Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Mission Operations”

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 109 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1991

A method for selecting an operations concept to achieve successful mission operations

A procedure is presented for mapping operations concepts into design alternatives for a data system to be used in a generic ground based control center. A set of descriptive categories are developed to characterize the operational environment that relate to responsiveness, automation, and commitment. The operations concept is then developed according to a hierarchical decomposition of a mission statement into lower-level tasks, and the interpretation of the model's output is addressed. The method permits the description of operations concepts in terms of concept categories and ranges of alternatives between those categories. The descriptive framework can provide a mechanism for analyzing competing operations concepts.

Hornstein, Rhoda S.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Hierarchthis: An Interactive Interface for Identifying Mission-Relevant Components of the Advanced Multi-Mission Operations System

Even though NASA's space missions are many and varied, there are some tasks that are common to all of them. For example, all spacecraft need to communicate with other entities, and all spacecraft need to know where they are. These tasks use tools and services that can be inherited and reused between missions, reducing systems engineering effort and therefore reducing cost.The Advanced Multi-Mission Operations System, or AMMOS, is a collection of multimission tools and services, whose development and maintenance are funded by NASA. I created HierarchThis, a plugin designed to provide an interactive interface to help customers identify mission-relevant tools and services. HierarchThis automatically creates diagrams of the AMMOS database, and then allows users to show/hide specific details through a graphical interface. Once customers identify tools and services they want for a specific mission, HierarchThis can automatically generate a contract between the Multimission Ground Systems and Services Office, which manages AMMOS, and the customer. The document contains the selected AMMOS components, along with their capabilities and satisfied requirements. HierarchThis reduces the time needed for the process from service selections to having a mission-specific contract from the order of days to the order of minutes.

Advanced Multi-Mission Operations System (AMMOS)↗
NASA NTRS2003

Modeling and Simulation for Mission Operations Work System Design

Work System analysis and design is complex and non-deterministic. In this paper we describe Brahms, a multiagent modeling and simulation environment for designing complex interactions in human-machine systems. Brahms was originally conceived as a business process design tool that simulates work practices, including social systems of work. We describe our modeling and simulation method for mission operations work systems design, based on a research case study in which we used Brahms to design mission operations for a proposed discovery mission to the Moon. We then describe the results of an actual method application project-the Brahms Mars Exploration Rover. Space mission operations are similar to operations of traditional organizations; we show that the application of Brahms for space mission operations design is relevant and transferable to other types of business processes in organizations.

Sierhuis, Maarten↗
NASA NTRS1994

Discovery Planetary Mission Operations Concepts

The NASA Discovery Program of small planetary missions will provide opportunities to continue scientific exploration of the solar system in today's cost-constrained environment. Using a multidisciplinary team, JPL has developed plans to provide mission operations within the financial parameters established by the Discovery Program. This paper describes experiences and methods that show promise of allowing the Discovery Missions to operate within the program cost constraints while maintaining low mission risk, high data quality, and reponsive operations.

low cost planetary exploration Discovery mission o↗
NASA NTRS2002

Managing Risk for Cassini During Mission Operations and Data Analysis (MOandDA)

A Risk Management Process has been tailored for Cassini that not only satisfies the requirements of NASA and JPL, but also allows the Program to proactively identify and assess risks that threaten mission objectives. Cassini Risk Management is a team effort that involves both management and engineering staff. The process is managed and facilitated by the Mission Assurance Manager (MAM), but requires regular interactions with Program Staff and team members to instill the risk management philosophy into the day to day mission operations. While Risk Management is well defined for projects in the development phase, it is a relatively new concept for Mission Operations. The Cassini team has embraced this process and has begun using it in an effective, proactive manner, to ensure mission success. It is hoped that the Cassini Risk Management Process will form the basis by which risk management is conducted during MO&DA on future projects. proactive in identifying, assessing and mitigating risks before they become problems. Cost ehtiveness is achieved by: Comprehensively identifying risks Rapidly assessing which risks require the expenditure of pruject cewums Taking early actions to mitigate these risks Iterating the process frequently, to be responsive to the dynamic internal and external environments The Cassini Program has successfully implemented a Risk Management Process for mission operations, The initial SRL has been developed and input into he online tool. The Risk Management webbased system has been rolled out for use by the flight team and risk owners we working proactive in identifying, assessing and mitigating risks before they become problems. Cost ehtiveness is achieved by: Comprehensively identifying risks Rapidly assessing which risks require the expenditure of pruject cewums Taking early actions to mitigate these risks Iterating the process frequently, to be responsive to the dynamic internal and external environments The Cassini Program has successfully implemented a Risk Management Process for mission operations, The initial SRL has been developed and input into he online tool. The Risk Management webbased system has been rolled out for use by the flight team and risk owners we working put into place will become visible and will be illusmted in future papers.

risk management↗
NASA NTRS2019

EOS Aqua Mission Status at the Earth Science Constellation (ECS) Mission Operations Working Group (MOWG) Meeting in Toulouse, France

This presentation provides mission operations status for the Earth Observing System (EOS) Aqua satellite for the past six-months (December 2018 through May 2019). It only contains information that is of interest to the International Earth Science Constellation (ESC) Mission Operations Working Group (MOWG) member missions. It will be presented at the bi-annual MOWG Meeting in Toulouse, France on Wednesday, June 5, 2019. These meetings have been occurring twice a year since the MOWG was formed in 2003.

EOS Aqua↗
NASA NTRS2019

EOS Aqua Mission Status at the Earth Science Constellation (ESC) Mission Operations Working Group (MOWG) Meeting in Gilbert, AZ

This presentation provides mission operations status for the Earth Observing System (EOS) Aqua satellite for the past six-months (June 2019 through November 2019). It only contains information that is of interest to the International Earth Science Constellation (ESC) Mission Operations Working Group (MOWG) member missions. It will be presented at the bi-annual MOWG Meeting in Gilbert, Arizona on Tuesday, December 3, 2019. These meetings have been occurring twice a year since the MOWG was formed in 2003.

Guit, Bill↗
NASA NTRS2020

Demonstrating Assurance of Model-Based Fault Diagnosis Systems on an Operational Mission

Developers of robotic scientific and commercial spacecraft are trending towards use of onboard autonomous capabilities for responding quickly to dynamic environments and rapidly changing situations. These capabilities need to know the state of the spacecraft’s health. Model-based fault diagnosis (MBFD) is an approach to estimating health by continuously verifying accurate behavior and diagnosing off-nominal behavior. Proper functioning of MBFD depends on 1) the quality of the diagnostic system model that is analyzed and compared to commands and onboard measurements to estimate a system’s health state, and 2) the correct functionality of the diagnosis engine interrogating the model and comparing its analyses to observed system behavior. Our goal is to develop Verification and Validation (V&V) techniques for MBFD to provide future missions sufficient confidence in its functionality and performance to deploy it on the systems they develop. Our work has been focused on infusing the techniques we developed earlier to an operational mission. First, we are constructing diagnostic models of a spacecraft attitude control system and updating our diagnostic engine so they can be demonstrated aboard the Arcsecond Space Telescope Enabling Research in Astrophysics (ASTERIA) mission, an operational spacecraft for which experiments in autonomy are being planned and executed, using the V&V techniques we have previously developed to assure they are both correct and complete. Since it is nearing the end of its life, ASTERIA provides a unique opportunity to demonstrate MBFD since the monitored components are expected to fail. Our demonstration will give system developers additional confidence to make timely, informed MBFD deployment decisions. Second, we will be completing performance assessments of the diagnostic engine/diagnostic model ensemble both on the flight system and ground-based testbeds to gain confidence in MBFD’s ability to run successfully in a spacecraft’s resource-constrained environment without adversely affecting other on-board activities. Finally, we are capturing our experience in preparing this demonstration in a set of checklists and guidance documents. Current practice includes high-level institutional guidance documents and standards, but at a high level of abstraction that does not necessarily address specific MBFD concerns. The purpose of the new checklists is to provide future mission developers clear, unambiguous, procedure-oriented guidance on assuring MBFD. This paper describes our work in these areas. For the first area, we describe the diagnostic models and updated diagnostic engine that will be used for the on-board demonstration. We describe how the V&V techniques we developed earlier are used to assure model and engine correctness and completeness. For the second area, we identify the performance measurement and assessment techniques used to characterize the diagnostic engine and diagnostic models, and discuss the effect of measured performance on overall mission operation. Finally, we present the checklist and guidance documents and describe how they meet the goals of providing system developers with clear, unambiguous, procedure-oriented guidance on MBFD assurance. We show how the techniques we have developed map into those artifacts.

Nikora, Allen↗
NASA NTRS2014

NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations: Science Operations Development for Human Exploration

The purpose of NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) mission 16 in 2012 was to evaluate and compare the performance of a defined series of representative near-Earth asteroid (NEA) extravehicular activity (EVA) tasks under different conditions and combinations of work systems, constraints, and assumptions considered for future human NEA exploration missions. NEEMO 16 followed NASA's 2011 Desert Research and Technology Studies (D-RATS), the primary focus of which was understanding the implications of communication latency, crew size, and work system combinations with respect to scientific data quality, data management, crew workload, and crew/mission control interactions. The 1-g environment precluded meaningful evaluation of NEA EVA translation, worksite stabilization, sampling, or instrument deployment techniques. Thus, NEEMO missions were designed to provide an opportunity to perform a preliminary evaluation of these important factors for each of the conditions being considered. NEEMO 15 also took place in 2011 and provided a first look at many of the factors, but the mission was cut short due to a hurricane threat before all objectives were completed. ARES Directorate (KX) personnel consulted with JSC engineers to ensure that high-fidelity planetary science protocols were incorporated into NEEMO mission architectures. ARES has been collaborating with NEEMO mission planners since NEEMO 9 in 2006, successively building upon previous developments to refine science operations concepts within engineering constraints; it is expected to continue the collaboration as NASA's human exploration mission plans evolve.

Bell, Mary S.↗
NASA NTRS1971

Mission operations for unmanned nuclear electric propulsion outer planet exploration with a thermionic reactor spacecraft.

Mission operations are presented for comet rendezvous and outer planet exploration NEP spacecraft employing in-core thermionic reactors for electric power generation. The selected reference missions are the Comet Halley rendezvous and a Jupiter orbiter at 5.9 planet radii, the orbit of the moon Io. The characteristics of the baseline multi-mission NEP spacecraft are presented and its performance in other outer planet missions, such as Saturn and Uranus orbiters and a Neptune flyby, are discussed. Candidate mission operations are defined from spacecraft assembly to mission completion. Pre-launch operations are identified. Shuttle launch and subsequent injection to earth escape by the Centaur D-1T are discussed, as well as power plant startup and the heliocentric mission phases. The sequence and type of operations are basically identical for all missions investigated.

Spera, R. J.↗
NASA NTRS2008

Orbital Express Mission Operations Planning and Resource Management using ASPEN

As satellite equipment and mission operations become more costly, the drive to keep working equipment running with less man-power rises.Demonstrating the feasibility of autonomous satellite servicing was the main goal behind the Orbital Express (OE) mission. Planning the satellite mission operations for OE required the ability to create a plan which could be executed autonomously over variable conditions. The Automated-Scheduling and Planning Environment (ASPEN)tool, developed at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, was used to create the schedule of events in each daily plan for the two satellites of the OE mission. This paper presents an introduction to the ASPEN tool, the constraints of the OE domain, the variable conditions that were presented within the mission, and the solution to operations that ASPEN provided. ASPEN has been used in several other domains, including research rovers, Deep Space Network scheduling research, and in flight operations for the ASE project's EO1 satellite. Related work is discussed, as are the future of ASPEN and the future of autonomous satellite servicing.

Automated Scheduling and Planning Environment (ASP↗
NASA NTRS2000

New Human-Computer Interface Concepts for Mission Operations

The current climate of budget cuts has forced the space mission operations community to reconsider how it does business. Gone are the days of building one-of-kind control centers with teams of controllers working in shifts 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. Increasingly, automation is used to significantly reduce staffing needs. In some cases, missions are moving towards lights-out operations where the ground system is run semi-autonomously. On-call operators are brought in only to resolve anomalies. Some operations concepts also call for smaller operations teams to manage an entire family of spacecraft. In the not too distant future, a skeleton crew of full-time general knowledge operators will oversee the operations of large constellations of small spacecraft, while geographically distributed specialists will be assigned to emergency response teams based on their expertise. As the operations paradigms change, so too must the tools to support the mission operations team's tasks. Tools need to be built not only to automate routine tasks, but also to communicate varying types of information to the part-time, generalist, or on-call operators and specialists more effectively. Thus, the proper design of a system's user-system interface (USI) becomes even more importance than before. Also, because the users will be accessing these systems from various locations (e.g., control center, home, on the road) via different devices with varying display capabilities (e.g., workstations, home PCs, PDAS, pagers) over connections with various bandwidths (e.g., dial-up 56k, wireless 9.6k), the same software must have different USIs to support the different types of users, their equipment, and their environments. In other words, the software must now adapt to the needs of the users! This paper will focus on the needs and the challenges of designing USIs for mission operations. After providing a general discussion of these challenges, the paper will focus on the current efforts of creatin(y an effective USI for one specific suite of tools, SERS (The Spacecraft Emergency Response System), which has been built to enable lights-out operations. SERS is a Web-based collaborative environment that enables secure distributed fault management.

Fox, Jeffrey A.↗
NASA NTRS1993

Analyzing human errors in flight mission operations

A long-term program is in progress at JPL to reduce cost and risk of flight mission operations through a defect prevention/error management program. The main thrust of this program is to create an environment in which the performance of the total system, both the human operator and the computer system, is optimized. To this end, 1580 Incident Surprise Anomaly reports (ISA's) from 1977-1991 were analyzed from the Voyager and Magellan projects. A Pareto analysis revealed that 38 percent of the errors were classified as human errors. A preliminary cluster analysis based on the Magellan human errors (204 ISA's) is presented here. The resulting clusters described the underlying relationships among the ISA's. Initial models of human error in flight mission operations are presented. Next, the Voyager ISA's will be scored and included in the analysis. Eventually, these relationships will be used to derive a theoretically motivated and empirically validated model of human error in flight mission operations. Ultimately, this analysis will be used to make continuous process improvements continuous process improvements to end-user applications and training requirements. This Total Quality Management approach will enable the management and prevention of errors in the future.

Bruno, Kristin J.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Ulysses mission operations

The Ulysses mission is described in terms of in-Shuttle operations, initial in-orbit operations, routine operations, operational organization, and data gathering and production. The configuration of the Ulysses payload is illustrated, and the flight to orbit is described including a three-hour on-orbit checkout. The first contact was reported at the Deep Space Network station followed by an adjustment of the spacecraft solar-aspect angle and the acquisition of ranging and Doppler data. In-orbit operations include the earth acquisition maneuver, a trajectory correction maneuver, and a payload switch. Continuous data gathering is discussed with reference to the Jupiter encounter and the first and second oppositions and conjunctions. The data-gathering components comprise ground stations, a data-processing computer, and a data-records system. Data production is performed in an off-line mode that does not interfere with the real-time operations.

Beech, P.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Virtual Mission Operations of Remote Sensors With Rapid Access To and From Space

This paper describes network-centric operations, where a virtual mission operations center autonomously receives sensor triggers, and schedules space and ground assets using Internet-based technologies and service-oriented architectures. For proof-of-concept purposes, sensor triggers are received from the United States Geological Survey (USGS) to determine targets for space-based sensors. The Surrey Satellite Technology Limited (SSTL) Disaster Monitoring Constellation satellite, the United Kingdom Disaster Monitoring Constellation (UK-DMC), is used as the space-based sensor. The UK-DMC s availability is determined via machine-to-machine communications using SSTL s mission planning system. Access to/from the UK-DMC for tasking and sensor data is via SSTL s and Universal Space Network s (USN) ground assets. The availability and scheduling of USN s assets can also be performed autonomously via machine-to-machine communications. All communication, both on the ground and between ground and space, uses open Internet standards.

Ivancic, William D.↗