closed. A selection of gaps, KPPs, and validation objectives and their formulation, current state, and how they inform capability roadmap planning are discussed.
NASA is conducting a focused technology program, known as the High-Angle-of-Attack Technology Program, to accelerate the development of flight-validated technology applicable to the design of fighters with superior stall and post-stall characteristics and agility. A carefully integrated effort is underway combining wind tunnel testing, analytical predictions, piloted simulation, and full-scale flight research. A modified F-18 aircraft has been extensively instrumented for use as the NASA High-Angle-of-Attack Research Vehicle used for flight verification of new methods and concepts. This program stresses the importance of providing improved aircraft control capabilities both by powered control (such as thrust-vectoring) and by innovative aerodynamic control concepts. The program is accomplishing extensive coordinated ground and flight testing to assess and improve available experimental and analytical methods and to develop new concepts for enhanced aerodynamics and for effective control, guidance, and cockpit displays essential for effective pilot utilization of the increased agility provided.
Acceptance of new deployable structures architectures and concepts requires validated design methods to minimize the expense involved with technology validation flight testing. Deployable concepts for large lightweight spacecraft include booms, antennae, and masts. This paper explores the implementation of probabilistic methods in the design process for the deployment of a strain-energy mechanism, specifically a simple tape-spring hinge. Strain-energy mechanisms are attractive for deployment in very lightweight systems because they do not require the added mass and complexity associated with motors and controllers. However, designers are hesitant to include free deployment, strain-energy mechanisms because of the potential for uncontrolled behavior. In the example presented here, the tapespring cross-sectional dimensions have been varied and a target displacement during deployment has been selected as the design metric. Specifically, the tape-spring should reach the final position in the shortest time with the minimal amount of overshoot and oscillations. Surrogate models have been used to reduce computational expense. Parameter values to achieve the target response have been computed and used to demonstrate the approach. Based on these results, the application of probabilistic methods for design of a tape-spring hinge has shown promise as a means of designing strain-energy components for more complex space concepts.
Acceptance of new spacecraft structural architectures and concepts requires validated design methods to minimize the expense involved with technology validation via flighttesting. This paper explores the implementation of probabilistic methods in the sensitivity analysis of the structural response of a Hypersonic Inflatable Aerodynamic Decelerator (HIAD). HIAD architectures are attractive for spacecraft deceleration because they are lightweight, store compactly, and utilize the atmosphere to decelerate a spacecraft during re-entry. However, designers are hesitant to include these inflatable approaches for large payloads or spacecraft because of the lack of flight validation. In the example presented here, the structural parameters of an existing HIAD model have been varied to illustrate the design approach utilizing uncertainty-based methods. Surrogate models have been used to reduce computational expense several orders of magnitude. The suitability of the design is based on assessing variation in the resulting cone angle. The acceptable cone angle variation would rely on the aerodynamic requirements.
CANYVAL-X is a technology demonstration CubeSat mission with a primary objective of validating technologies that allow two spacecraft to fly in formation along an inertial line-of-sight (i.e., align two spacecraft to an inertial source). Demonstration of precision dual-spacecraft alignment achieving fine angular precision enables a variety of cutting-edge heliophysics and astrophysics science.
The Deep Space 4/Champollion mission is designed to test and validate technologies for landing on and anchoring to small bodies, and sample collection and transfer, in preparation for future sample return missions from comets, asteroids, and satellites. in addition, DS-4 will test technologies for advanced, multi-engine solar electric propulsion (SEP) systems, inflatable-rigidizable solar arrays, autonomous navigation and precision guidance for landing, autonomous hazard detection and avoidance, and advanced integrated avionics and packaging concepts. Deep Space-4/Champollion consists of two spacecraft: an orbiter/carrier vehicle which includes the multi-engine SEP stage, and a lander, called Champollion, which will descend to the surface of the 46P/Tempel 1 cometary nucleus. The spacecraft will launch in April, 2003 and land on the comet in September, 2006 Deep Space 4/Champollion is a joint project between NASA and CNES, the French space agency.
The National Aero-Space Plane (NASP) program has recently entered a new phase of the program known as Phase 2D. During this period, five aerospace companies and the Government have formed a National Team. This team has focused on developing a single experimental (X-30) vehicle design and are pursuing a technology validation and demonstration program to prove out the design concepts and design tools. This paper presents an overview of the Phase 2D round testing being conducted to validate the X-30 design and to demonstrate the critical technologies needed to build and fly a research vehicle during Phase 3 of the program. The Phase 2D exit criteria are discussed to identify how they provide top-level guidance for developing the ground test program. An overview of major test facility modifications being performed in support of the test program is also presented. Emphasis is placed on propulsion and structures testing since these are felt to be the primary areas requiring technologies beyond the current state-of-the-art. Also discussed is the use of uncertainty analysis as a method to account for uncertainties in test data. In addition, this paper addresses the use of these uncertainties to develop qualitative indicators of how well the design and technology developed during Phase 2 have matured.