SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Mission Systems Architecture Process Modeling”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 109 records · Page 6

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS1988

Computational requirements for on-orbit identification of space systems

For the future space systems, on-orbit identification (ID) capability will be required to complement on-orbit control, due to the fact that the dynamics of large space structures, spacecrafts, and antennas will not be known sufficiently from ground modeling and testing. The computational requirements for ID of flexible structures such as the space station (SS) or the large deployable reflectors (LDR) are however, extensive due to the large number of modes, sensors, and actuators. For these systems the ID algorithm operations need not be computed in real-time, only in near real-time, or an appropriate mission time. Consequently the space systems will need advanced processors and efficient parallel processing algorithm design and architectures to implement the identification algorithms in near real-time. The MAX computer currently being developed may handle such computational requirements. The purpose is to specify the on-board computational requirements for dynamic and static identification for large space structures. The computational requirements for six ID algorithms are presented in the context of three examples: the JPL/AFAL ground antenna facility, the space station (SS), and the large deployable reflector (LDR).

Hadaegh, Fred Y.↗

NASA NTRS2024

Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate: Moon to Mars Architecture Definition Document

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) explores the unknown in air and space, innovates for the benefit of humanity, and inspires the world through discovery. Extending the reach of humanity through the human exploration of the Moon, Mars, and beyond is key to that mission. NASA’s Moon to Mars Strategy and Objectives document establishes long-term goals and objectives for crewed deep space exploration; however, satisfying NASA’s Moon to Mars Objectives requires an innovative approach to the definition, management, and execution of NASA’s Moon to Mars Architecture. An architecture offers a high-level unifying structure and defines a system. It provides rules, guidelines, and constraints that define a cohesive and coherent framework that identifies constituent parts, relationships, and connections and establishes how those parts fit and work together. This Architecture Definition Document (ADD) establishes the process for the decomposition of objectives empowers the agency’s success in achieving human exploration of the cosmos. NASA updates this document annually to reflect the maturation of the architecture and the progress NASA and partners make toward achieving exploration objectives. The ADD is not a manifest or requirements document. Instead, it serves as a tool for the programs, projects, and engineers who will implement and execute NASA’s bold ambitions for crewed exploration of deep space. As established in the Moon to Mars Strategy and Objectives, “Why” we explore encompasses three pillars: Science, Inspiration, and National Posture. Ensuring success in all three areas requires an architectural approach that incorporates innovation, collaboration, and partnerships that can be sustained across a multi-decadal effort. This second revision (Rev-B) of the ADD, developed to support NASA’s 2024 Architecture Concept Review (ACR), incorporates several key updates to support the continued evolution of the architecture. Since the last revision of the ADD, NASA has significantly improved the clarity of the objective decomposition, which distills exploration objectives into the characteristics and needs and use cases and functions needed to achieve them. The updated decomposition incorporates findings from internal studies and diverse stakeholder feedback. A model-based systems engineering approach ensures coherence and consistency, removing inconsistency and repetition. Revision B also incorporates advancements to NASA’s Mars architecture, including insight into initial capabilities, systems, and operations necessary to support the Humans to Mars segment. Updates to objective decomposition for Mars add significant detail to the ADD and hint at areas of forward work and future study. An appendix adds greater depth in the future decisions needed for Mars that will drive lunar needs. They are not the only decisions to be made, but they will have huge effects on subsequent decisions. NASA continues to introduce new exploration systems into the architecture. Two new elements — initial surface habitat and lunar surface cargo lander—successfully passed mission concept review in 2024 as a result of extensive analysis, concept refinement, and studies. These elements and their respective reference missions appear in this revision. NASA also continues to apply architecture processes to cross-agency efforts and coordination with external stakeholders by including definitions of architecture technology gaps — essential areas for engagement across and beyond the agency. The technology gaps appendix identifies areas that need attention and innovation to enable future exploration. In publishing this information, NASA communicates the technologies and capabilities that may benefit from partnership with industry, academia, other U.S. government agencies, and international space agencies. Ultimately, NASA established the Moon to Mars Architecture approach to communicate and facilitate humanity’s journey into the universe according to the principles and recurring tenets of NASA’s Moon to Mars Strategy and Objectives. The NASA architecture team thanks their many stakeholders, participants, and partners for their efforts to review and provide feedback. Their support has been critical to the success of this approach.

Elements↗

NASA NTRS2006

State Analysis Database Tool

The State Analysis Database Tool software establishes a productive environment for collaboration among software and system engineers engaged in the development of complex interacting systems. The tool embodies State Analysis, a model-based system engineering methodology founded on a state-based control architecture (see figure). A state represents a momentary condition of an evolving system, and a model may describe how a state evolves and is affected by other states. The State Analysis methodology is a process for capturing system and software requirements in the form of explicit models and states, and defining goal-based operational plans consistent with the models. Requirements, models, and operational concerns have traditionally been documented in a variety of system engineering artifacts that address different aspects of a mission s lifecycle. In State Analysis, requirements, models, and operations information are State Analysis artifacts that are consistent and stored in a State Analysis Database. The tool includes a back-end database, a multi-platform front-end client, and Web-based administrative functions. The tool is structured to prompt an engineer to follow the State Analysis methodology, to encourage state discovery and model description, and to make software requirements and operations plans consistent with model descriptions.

Rasmussen, Robert↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Mass Economy Evaluation for Integrated ECLSS and Propulsion Architecture

As missions in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) lengthen and extend to deep space, minimizing resupply needs becomes vital for sustaining crewed operations. Traditional life support systems depend on consumables resupplied from Earth, a method that is increasingly impractical for missions beyond LEO, such as lunar outposts or Mars transit. Long-duration missions require more efficient, autonomous systems that can recycle essential resources, particularly water and oxygen, to minimize the frequency and mass of resupply missions. The Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) is essential to such missions, with the International Space Station (ISS) serving as a testbed for advanced water recovery and partial oxygen recycling via physico-chemical methods. Yet, ECLSS and propulsion subsystems generally operate independently, despite overlapping requirements and potential areas for synergy. For instance, ECLSS byproducts, water, CO₂, and hydrogen, could be repurposed for propulsion, potentially reducing dedicated propellant mass and increasing overall system efficiency. One promising approach is to develop shared-resource architectures that integrate ECLSS with propulsion systems. This study examines the potential of such integration through the Sabatier CO₂ reduction process, focusing on water management as a key factor in system mass trade-offs. The Sabatier reaction produces water and methane from metabolic CO₂ and electrolytic hydrogen, partially closing the life support loop and providing methane, which could serve as a propellant. This integration could minimize waste, reduce resupply requirements, and enhance mission mass efficiency. A dynamic modeling framework will be used to simulate resource flows over long missions, capturing interactions between life support and propulsion. By comparing integrated versus separate system configurations, the study aims to quantify mass benefits and penalties, informing future habitat designs and trade studies for missions prioritizing autonomy and mass efficiency.

ECLSS↗

NASA NTRS1993

An architecture for object-oriented intelligent control of power systems in space

A control system for autonomous distribution and control of electrical power during space missions is being developed. This system should free the astronauts from localizing faults and reconfiguring loads if problems with the power distribution and generation components occur. The control system uses an object-oriented simulation model of the power system and first principle knowledge to detect, identify, and isolate faults. Each power system component is represented as a separate object with knowledge of its normal behavior. The reasoning process takes place at three different levels of abstraction: the Physical Component Model (PCM) level, the Electrical Equivalent Model (EEM) level, and the Functional System Model (FSM) level, with the PCM the lowest level of abstraction and the FSM the highest. At the EEM level the power system components are reasoned about as their electrical equivalents, e.g, a resistive load is thought of as a resistor. However, at the PCM level detailed knowledge about the component's specific characteristics is taken into account. The FSM level models the system at the subsystem level, a level appropriate for reconfiguration and scheduling. The control system operates in two modes, a reactive and a proactive mode, simultaneously. In the reactive mode the control system receives measurement data from the power system and compares these values with values determined through simulation to detect the existence of a fault. The nature of the fault is then identified through a model-based reasoning process using mainly the EEM. Compound component models are constructed at the EEM level and used in the fault identification process. In the proactive mode the reasoning takes place at the PCM level. Individual components determine their future health status using a physical model and measured historical data. In case changes in the health status seem imminent the component warns the control system about its impending failure. The fault isolation process uses the FSM level for its reasoning base.

Holmquist, Sven G.↗

NASA NTRS2024

Terrestrial Proving Ground Capabilities Needed for Lunar In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) & Construction Concepts of Operation

Incorporating any new technology or system into a human exploration mission or architecture requires development well in advance of the mission to eliminate technology, cost, and schedule risk concerns. It is often stated that technologies need to be at a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of 6, i.e. ‘system/subsystem model or prototype demonstration in a relevant environment (ground or space)’, by Authority To Proceed (ATP) or by the Preliminary Design Review (PDR) for the mission at the latest. There are two game changing capabilities for sustained human exploration of space that can have a significant effect on the overall exploration architecture and the technologies and systems included in the architecture. The first game changing capability, known as In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU), involves the search for, acquisition, and processing of resources on the Moon and Mars into mission consumables and usable products, and the second is the ability to utilize space resources in the construction of roads, structures, and surface infrastructure. ISRU and surface construction capabilities have the potential to greatly reduce the cost and risk of human exploration while enabling sustained lunar surface and commercial operations. However, ISRU and surface construction systems are complex and must operate in extremely harsh environments, with abrasive regolith and pervasive dust, for long-periods of time, with potentially limited opportunities for maintenance and repair by humans. The complexity of these capabilities and operations also means that there are a limited number of companies that can design, build, and operate end-to-end systems on their own. The majority of the technologies being developed for these systems are by small companies and at the component or subsystem level. With the overarching strategy of the United States National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) to enable industry to implement ISRU and surface infrastructure for Artemis and space commercialization, it is therefore important to establish processes and capabilities to promote and foster collaborations among large and small companies involved in ISRU and surface infrastructure development. For ISRU and infrastructure systems and capabilities to be used in Artemis missions and future commercial lunar surface operations, a coordinated framework with virtual/physical integration and testing locations, or ‘Proving Grounds’, needs to be established and operated on a regular basis and open to all. This paper will discuss the ISRU and surface construction near and long-term concepts of operations, and review operations and lessons-learned from the previous ISRU analog field tests. From this information, requirements and capabilities will be proposed to support and enable the integration and testing of ISRU and construction systems with industry, academia, and international agencies, as well as what facilities and organizations could help establish these Proving Grounds.

ISRU↗

NASA NTRS2026

Mass Economy Evaluation for Integrated ECLSS and Propulsion Architecture

As missions in low Earth orbit (LEO) lengthen and extend to deep space, minimizing resupply needs becomes vital for sustaining crewed operations. Traditional life support systems depend on consumables resupplied from Earth, a method that is increasingly impractical for missions beyond LEO, such as lunar outposts or Mars transit. Long-duration missions require more efficient, autonomous systems that can recycle essential resources, particularly water and oxygen, to minimize the frequency and mass of resupply missions. The Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) is essential to such missions, with the International Space Station (ISS) serving as a testbed for advanced water recovery and partial oxygen recycling via physico-chemical methods. Yet, ECLSS and propulsion subsystems generally operate independently, despite overlapping requirements and potential areas for synergy. For instance, ECLSS byproducts, water, CO 2 , and hydrogen, could be repurposed for propulsion, potentially reducing dedicated propellant mass and increasing overall system efficiency. One promising approach is to develop shared-resource architectures that integrate ECLSS with propulsion systems. This study examines the potential of such integration through the Sabatier CO₂ reduction process, focusing on water management as a key factor in system mass trade-offs. The Sabatier reaction produces water and methane from metabolic CO 2 and electrolytic hydrogen, partially closing the life support loop and providing methane, which could serve as a propellant. This integration could minimize waste, reduce resupply requirements, and enhance mission mass efficiency. A dynamic modeling framework will be used to simulate resource flows over long missions, capturing interactions between life support and propulsion. By comparing integrated versus separate system configurations, the study aims to quantify mass benefits and penalties, informing future habitat designs and trade studies for missions prioritizing autonomy and mass efficiency.

ECLSS↗

NASA NTRS2008

Updates to the NASA Space Telecommunications Radio System (STRS) Architecture

This paper describes an update of the Space Telecommunications Radio System (STRS) open architecture for NASA space based radios. The STRS architecture has been defined as a framework for the design, development, operation and upgrade of space based software defined radios, where processing resources are constrained. The architecture has been updated based upon reviews by NASA missions, radio providers, and component vendors. The STRS Standard prescribes the architectural relationship between the software elements used in software execution and defines the Application Programmer Interface (API) between the operating environment and the waveform application. Modeling tools have been adopted to present the architecture. The paper will present a description of the updated API, configuration files, and constraints. Minimum compliance is discussed for early implementations. The paper then closes with a summary of the changes made and discussion of the relevant alignment with the Object Management Group (OMG) SWRadio specification, and enhancements to the specialized signal processing abstraction.

Kacpura, Thomas J.↗

NASA NTRS2004

Data processing pipeline with transaction-oriented data sharing

This paper makes three contributions to the area of modern science data processing systems. First, the paper describes the science data processing pipeline, developed at the Multi-mission Image Processing Lab of JPL, for transforming raw space data into high quality image data and automating the distribution of data using a high-performance file transaction service. File Exchange Interface is the file transaction service developed MIPL. Second, it presents the FEI component architecture in the are of file transaction management, security,a nd file integrity verfication. Finally, the paper presents the federated model for the FEI service to demonstrate how to create a pool of file trasaction services to support load balancing and service fallover, and simplify service management.

science data processing↗

NASA NTRS2014

Lessons Learned from the Development and Implementation of the Atmosphere Resource Recovery and Environmental Monitoring Project

The Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) Program's Atmosphere Resource Recovery and Environmental Monitoring (ARREM) Project have been developing atmosphere revitalization and environmental monitoring subsystem architectures suitable for enabling sustained crewed exploration missions beyond low Earth orbit (LEO). Using the International Space Station state-of-the-art (SOA) as the technical basis, the ARREM Project has contributed to technical advances that improve affordability, reliability, and functional efficiency while reducing dependence on a ground-based logistics resupply model. Functional demonstrations have merged new process technologies and concepts with existing ISS developmental hardware and operate them in a controlled environment simulating various crew metabolic loads. The ARREM Project's strengths include access to a full complement of existing developmental hardware that perform all the core atmosphere revitalization functions, unique testing facilities to evaluate subsystem performance, and a coordinated partnering effort among six NASA field centers and industry partners to provide the innovative expertise necessary to succeed. A project overview is provided and the project management strategies that have enabled a multidiscipinary engineering team to work efficiently across project, NASA field center, and industry boundaries to achieve the project's technical goals are discussed. Lessons learned and best practices relating to the project are presented and discussed.

Roman, Monsi C.↗

NASA NTRS2001

Automating Trend Analysis for Spacecraft Constellations

Spacecraft trend analysis is a vital mission operations function performed by satellite controllers and engineers, who perform detailed analyses of engineering telemetry data to diagnose subsystem faults and to detect trends that may potentially lead to degraded subsystem performance or failure in the future. It is this latter function that is of greatest importance, for careful trending can often predict or detect events that may lead to a spacecraft's entry into safe-hold. Early prediction and detection of such events could result in the avoidance of, or rapid return to service from, spacecraft safing, which not only results in reduced recovery costs but also in a higher overall level of service for the satellite system. Contemporary spacecraft trending activities are manually intensive and are primarily performed diagnostically after a fault occurs, rather than proactively to predict its occurrence. They also tend to rely on information systems and software that are oudated when compared to current technologies. When coupled with the fact that flight operations teams often have limited resources, proactive trending opportunities are limited, and detailed trend analysis is often reserved for critical responses to safe holds or other on-orbit events such as maneuvers. While the contemporary trend analysis approach has sufficed for current single-spacecraft operations, it will be unfeasible for NASA's planned and proposed space science constellations. Missions such as the Dynamics, Reconnection and Configuration Observatory (DRACO), for example, are planning to launch as many as 100 'nanospacecraft' to form a homogenous constellation. A simple extrapolation of resources and manpower based on single-spacecraft operations suggests that trending for such a large spacecraft fleet will be unmanageable, unwieldy, and cost-prohibitive. It is therefore imperative that an approach to automating the spacecraft trend analysis function be studied, developed, and applied to missions such as DRACO with the intent that mission operations costs be significantly reduced. The goal of the Constellation Spacecraft Trend Analysis Toolkit (CSTAT) project is to serve as the pathfinder for a fully automated trending system to support spacecraft constellations. The development approach to be taken is evolutionary. In the first year of the project, the intent is to significantly advance the state of the art in current trending systems through improved functionality and increased automation. In the second year, the intent is to add an expert system shell, likely through the adaptation of an existing commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) or government-off-the-shelf (GOTS) tool to implement some level of the trending intelligence that humans currently provide in manual operations. In the third year, the intent is to infuse the resulting technology into a near-term constellation or formation-flying mission to test it and gain experience in automated trending. The lessons learned from the real missions operations experience will then be used to improve the system, and to ultimately incorporate it into a fully autonomous, closed-loop mission operations system that is truly capable of supporting large constellations. In this paper, the process of automating trend analysis for spacecraft constellations will be addressed. First, the results of a survey on automation in spacecraft mission operations in general, and in trending systems in particular will be presented to provide an overview of the current state of the art. Next, a rule-based model for implementing intelligent spacecraft subsystem trending will be then presented, followed by a survey of existing COTS/GOTS tools that could be adapted for implementing such a model. The baseline design and architecture of the CSTAT system will be presented. Finally, some results obtained from initial software tests and demonstrations will be presented.

Davis, George↗

NASA NTRS2001

A Multi-Mission Testbed for Advanced Technologies

The mission of the Center for Space Integrated Microsystem (CSIM) at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory is to develop advanced avionics systems for future deep space missions. The Advanced Micro Spacecraft (AMS) task is building a multi-mission testbed facility to enable the infusion of CSIM technologies into future missions. The testbed facility will also perform experimentation for advanced avionics technologies and architectures to meet challenging power, performance, mass, volume, reliability, and fault tolerance of future missions. The testbed facility has two levels of testbeds: (1) a Proof-of-Concept (POC) Testbed and (2) an Engineering Model Testbed. The methodology of the testbed development and the process of technology infusion are presented in a separate paper in this conference. This paper focuses only on the design, implementation, and application of the POC testbed. Additional information is contained in the original extended abstract.

Chau, S. N.↗

NASA NTRS2020

Architecture and Information Requirements to Assess and Predict Flight Safety Risks During Highly Autonomous Urban Flight Operations

As aviation adopts new and increasingly complex operational paradigms, vehicle types, and technologies to broaden airspace capability and efficiency, maintaining a safe system will require recognition and timely mitigation of new safety issues as they emerge and before significant consequences occur. A shift toward a more predictive risk mitigation capability becomes critical to meet this challenge. In-time safety assurance comprises monitoring, assessment, and mitigation functions that proactively reduce risk in complex operational environments where the interplay of hazards may not be known (and therefore not accounted for) during design. These functions can also help to understand and predict emergent effects caused by the increased use of automation or autonomous functions that may exhibit unexpected non-deterministic behaviors. The envisioned monitoring and assessment functions can look for precursors, anomalies, and trends (PATs) by applying model-based and data-driven methods. Outputs would then drive downstream mitigation(s) if needed to reduce risk. These mitigations may be accomplished using traditional design revision processes or via operational (and sometimes automated) mechanisms. The latter refers to the ‘in-time’ aspect of the system concept. This report comprises architecture and information requirements and considerations toward enabling such a capability within the domain of low altitude highly autonomous urban flight operations. This domain may span, for example, public-use surveillance missions flown by small unmanned aircraft (e.g., infrastructure inspection, facility management, emergency response, law enforcement, and/or security) to transportation missions flown by larger aircraft that may carry passengers or deliver products. Caveat: Any stated requirements in this report should be considered initial requirements that are intended to drive research and development (R&D). These initial requirements are likely to evolve based on R&D findings, refinement of operational concepts, industry advances, and new industry or regulatory policies or standards related to safety assurance.

Young, Steven↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Case Study for Lunar ISRU Systems Utilizing Polar Water

In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) is key to long term presence at any extraterrestrial destination. Current NASA direction is to achieve a sustainable presence on the lunar surface by 2028. Mission plans currently target the lunar South Pole to leverage the extended periods of solar illumination and allows for potential access to water ice in the permanently shadowed areas around the poles. With water, it is possible to produce both fuel and oxidizer to fully refuel a vehicle. In order to address ISRU infusion into mission planning, a study of an end-to-end ISRU propellant production system was initiated to assess ISRU architectures and obtain mass and power estimates for each. The results of these case studies will be presented. For this study, The ISRU system architecture involved two sites; the mine site in a shadowed crater where water ice is excavated and extracted from the regolith and the propellant production site at an illuminated ridge where the water is processed into liquefied O2 and H2 propellants. Fixed hardware would be emplaced at each site, with two alternating water tankers to transport water between them. Notional lunar sites were identified for this architecture for baseline environmental parameters. Technology solutions for each subsystem were selected based on those with the highest fidelity models or those that have empirical laboratory data to anchor to. While power needs were identified for each location, a power solution was not prescribed, therefore the masses presented do not include surface power systems. The baseline case in this study assumed that 10 mT of oxygen, along with enough hydrogen to support a propulsion mixture ratio of 6, must be produced in 225 days. Therefore 15 mT of water would need to be collected and processed. The baseline solution resulted in a system mass of5 mT and a total required power of 68kW. The majority of the mass was split between the ridge site system and the two water tankers (2.6 mTand 1.8mTrespectively). The majority of the required power was with three subsystems at approximately 20 kW each: hydrogen liquefaction, electrolysis, and the water extractor subsystem. Trades for four key variables are also presented, namely production rate, water concentration, dry overburden depth, and number of water transport trips. This can be compared to a system that targets oxygen from the minerals in the surface regolith material. A carbothermal reduction reactor system was used for this comparison. The use of direct solar thermal energy to process the regolith and the ease of access of the resource resulted in significantly lower values for the oxygen case: approximately 2.7 mT and 11.8 kW. However, the mass trade would favor the water case over successive missions where the hydrogen up-mass of 2 mT per mission will accrue against the oxygen system.1Aerospace Research Engineer, Chemical and Thermal Propulsion Systems Branch, Senior Member.2Mechanical Engineer, Propulsion and Power Division/Energy Conversion Systems, 2101 Nasa Pkwy/Mailcode EP3 Houston, TX 77058, AIAA member.

Lunar↗

NASA NTRS1990

Real-time data system: Incorporating new technology in mission critical environments

If the Space Station Freedom is to remain viable over its 30-year life span, it must be able to incorporate new information systems technologies. These technologies are necessary to enhance mission effectiveness and to enable new NASA missions, such as supporting the Lunar-Mars Initiative. Hi-definition television (HDTV), neural nets, model-based reasoning, advanced languages, CPU designs, and computer networking standards are areas which have been forecasted to make major strides in the next 30 years. A major challenge to NASA is to bring these technologies online without compromising mission safety. In past programs, NASA managers have been understandably reluctant to rely on new technologies for mission critical activities until they are proven in noncritical areas. NASA must develop strategies to allow inflight confidence building and migration of technologies into the trusted tool base. NASA has successfully met this challenge and developed a winning strategy in the Space Shuttle Mission Control Center. This facility, which is clearly among NASA's most critical, is based on 1970's mainframe architecture. Changes to the mainframe are very expensive due to the extensive testing required to prove that changes do not have unanticipated impact on critical processes. Systematic improvement efforts in this facility have been delayed due to this 'risk to change.' In the real-time data system (RTDS) we have introduced a network of engineering computer workstations which run in parallel to the mainframe system. These workstations are located next to flight controller operating positions in mission control and, in some cases, the display units are mounted in the traditional mainframe consoles. This system incorporates several major improvements over the mainframe consoles including automated fault detection by real-time expert systems and color graphic animated schematics of subsystems driven by real-time telemetry. The workstations have the capability of recording telemetry data and providing 'instant replay' for flight controllers. RTDS also provides unique graphics animated by real-time telemetry such as workstation emulation of the shuttle's flight instruments and displays of the remote manipulator system (RMS) position. These systems have been used successfully as prime operational tools since STS-26 and have supported seven shuttle missions.

Muratore, John F.↗

NASA NTRS2005

International Space Station Electric Power System Performance Code-SPACE

The System Power Analysis for Capability Evaluation (SPACE) software analyzes and predicts the minute-by-minute state of the International Space Station (ISS) electrical power system (EPS) for upcoming missions as well as EPS power generation capacity as a function of ISS configuration and orbital conditions. In order to complete the Certification of Flight Readiness (CoFR) process in which the mission is certified for flight each ISS System must thoroughly assess every proposed mission to verify that the system will support the planned mission operations; SPACE is the sole tool used to conduct these assessments for the power system capability. SPACE is an integrated power system model that incorporates a variety of modules tied together with integration routines and graphical output. The modules include orbit mechanics, solar array pointing/shadowing/thermal and electrical, battery performance, and power management and distribution performance. These modules are tightly integrated within a flexible architecture featuring data-file-driven configurations, source- or load-driven operation, and event scripting. SPACE also predicts the amount of power available for a given system configuration, spacecraft orientation, solar-array-pointing conditions, orbit, and the like. In the source-driven mode, the model must assure that energy balance is achieved, meaning that energy removed from the batteries must be restored (or balanced) each and every orbit. This entails an optimization scheme to ensure that energy balance is maintained without violating any other constraints.

Hojnicki, Jeffrey↗

NASA NTRS2017

Advanced Ceramic Matrix Composites: Science and Technology of Materials, Design, Applications, Performance and Integration

Overview of NASA Transformational Tools and Technologies Project's 2700F CMC/EBC Technology Challenge J. Hurst, NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, OH USA Key Words: ceramic matrix composites (CMCs), SiC/SiC composites, environmental barrier coatings (EBCs), CMC modeling, simulated engine testing As advanced gas turbine engine designs continue to move toward both higher operating temperatures and increased pressures, materials capable of functioning under these extreme conditions are being sought by both government and industry. As part of its mission, the NASA's Transformational Tools and Technologies Project, under the auspices of NASA's Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate, has been pursuing a five year Technology Challenge problem. This challenge problem has sought to develop high temperature materials for turbine engines that enable a 6% reduction in fuel burn for commercial aircraft, compared to current SOA materials. Specifically this is accomplished by the development and demonstration of a ceramic matrix composite (CMC) and environmental barrier coating (EBC) system capable of sustained performance at temperature of 2700F. The NASA Glenn Research Center has continued its two decade long interest in CMC/EBCs technology by pursuing this 2700F performance goal. This ambitious effort included an array of vendors, universities and engine companies. Included in this challenge was fiber development, fiber architecture considerations, ceramic matrix composition, environmental barrier compositions and processing routes as well as test development. Evaluation of the CMC/EBC materials included a variety of testing, from coupon testing for strength and creep resistance, to testing aimed at determining material behavior under more engine-like conditions. The development and validation of thermomechanical models and computational tools for design, analysis, and life prediction, have been an important part of this effort as well. Simulated engine testing of vane subcomponents by P&W was the final step following years of development. In addition to achieving the temperature goals and enhanced durability performance of the Tech Challenge, an additional goal achieved by this work was reaching a Technology Readiness Level of 5 for the 3-D CMC/EBC system. As this five year Technical Challenge comes to a conclusion, future development interests in environmental barrier coatings and environmental modeling are discussed.

SiC/SiC composites↗

NASA NTRS2018

6DOF Testing of the SLS Inertial Navigation Unit

The Navigation System on the NASA Space Launch System (SLS) Block 1 vehicle performs initial alignment of the Inertial Navigation System (INS) navigation frame through gyrocompass alignment (GCA). Because the navigation architecture for the SLS Block 1 vehicle is a purely inertial system, the accuracy of the achieved orbit relative to mission requirements is very sensitive to initial alignment accuracy. The assessment of this sensitivity and many others via simulation is a part of the SLS Model-Based Design and Model-Based Requirements approach. As a part of the aforementioned, 6DOF Monte Carlo simulation is used in large part to develop and demonstrate verification of program requirements. To facilitate this and the GN&C flight software design process, an SLS-Program-controlled Design Math Model (DMM) of the SLS INS was developed by the SLS Navigation Team. The SLS INS model implements all of the key functions of the hardware-namely, GCA, inertial navigation, and FDIR (Fault Detection, Isolation, and Recovery)-in support of SLS GN&C design requirements verification. Despite the strong sensitivity to initial alignment, GCA accuracy requirements were not verified by test due to program cost and schedule constraints. Instead, the system relies upon assessments performed using the SLS INS model. In order to verify SLS program requirements by analysis, the SLS INS model is verified and validated against flight hardware. In lieu of direct testing of GCA accuracy in support of requirement verification, the SLS Navigation Team proposed and conducted an engineering test to, among other things, validate the GCA performance and overall behavior of the SLS INS model through comparison with test data. This paper will detail dynamic hardware testing of the SLS INS, conducted by the SLS Navigation Team at Marshall Space Flight Center's 6DOF Table Facility, in support of GCA performance characterization and INS model validation. A 6-DOF motion platform was used to produce 6DOF pad twist and sway dynamics while a simulated SLS flight computer communicated with the INS. Tests conducted include an evaluation of GCA algorithm robustness to increasingly dynamic pad environments, an examination of GCA algorithm stability and accuracy over long durations, and a long-duration static test to gather enough data for Allan Variance analysis. Test setup, execution, and data analysis will be discussed, including analysis performed in support of SLS INS model validation.

Geohagan, Kevin↗