SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Open source hardware”

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.

104 records · Page 6

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2014

Using SpF to Achieve Petascale for Legacy Pseudospectral Applications

Pseudospectral (PS) methods possess a number of characteristics (e.g., efficiency, accuracy, natural boundary conditions) that are extremely desirable for dynamo models. Unfortunately, dynamo models based upon PS methods face a number of daunting challenges, which include exposing additional parallelism, leveraging hardware accelerators, exploiting hybrid parallelism, and improving the scalability of global memory transposes. Although these issues are a concern for most models, solutions for PS methods tend to require far more pervasive changes to underlying data and control structures. Further, improvements in performance in one model are difficult to transfer to other models, resulting in significant duplication of effort across the research community. We have developed an extensible software framework for pseudospectral methods called SpF that is intended to enable extreme scalability and optimal performance. Highlevel abstractions provided by SpF unburden applications of the responsibility of managing domain decomposition and load balance while reducing the changes in code required to adapt to new computing architectures. The key design concept in SpF is that each phase of the numerical calculation is partitioned into disjoint numerical kernels that can be performed entirely inprocessor. The granularity of domain decomposition provided by SpF is only constrained by the datalocality requirements of these kernels. SpF builds on top of optimized vendor libraries for common numerical operations such as transforms, matrix solvers, etc., but can also be configured to use open source alternatives for portability. SpF includes several alternative schemes for global data redistribution and is expected to serve as an ideal testbed for further research into optimal approaches for different network architectures. In this presentation, we will describe our experience in porting legacy pseudospectral models, MoSST and DYNAMO, to use SpF as well as present preliminary performance results provided by the improved scalability.

DYNAMO↗

NASA NTRS2013

SpF: Enabling Petascale Performance for Pseudospectral Dynamo Models

Pseudospectral (PS) methods possess a number of characteristics (e.g., efficiency, accuracy, natural boundary conditions) that are extremely desirable for dynamo models. Unfortunately, dynamo models based upon PS methods face a number of daunting challenges, which include exposing additional parallelism, leveraging hardware accelerators, exploiting hybrid parallelism, and improving the scalability of global memory transposes. Although these issues are a concern for most models, solutions for PS methods tend to require far more pervasive changes to underlying data and control structures. Further, improvements in performance in one model are difficult to transfer to other models, resulting in significant duplication of effort across the research community.We have developed an extensible software framework for pseudospectral methods called SpF that is intended to enable extreme scalability and optimal performance. High-level abstractions provided by SpF unburden applications of the responsibility of managing domain decomposition and load balance while reducing the changes in code required to adapt to new computing architectures. The key design concept in SpF is that each phase of the numerical calculation is partitioned into disjoint numerical kernels that can be performed entirely in-processor. The granularity of domain-decomposition provided by SpF is only constrained by the data-locality requirements of these kernels. SpF builds on top of optimized vendor libraries for common numerical operations such as transforms, matrix solvers, etc., but can also be configured to use open source alternatives for portability. SpF includes several alternative schemes for global data redistribution and is expected to serve as an ideal testbed for further research into optimal approaches for different network architectures.In this presentation, we will describe the basic architecture of SpF as well as preliminary performance data and experience with adapting legacy dynamo codes. We will conclude with a discussion of planned extensions to SpF that will provide pseudospectral applications with additional flexibility with regard to time integration, linear solvers, and discretization in the radial direction.

Pseudospectral (PS)↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Open Innovation for a NASA Architecture Library

NASA’s Center of Excellence for Collaborative Innovation (CoECI) uses open innovation, or “crowdsourcing”, to access the global public to find ideas, concepts, designs, or solutions that meet a previously unmet need possibly resulting in significant advances in performance. The Center of Excellence for Collaborative Innovation was launched at the request of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. This is both a non-traditional method of innovation and a non-traditional method of outreach to the public to involve them in space technologies and programs. It has been used often for software development and new hardware technology. In this case we applied it to innovate with systems engineering tools for creating space architectures. The challenge was sponsored by NASA Engineering and Safety Center Systems Engineering Technical Fellow as part of a program for NASA’s adoption of MBSE. It was a trial to see if there would be as much participation or quality submissions with this more specialized topic and skill. The challenge sought space architecture representations and decompositions to create a library of modeled parts in a system modeling language (SysML). Mission architects mostly start from scratch to build model elements representing the functional and physical architecture of a system in SysML. There are a few beginning libraries, but these are also local to a program or group. A common library will save system engineers a large amount of time, will allow project stakeholders to recognize common graphics and quickly understand the architecture options. The challenge was promoted internationally, especially through professional organizations and universities with a systems engineering focus. It was open for 4 months, purposefully over the winter holiday break time to allow participants extra time outside of work or school. The challenge was designed so that expertise in space hardware was not necessary but getting to play with models of space architecture could provide motivation to participate. We did not receive as many entries as other broader outreach challenges, but the ones we received were extremely thorough and high quality. Solutions came from individuals and teams, students and professional consultants from the United States and Europe. We learned a few lessons about how to engage with the public and what characteristics of a problem result in good crowdsourcing results. The outreach challenge produced several useful ideas and modeled space elements, and the group will be engaging the winners to learn more about their new approaches.

innovation↗

NASA NTRS2017

OpenSatKit Enables Quick Startup for CubeSat Missions

The software required to develop, integrate, and operate a spacecraft is substantial regardless of whether its a large or small satellite. Even getting started can be a monumental task. To solve this problem, NASAs Core Flight System (cFS), NASA's 42 spacecraft dynamics simulator, and Ball Aerospaces COSMOS ground system have been integrated together into a kit called OpenSatKit that provides a complete and open source software solution for starting a new satellite mission. Users can have a working system with flight software, dynamics simulation, and a ground command and control system up and running within hours.Every satellite mission requires three primary categories of software to function. The first is Flight Software (FSW) which provides the onboard control of the satellites and its payload(s). NASA's cFS provides a great platform for developing this software. Second, while developing a satellite on earth, it is necessary to simulate the satellites orbit, attitude, and actuators, to ensure that the systems that control these aspects will work correctly in the real environment. NASAs 42 simulator provides these functionalities. Finally, the ground has to be able to communicate with the satellite, monitor its performance and health, and display its data. Additionally, test scripts have to be written to verify the system on the ground. Ball Aerospace's COSMOS command and control system provides this functionality. Once the OpenSatKit is up and running, the next step is to customize the platform and get it running on the end target. Starting from a fully working system makes porting the cFS from Linux to a users platform much easier. An example Raspberry Pi target is included in the kit so users can gain experience working with a low cost hardware target. All users can benefit from OpenSatKit but the greatest impact and benefits will be to SmallSat missions with constrained budgets and small software teams. This paper describes OpenSatKits system design, the steps necessary to run the system to target the Raspberry Pi, and future plans. OpenSatKit is a free fully functional spacecraft software system that we hope will greatly benefit the SmallSat community.

Software↗

NASA NTRS2014

Enabling Dedicated, Affordable Space Access Through Aggressive Technology Maturation

A recent explosion in nano-sat, small-sat, and university class payloads has been driven by low cost electronics and sensors, wide component availability, as well as low cost, miniature computational capability and open source code. Increasing numbers of these very small spacecraft are being launched as secondary payloads, dramatically decreasing costs, and allowing greater access to operations and experimentation using actual space flight systems. While manifesting as a secondary payload provides inexpensive rides to orbit, these arrangements also have certain limitations. Small, secondary payloads are typically included with very limited payload accommodations, supported on a non interference basis (to the prime payload), and are delivered to orbital conditions driven by the primary launch customer. Integration of propulsion systems or other hazardous capabilities will further complicate secondary launch arrangements, and accommodation requirements. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's Marshall Space Flight Center has begun work on the development of small, low cost launch system concepts that could provide dedicated, affordable launch alternatives to small, risk tolerant university type payloads and spacecraft. These efforts include development of small propulsion systems and highly optimized structural efficiency, utilizing modern advanced manufacturing techniques. This paper outlines the plans and accomplishments of these efforts and investigates opportunities for truly revolutionary reductions in launch and operations costs. Both evolution of existing sounding rocket systems to orbital delivery, and the development of clean sheet, optimized small launch systems are addressed. A launch vehicle at the scale and price point which allows developers to take reasonable risks with new propulsion and avionics hardware solutions does not exist today. Establishing this service provides a ride through the proverbial "valley of death" that lies between demonstration in laboratory and flight environments. This effort will provide the framework to mature both on-orbit and earth-to-orbit avionics and propulsion technologies while also providing dedicated, affordable access to LEO for cubesat class payloads.

Jones, Jonathan↗

NASA NTRS2007

Calibration of High Frequency MEMS Microphones

Understanding and controlling aircraft noise is one of the major research topics of the NASA Fundamental Aeronautics Program. One of the measurement technologies used to acquire noise data is the microphone directional array (DA). Traditional direction array hardware, consisting of commercially available condenser microphones and preamplifiers can be too expensive and their installation in hard-walled wind tunnel test sections too complicated. An emerging micro-machining technology coupled with the latest cutting edge technologies for smaller and faster systems have opened the way for development of MEMS microphones. The MEMS microphone devices are available in the market but suffer from certain important shortcomings. Based on early experiments with array prototypes, it has been found that both the bandwidth and the sound pressure level dynamic range of the microphones should be increased significantly to improve the performance and flexibility of the overall array. Thus, in collaboration with an outside MEMS design vendor, NASA Langley modified commercially available MEMS microphone as shown in Figure 1 to meet the new requirements. Coupled with the design of the enhanced MEMS microphones was the development of a new calibration method for simultaneously obtaining the sensitivity and phase response of the devices over their entire broadband frequency range. Over the years, several methods have been used for microphone calibration. Some of the common methods of microphone calibration are Coupler (Reciprocity, Substitution, and Simultaneous), Pistonphone, Electrostatic actuator, and Free-field calibration (Reciprocity, Substitution, and Simultaneous). Traditionally, electrostatic actuators (EA) have been used to characterize air-condenser microphones for wideband frequency ranges; however, MEMS microphones are not adaptable to the EA method due to their construction and very small diaphragm size. Hence a substitution-based, free-field method was developed to calibrate these microphones at frequencies up to 80 kHz. The technique relied on the use of a random, ultrasonic broadband centrifugal sound source located in a small anechoic chamber. Phase calibrations of the MEMS microphones were derived from cross spectral phase comparisons between the reference and test substitution microphones and an adjacent and invariant grazing-incidence 1/8-inch standard microphone.

Shams, Qamar A.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Habitability Assessments And Lessons-learned From 3-day And 11-day Enriched Oxygen Hypobaric Chamber Tests At NASA Johnson Space Center

INTRODUCTION: Decompression sickness (DCS) is a risk to the health and performance of astronauts and high-altitude aircrew. Tolerance to flammability, hypoxia, prebreathe duration, and DCS risk varies across different organizations, vehicles, suits, and destinations, necessitating a variety of DCS risk mitigation approaches. Existing models of altitude DCS risk are often insufficient to enable accurate risk-informed decisions during hardware development, mission planning, and flight operations. METHODS: NASA completed outfitting of a dedicated facility at Johnson Space Center to support testing of up to eight human subjects for multiple days in hypobaric and enriched oxygen atmospheres. The primary purpose of the testing capability is validation of DCS risk mitigation protocols for Artemis missions to the Moon; however, it will also support development and validation of a generalizable altitude DCS risk estimation tool. A 3-day and an 11-day prebreathe validation test were completed in 2022, each with 8 human subjects living at 56.5 kPa (8.2 psia), 34% O2, 66% N2, with 5 simulated EVAs performed on masks at 29.6 kPa (4.3 psi), 85% O2, 15% N2. Facility and organizational lessons-learned and process improvements were recorded during and following the tests, and subjective habitability ratings were recorded daily during the 11-day test. Hypoxia and DCS-related physiological and cognitive outcome measures were recorded during both tests and are reported in companion presentations. RESULTS & DISCUSSION: All subjects completed each of the tests. Primary habitability issues related to mask discomfort during simulated EVAs and poor sleep quality due to thin mattresses. Polybenzimidazole (PBI) clothing was worn by all subjects due to the increased fire risk and may be required for Artemis missions; clothing was found to be acceptable overall with the worst ratings being due to poor fit and inelasticity. Chamber O2 and CO2 sensor inconsistency was observed that did not result in test termination but required post-test follow-up. Forward plans include additional hypobaric testing and integration of existing and future physiological outcome data into an open-source Aerospace Estimation Tool for Hypobaric Exposure Risk (AETHER). NASA is also working to make the testing capability available to commercial companies.

Andrew F J Abercromby↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Habitability Assessments And Lessons-learned From 3-day And 11-day Enriched Oxygen Hypobaric Chamber Tests At NASA Johnson Space Center

Andrew Abercromby↗

NASA NTRS2017

NASA's Space Launch System: Deep-Space Delivery for Smallsats

Designed for human exploration missions into deep space, NASA's Space Launch System (SLS) represents a new spaceflight infrastructure asset, enabling a wide variety of unique utilization opportunities. While primarily focused on launching the large systems needed for crewed spaceflight beyond Earth orbit, SLS also offers a game-changing capability for the deployment of small satellites to deep-space destinations, beginning with its first flight. Currently, SLS is making rapid progress toward readiness for its first launch in two years, using the initial configuration of the vehicle, which is capable of delivering 70 metric tons (t) to Low Earth Orbit (LEO). On its first flight test of the Orion spacecraft around the moon, accompanying Orion on SLS will be small-satellite secondary payloads, which will deploy in cislunar space. The deployment berths are sized for "6U" CubeSats, and on EM-1 the spacecraft will be deployed into cislunar space following Orion separate from the SLS Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage. Payloads in 6U class will be limited to 14 kg maximum mass. Secondary payloads on EM-1 will be launched in the Orion Stage Adapter (OSA). Payload dispensers will be mounted on specially designed brackets, each attached to the interior wall of the OSA. For the EM-1 mission, a total of fourteen brackets will be installed, allowing for thirteen payload locations. The final location will be used for mounting an avionics unit, which will include a battery and sequencer for executing the mission deployment sequence. Following the launch of EM-1, deployments of the secondary payloads will commence after sufficient separation of the Orion spacecraft to the upper stage vehicle to minimize any possible contact of the deployed CubeSats to Orion. Currently this is estimated to require approximately 4 hours. The allowed deployment window for the CubeSats will be from the time the upper stage disposal maneuvers are complete to up to 10 days after launch. The upper stage will fly past the moon at a perigee of approximately 100km, and this closest approach will occur about 5 days after launch. The limiting factor for the latest deployment time is the available power in the sequencer system. Several NASA Mission Directorates were involved in the development of programs for the competition, selection, and development of EM-1 payloads that support directorate priorities. CubeSat payloads on EM-1 will include both NASA research experiments and spacecraft developed by industry, international and potentially academia partners. The Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD) Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) Division was allocated five payload opportunities on the EM-1 mission. Near Earth Asteroid (NEA) Scout is designed to rendezvous with and characterize a candidate NEA. A solar sail, an innovation the spacecraft will demonstrated for the CubeSat class, will provide propulsion. Lunar Flashlight will use a green propellant system and will search for potential ice deposits in the moon's permanently shadowed craters. BioSentinel is a yeast radiation biosensor, planned to measure the effects of space radiation on deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). Lunar Icecube, a collaboration with Morehead State University, will prospect for water in ice, liquid, and vapor forms as well as other lunar volatiles from a low-perigee, highly inclined lunar orbit using a compact Infrared spectrometer. Skyfire, a partnership with Lockheed Martin, is a technology demonstration mission that will perform a lunar flyby, collecting spectroscopy, and thermography data to address questions related to surface characterization, remote sensing, and site selection. NASA's Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) was allocated three payload opportunities on the EM-1 mission. These slots will be filled via the Centennial Challenges Program, NASA's flagship program for technology prize competitions, which directly engages the public, academia, and industry in open prize competitions to stimulate innovation. The NASA Science Mission Directorate (SMD) was allocated two payload opportunities on the EM-1 mission. The CubeSat Mission to Study Solar Particles (CuSP) payload will study the sources and acceleration mechanisms of solar and interplanetary particles in near-Earth orbit, support space weather research by determining proton radiation levels during Solar Energetic Particle (SEP) events and identifying suprathermal properties that could help predict geomagnetic storms. The LunaH-Map payload will help scientists understand the quantity of H-bearing materials in lunar cold traps (~10 km), determine the concentration of H-bearing materials with 1m depth, and constrain the vertical distribution of H-bearing materials. The final three payload opportunities for the EM-1 mission were allocated for NASA's international space agency counterparts. The flight opportunities are intended to benefit the international space agency and NASA as well as further the collective space exploration goals. ArgoMoon is sponsored by ESA/ASI and will fly along with the ICPS on its disposal trajectory to perform proximity operations with the ICPS post-disposal, take external imagery of engineering and historical significance, and perform an optical communications demonstration. EQUULEUS, sponsored by JAXA, will fly to a libration orbit around the Earth-Moon L2 point and demonstrate trajectory control techniques within the Sun-Earth- Moon region for the first time by a nano spacecraft. The mission will also contribute to the future human exploration scenario by understanding the radiation environment in geospace and deep space, characterizing the flux of impacting meteors on the far side of the moon, and demonstrating the future deep space exploration scenario using the "deep space port" at Lagrange points. OMOTENASHI, also sponsored by JAXA, will land the smallest lunar lander to date on the lunar surface to demonstrate the feasibility of the hardware for distributed cooperative exploration system. Small landers will enable multi-point exploration, which is complimentary with large-scale human exploration. Once on the lunar surface, the OMOTENASHI spacecraft will observe the radiation and soil environments of the lunar surface by active radiation measurements and soil shear measurements. Following EM-1, Space Launch System will evolve to the more-powerful Block 1B configuration, which uses a new Exploration Upper Stage to increase the vehicle's LEO payload capability from 70 t to 105 t. With that transition, the Orion Stage Adapter, which will carry the secondary payloads on EM-1, will be phased out, and a new Universal Stage Adapter will be introduced, creating opportunities for flying larger secondary payloads. This paper will provide a brief status of SLS progress toward first launch; an overview of smallsat accommodations, integration, and operations on EM-1; information about the specific payloads flying on that launch; and a discussion of future accommodations and opportunities for secondary payloads on SLS for Exploration Mission-2 and beyond.

Robinson, Kimberly F.↗

NASA NTRS2017

NASA's Space Launch System: Deep-Space Opportunities for SmallSats

Designed for human exploration missions into deep space, NASA's Space Launch System (SLS) represents a new spaceflight infrastructure asset, enabling a wide variety of unique utilization opportunities. While primarily focused on launching the large systems needed for crewed spaceflight beyond Earth orbit, SLS also offers a game-changing capability for the deployment of small satellites to deep-space destinations, beginning with its first flight. Currently, SLS is making rapid progress toward readiness for its first launch in two years, using the initial configuration of the vehicle, which is capable of delivering 70 metric tons (t) to Low Earth Orbit (LEO). On its first flight test of the Orion spacecraft around the moon, accompanying Orion on SLS will be small-satellite secondary payloads, which will deploy in cislunar space. The deployment berths are sized for "6U" CubeSats, and on EM-1 the spacecraft will be deployed into cislunar space following Orion separate from the SLS Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage. Payloads in 6U class will be limited to 14 kg maximum mass. Secondary payloads on EM-1 will be launched in the Orion Stage Adapter (OSA). Payload dispensers will be mounted on specially designed brackets, each attached to the interior wall of the OSA. For the EM-1 mission, a total of fourteen brackets will be installed, allowing for thirteen payload locations. The final location will be used for mounting an avionics unit, which will include a battery and sequencer for executing the mission deployment sequence. Following the launch of EM-1, deployments of the secondary payloads will commence after sufficient separation of the Orion spacecraft to the upper stage vehicle to minimize any possible contact of the deployed cubesats to Orion. Currently this is estimated to require approximately 4 hours. The allowed deployment window for the cubesats will be from the time the upper stage disposal maneuvers are complete to up to 10 days after launch. The upper stage will fly past the moon at a perigee of approximately 100km, and this closest approach will occur about 5 days after launch. The limiting factor for the latest deployment time is the available power in the sequencer system. Several NASA Mission Directorates were involved in the development of programs for the competition, selection, and development of EM-1 payloads that support directorate priorities. CubeSat payloads on EM-1 will include both NASA research experiments and spacecraft developed by industry, international and potentially academia partners. The Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD) Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) Division was allocated five payload opportunities on the EM-1 mission. Near Earth Asteroid (NEA) Scout is designed to rendezvous with and characterize a candidate NEA. A solar sail, an innovation the spacecraft will demonstrated for the CubeSat class, will provide propulsion. Lunar Flashlight will use a green propellant system and will search for potential ice deposits in the moon's permanently shadowed craters. BioSentinel is a yeast radiation biosensor, planned to measure the effects of space radiation on deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). Lunar Icecube, a collaboration with Morehead State University, will prospect for water in ice, liquid, and vapor forms as well as other lunar volatiles from a low-perigee, highly inclined lunar orbit using a compact Infrared spectrometer. Skyfire, a partnership with Lockheed Martin, is a technology demonstration mission that will perform a lunar flyby, collecting spectroscopy, and thermography data to address questions related to surface characterization, remote sensing, and site selection. NASA's Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) was allocated three payload opportunities on the EM-1 mission. These slots will be filled via the 2 Centennial Challenges Program, NASA's flagship program for technology prize competitions, which directly engages the public, academia, and industry in open prize competitions to stimulate innovation. The NASA Science Mission Directorate (SMD) was allocated two payload opportunities on the EM-1 mission. The CubeSat Mission to Study Solar Particles (CuSP) payload will study the sources and acceleration mechanisms of solar and interplanetary particles in near-Earth orbit, support space weather research by determining proton radiation levels during Solar Energetic Particle (SEP) events and identifying suprathermal properties that could help predict geomagnetic storms. The LunaH-Map payload will help scientists understand the quantity of H-bearing materials in lunar cold traps (~10 km), determine the concentration of H-bearing materials with 1m depth, and constrain the vertical distribution of H-bearing materials. The final three payload opportunities for the EM-1 mission were allocated for NASA's international space agency counterparts. The flight opportunities are intended to benefit the international space agency and NASA as well as further the collective space exploration goals. ArgoMoon is sponsored by ESA/ASI and will fly along with the ICPS on its disposal trajectory to perform proximity operations with the ICPS post-disposal, take external imagery of engineering and historical significance, and perform an optical communications demonstration. EQUULEUS, sponsored by JAXA, will fly to a libration orbit around the Earth-Moon L2 point and demonstrate trajectory control techniques within the Sun-Earth-Moon region for the first time by a nano spacecraft. The mission will also contribute to the future human exploration scenario by understanding the radiation environment in geospace and deep space, characterizing the flux of impacting meteors on the far side of the moon, and demonstrating the future deep space exploration scenario using the "deep space port" at Lagrange points. OMOTENASHI, also sponsored by JAXA, will land the smallest lunar lander to date on the lunar surface to demonstrate the feasibility of the hardware for distributed cooperative exploration system. Small landers will enable multi-point exploration, which is complimentary with large-scale human exploration. Once on the lunar surface, the OMOTENASHI spacecraft will observe the radiation and soil environments of the lunar surface by active radiation measurements and soil shear measurements. Following EM-1, Space Launch System will evolve to the more-powerful Block 1B configuration, which uses a new Exploration Upper Stage to increase the vehicle's LEO payload capability from 70 t to 105 t. With that transition, the Orion Stage Adapter, which will carry the secondary payloads on EM-1, will be phased out, and a new Universal Stage Adapter will be introduced, creating opportunities for flying larger secondary payloads. This paper will provide a brief status of SLS progress toward first launch; an overview of smallsat accommodations, integration, and operations on EM-1; information about the specific payloads flying on that launch; and a discussion of future accommodations and opportunities for secondary payloads on SLS for Exploration Mission-2 and beyond.

Robinson, Kimberly F.↗

NASA NTRS1994

Debris/ice/TPS assessment and integrated photographic analysis for Shuttle Mission STS-62

A pre-launch debris inspection of the pad and Shuttle vehicle was conducted on 2 March 1994. The detailed walkdown of Launch Pad 39B and MLP-1 also included the primary flight elements OV-102 Columbia (16th flight), ET-62 (LWT 55), and BI-064 SRB's. There were no significant facility or vehicle anomalies. After the launch on March 4th, a debris inspection of Pad 39B was performed. Damage to the pad overall was minimal. On-orbit photographs taken by the flight crew and two films from the ET/ORB umbilical cameras of the External Tank after separation from the Orbiter revealed no major damage or lost flight hardware that would have been a safety of flight concern. Orbiter performance on final approach appeared normal. Infrared imagery of landing gear deployment showed the loss of thermal barrier from the nose gear wheel well. The missing thermal barrier material was not recovered. The Solid Rocket Boosters were inspected at Hanger AF after retrieval. Both frustums had a combined total of 44 MSA-2 debonds over fasteners. Significant amounts of BTA had been applied to closeouts on the RH frustum, forward skirt, and aft skirt. Hypalon paint was blistered/missing over the areas were the BTA had been applied. The underlying BTA was not sooted (IFA STS-62-B-1). Investigation of this condition has concluded there was insufficient heat rates to cause blistering of the Hypalon until late in the ascent phase. A post landing inspection of OV-102 was conducted after the landing at KSC. The Orbiter TPS sustained a total of 97 hits, of which 16 had a major dimension of 1 inch or larger. The Orbiter lower surface had a total of 36 hits, of which 7 had a major dimension of 1 inch or larger. Based on these numbers and comparison to statistics from previous missions of similar configuration, both the total number of debris hits and the number of hits 1 inch or larger was less than average. Six thermal barriers, total size approximately 36 in. x 3 in. x 1.5 in., and one corner tile piece 4 in. x 4 in., were missing from the nose landing gear doors. Runway infrared cameras recorded these objects falling from the Orbiter when the nose landing gear doors were opened on final approach. A search of the area under the flight path failed to recover the missing thermal batteries, which may be submerged in the large body of water south of the runway. The cause for the loss of the material was attributed to the way the substrate was prepared for bonding at the vendor. Orbiter post landing microchemical sample results revealed a variety of residuals in the Orbiter window samples. These were attributed to SRB BSM exhaust, Orbiter TPS, window protective covers and processing, natural landing site products, and paints/primers from various sources. The residual sampling data do not indicate a single source of damaging debris and all of these materials have been documented previously in analyses for post landing sample reports. Data from residual sampling also showed no trends when compared to previous mission data. A total of ten Post Launch Anomalies, including one IFA, were observed during the STS-62 mission assessment.

Katnik, Gregory N.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Trajectory Engineering with Modular Patched Conics for Entry Systems and TPS (TEMPEST)

Brief Presenter Biography (35 word limit): Bohdan Wesely is an Aerospace Engineer in the Entry Systems and Technology Division at Ames. He has worked on a variety of projects for NASA including integrated TPS (thermal protection system) flight hardware deliveries and testing services for commercial partners. Introduction: TEMPEST is a new trajectory analysis framework that is designed to fill the gap between dedicated flight mechanics tools and aerothermal and TPS sizing tools. The project started as an SJSU master’s thesis and has since evolved into a general conceptual design tool capable of studying a wide variety of entry problems. Development is ongoing in the Entry Systems and Technology Division at NASA ARC. Why TEMPEST: Space missions involving entry into a planetary atmosphere involve a series of unique requirements across multiple disciplines. Whether it is traditional entry descent and landing (EDL), or aerocapture, the vehicle must navigate to its target landing location or orbit state, and the TPS must protect the payload during entry. The design process typically involves iterative handoffs between various flight mechanics, flow solver, and material response level tools. During the early conceptual phase, a wide variety of feasible trajectories are simulated in a Monte Carlo scenario which broadly satisfy the mission or landing requirements. Next, computational fluid dynamics (CFD), direct simulation Monte Carlo (DSMC), and other flow solver analyses are performed at various key trajectory points to generate an aero-database, heating and TPS design requirements also emerge at this stage. At this point, with updated aerodynamics from the various flow solvers, trajectories can be re-run, this in turn can change the required freestream conditions for the CFD tools, and as a project progresses, these analyses converge, and uncertainty is reduced. However, there is always a “hand-off” occurring between two inherently coupled phenomena. Analysis Description: One of the goals with TEMPEST is to use a variety of first principles estimation methods coupled with an atmosphere model to predict vehicle aerothermodynamics across the entire flight regime while propagating a 3 or 6 degree of freedom (DoF) trajectory. Aerodynamics methods include modified Newtonian, Maxwell and Cercignani- Lampis-Lord (CLL) for continuum, transitional, and free molecular flow regimes. Aerothermodynamics include boundary layer and reference enthalpy methods, and Mutation++ for non-equilibrium chemistry modeling. TEMPEST is also capable of stitching multiple trajectory segments together to study mission scenarios like multi-pass aerocapture and aero-gravity assists. Most of the program is implemented in MATLAB using modern system objects, it relies on several C++ shared libraries for supporting tools like Gmsh, the Global Reference Atmospheric Model (GRAM), and Mutation++. The various first principles aerothermal estimation methods are discretized across either a structured axisymmetric panel mesh or an unstructured tri-mesh generated from an open-source tool such as Gmsh, this allows solutions on the same mesh to be compared across tools such as CB-Aero. CFD Coupling. A physics-aware, gaussian process CFD anchoring scheme is proposed to adjust the various first principles methods as a CFD database is populated. One goal for this anchoring module is to inform the project where CFD should be run. Full knowledge of the entire trajectory, atmosphere, and aerothermodynamics allows for easier identification of high sensitivity areas and uncertainty quantification. While the first principles effects are well known and proven accurate in existing tools such as CB- Aero and Cart3D, a physics aware CFD anchoring scheme increases tool credibility across a project lifecycle. Material Response Modeling. Correct TPS sizing is critical for optimizing mass for science payloads and ensuring mission success. The process typically involves a thermal analysis along the trajectory with surface heating environments as a boundary condition. Several design constraints are maximum bondline temperature and maximum recession with various margining techniques. The material response tool FIAT, developed out of NASA Ames, is currently being integrated into the TEMPEST environment. TPS recession, shape change, mass loss, and mass property alteration are all factors that can perturb an entry trajectory. For missions like Mars 2020, recession was minimal and was safely handled separately as a post process. For missions such as Jupiter Galileo with a high TPS mass fraction or asteroid entries, recession plays a major role. The proposed fully coupled scheme is to use an epoch-based approach where the trajectory integration is halted after a recession threshold, the energy balance and FIAT are solved at each panel, the mesh, aerodynamics, and mass properties are updated, and the trajectory continues. Several computational tradeoffs have been made during the development of TEMPEST to limit the cost of a single trajectory and preserve its utility as a conceptual, rapid iteration tool. Conclusion: Development of TEMPEST is ongoing and the project is still in its infancy. This talk aims to showcase its unique capabilities to support future NASA entry systems missions.

Bohdan O Wesely↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

EVA Swab Kit: Tools and Techniques for Collecting Aseptic Samples from Crewed Space Missions

Introduction: When we send humans to search for life on other planets, we'll need to know what we brought with us versus what may already be there. To ensure our crewed spacecraft meet planetary protection requirements—and to protect our science from human contamination—we'll need to assess and verify whether micro-organisms may be leaking/venting from our spacesuits. This requires collecting samples under Extravehicular Activity (EVA) conditions. Detailed, systematic research on forward contamination from robotic spacecraft has been steadily progressing since the Viking missions, but systematic studies of contamination from space suits has not been conducted in many years. The modern EMU (Extravehicular Mobility Unit) suit used by NASA is designed to leak at rates as high as 100 cc/min. Before humans land on Mars there is a critical need to understand the types and quantities of microbes that could be introduced via space suits. The Human Forward Contamination Assessment team at NASA’s Johnson Space Center (JSC) has developed a prototype EVA swab tool [1,2,3,4] designed for use in space to sample cleaned and uncleaned space suits to determine the present day microbial load and eventually the rate of leakage. The ability to assess microbial leakage early in advanced space suit and life support system design cycles will help avoid costly hardware redesign later. Test Objectives: The primary objective of EMU testing was to characterize the type of micro-organisms typically found on or near selected suit pressure joints under suit differential pressure conditions. Most human-borne microbes can fit through a 0.5 to 1.0 µm gap. Knowing which joints are more likely to leak will inform hardware design decisions. Knowing which types of micro-organisms may leak from EVA suits provides a basis for subsequent studies to characterize the viability of those organisms under destination conditions, as well as how far they might spread through natural or human-influenced processes. That data, in turn, will inform exploration mission operations and hardware design. The secondary objective of testing was to evaluate the interface between a fully suited test subject and the EVA swab tool at vacuum. Bulky EVA suits can restrict movement and limit visibility through the helmet visor. Fully suited testing is important for identifying tool design issues prior to flight. At exploration destinations, such as Mars, suited crew may be required to periodically sample their suits as part of an environmental monitoring protocol. Suit Microbial Sampling Results: This report details results of microbial swabs collected from current flight suit configurations worn by crew members assigned to upcoming ISS expedition missions as well as swabs collected from prototype suits intended for use on the Orion spacecraft. These tests were intended to characterize the types of contaminants found on flight suits under current, typical handling conditions. No attempt was made to change suit handling procedures, provide additional sterilization, or to limit typical potential contaminant sources. Using culture based techniques, we cultivated 235 CFU (colony forming units) comprised of 26 bacterial species and one fungal species on the outside of the suits. The fungal species and 14 of the bacterial species were unique to the suit surfaces and were not detected in any of the background samples collected within the chambers. We sequenced 755,434 ribosomal fragments on all of the suit surfaces from swab samples. 557,016 of these sequences represent DNA that survived at least 4 hours at vacuum. These sequences formed 2,464 OTU's (Operational Taxonomic Units, 97% similarity) showing low diversity in the samples. The most abundant sequences that survived vacuum belong to the genera Staphyloccocus, Ralstona, Bacillus and Rhodobacter all of which are common to the human microbiome. [5] See Danko et al., (2021) for more complete details of these first analyses. Further analysis of EVA suit materials with respect to the efficacy of various cleaning protocols and engineered containment solutions is planned to inform suit design for NASA’s Artemis Moon to Mars program crew testing. Swab Tool Function Results: The kit was demonstrated for fit and function in suited subject vacuum tests to determine how well the tool worked as an aseptic microbial sampling device as well as to identify any design elements that could be upgraded for EVA task specific improvement. It was found that sample acquisition efficacy could be enhanced by redesign of the sample canister to end-effector interface. Several modifications of the sample caddy assemblies to optimize EVA safety and functionality were also identified. Consequently, fabrication of the redesigned sample canister to end-effector assembly interfaces and and the sample caddy assemblies are required. Fabrication of sixteen flight sample canister assemblies (8 per each of two EVA Swab Kits) and two sample caddy assemblies are in process to be followed by hardware testing and certification to produce two flight-certified EVA Swab Kits for transport to ISS no earlier than summer of 2022. Sampling Strategy: The International Space Station is an ideal testbed for systematic studies of contamination from crewed vehicles since it has been continuously occupied for 20 years and exposed to non-terrestrial conditions. We will sample the exterior of the ISS during EVA using a purpose-built swab tool capable of maintaining sterility while undergoing temperature changes from -151 to +121°C under hard vacuum. Prior to each EVA, the project team will work with ISS mission managers to identify precise sampling locations, which will vary by EVA based on the translation paths and worksites scheduled for that particular EVA. Ideally, translation path handrails and areas near ECLSS (Environmental Control and Life Support System) external vent openings on a spacecraft would be assessed. There are currently more than a dozen ECLSS external vents on the ISS. Some are connected to systems that vent waste products, while others are intended to equalize cabin pressure. As EVA opportunity allows, microbial samples from any of these external vents would provide a valuable data point, though some will be more useful than others. Four criteria have been identified to help prioritize sampling sites near vents: • EVA Accessibility: To minimize cost, it is desired to piggy-back onto a planned EVA. Therefore, the sampling location must be readily accessible by an EVA crew • Type of Vented Products: Vent products that have been in direct contact with crew, such as cabin air, are more likely to contain microorganisms than vent products associated with isolated systems, such as experiment module combustion products. • Mass of Vented Products: Higher-flow vents are more likely to contain detectible levels of microbial contaminants than lower-flow vents. • Local Environment: Sample locations with relatively benign local conditions, such as warm surfaces shielded from direct ultraviolet (UV) radiation exposure, may be more likely to support microbial growth than locations with harsher local environmental conditions. Because EVA accessibility is the most important criteria, the proposal team worked with an astronaut and flight controllers using the Dynamic Onboard Ubiquitous Graphics (DOUG) tool. The DOUG virtual environment allows an operator to “fly” around the current ISS vehicle configuration to assess EVA translation paths, attach points, and keep-out zones. While analysis on station or rapid return to Earth would be preferable, samples collected from the exterior of the ISS have already been exposed to temperature variations between -157 and +121 °C as well as hard vacuum. Therefore, they should be fairly stable and robust. We hypothesize that samples collected from the ISS exterior could be stored for up to 6 months at -80°C without degradation. Sample canisters will be returned to Earth while frozen at -80°C for analysis, and sterilized canisters can be re-flown back to ISS to support additional sampling opportunities Relevance to NASA Exploration Objectives: These data will allow us to identify new or improved methods, technologies, and procedures for spacecraft sterilization and leakage mitigation to minimize the amount of contamination introduced to the environment by human explorers. This work is funded by NASA research grant: NNH18ZDA001N-PPR References: [1] Bell, M.S. et al. (2015) LPS XLVI, Abst. #1832 [2] Rucker et al. (2018) 42nd COSPAR (PPP.3) [3] Bell, M.S. et al. (2019) Mars Extant Life Conference, Abst. #5096.[4] Bell, M.S. et al., (2020) 43rd COSPAR (BO.2).[5] Danko D, et.al.,(2021)Front.Microbiol.12:608478.

Mary Suzanne Bell↗

NASA NTRS2011

Verification of the Solar Dynamics Observatory High Gain Antenna Pointing Algorithm Using Flight Data

The Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) is a NASA spacecraft designed to study the Sun. It was launched on February 11, 2010 into a geosynchronous orbit, and uses a suite of attitude sensors and actuators to finely point the spacecraft at the Sun. SDO has three science instruments: the Atmospheric Imaging Assembly (AIA), the Helioseismic and Magnetic Imager (HMI), and the Extreme Ultraviolet Variability Experiment (EVE). SDO uses two High Gain Antennas (HGAs) to send science data to a dedicated ground station in White Sands, New Mexico. In order to meet the science data capture budget, the HGAs must be able to transmit data to the ground for a very large percentage of the time. Each HGA is a dual-axis antenna driven by stepper motors. Both antennas transmit data at all times, but only a single antenna is required in order to meet the transmission rate requirement. For portions of the year, one antenna or the other has an unobstructed view of the White Sands ground station. During other periods, however, the view from both antennas to the Earth is blocked for different portions of the day. During these times of blockage, the two HGAs take turns pointing to White Sands, with the other antenna pointing out to space. The HGAs handover White Sands transmission responsibilities to the unblocked antenna. There are two handover seasons per year, each lasting about 72 days, where the antennas hand off control every twelve hours. The non-tracking antenna slews back to the ground station by following a ground commanded trajectory and arrives approximately 5 minutes before the formerly tracking antenna slews away to point out into space. The SDO Attitude Control System (ACS) runs at 5 Hz, and the HGA Gimbal Control Electronics (GCE) run at 200 Hz. There are 40 opportunities for the gimbals to step each ACS cycle, with a hardware limitation of no more than one step every three GCE cycles. The ACS calculates the desired gimbal motion for tracking the ground station or for slewing, and sends the command to the GCE at 5 Hz. This command contains the number of gimbals steps for that ACS cycle, the direction of motion, the spacing of the steps, and the delay before taking the first step. The AIA and HMI instruments are sensitive to spacecraft jitter. Pre-flight analysis showed that jitter from the motion of the HGAs was a cause of concern. Three jitter mitigation techniques were developed to overcome the effects of jitter from different sources. The first method is the random step delay, which avoids gimbal steps hitting a cadence on a jitter-critical mode by pseudo-randomly delaying the first gimbal step in an ACS cycle. The second method of jitter mitigation is stagger stepping, which forbids the two antennas from taking steps during the same ACS cycle in order to avoid constructively adding jitter from two antennas. The third method is the inclusion of an instrument No Step Request (NSR), which allows the instruments to request a stoppage in gimbal stepping during the times when they are taking images. During the commissioning phase of the mission, a jitter test was performed onboard the spacecraft. Various sources of jitter, such as the reaction wheels, the High Gain Antenna motors, and the motion of the instrument filter wheels, were examined to determine the level of their effect on the instruments. During the HGA portion of the test, the jitter amplitudes from the single step of a gimbal were examined, as well as the amplitudes due to the execution of various gimbal rates. These jitter levels are compared with the gimbal jitter allocations for each instrument. Additionally, the jitter test provided insight into a readback delay that exists with the GCE. Pre-flight analysis suggested that gimbal steps scheduled to occur during the later portion of an ACS cycle would not be read during that cycle, resulting in a delay in the telemetered current gimbal position. Flight data from the jitter test confirmed this expectation. Analysis is presentehat shows the readback delay does not have a negative impact on gimbal control. The decision was made to consider implementing two of the jitter mitigation techniques on board the spacecraft: stagger stepping and the NSR. Flight data from two sets of handovers, one set without jitter mitigation and the other with mitigation enabled, were examined. The trajectory of the predicted handover was compared with the measured trajectory for the two cases, showing that tracking was not negatively impacted with the addition of the jitter mitigation techniques. Additionally, the individual gimbal steps were examined, and it was confirmed that the stagger stepping and NSRs worked as designed. An Image Quality Test was performed to determine the amount of cumulative jitter from the reaction wheels, HGAs, and instruments during various combinations of typical operations. In this paper, the flight results are examined from a test where the HGAs are following the path of a nominal handover with stagger stepping on and HMI NSRs enabled. In this case, the reaction wheels are moving at low speed and the instruments are taking pictures in their standard sequence. The flight data shows the level of jitter that the instruments see when their shutters are open. The HGA-induced jitter is well within the jitter requirement when the stagger step and NSR mitigation options are enabled. The SDO HGA pointing algorithm was designed to achieve nominal antenna pointing at the ground station, perform slews during handover season, and provide three HGA-induced jitter mitigation options without compromising pointing objectives. During the commissioning phase, flight data sets were collected to verify the HGA pointing algorithm and demonstrate its jitter mitigation capabilities.

Bourkland, Kristin L.↗