Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Contingency”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

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

At least 1,333 records · Page 74
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2010

NASA's Applied Sciences: Natural Disasters Program

Fully utilize current and near-term airborne and spaceborne assets and capabilities. NASA spaceborne instruments are for research but can be applied to natural disaster response as appropriate. NASA airborne instruments can be targeted specifically for disaster response. Could impact research programs. Better flow of information improves disaster response. Catalog capability, product, applicable disaster, points of contact. Ownership needs to come from the highest level of NASA - unpredictable and irregular nature of disasters requires contingency funding for disaster response. Build-in transfer of applicable natural disaster research capabilities to operational functionality at other agencies (e.g., USFS, NOAA, FEMA...) at the outset, whenever possible. For the Decadal Survey Missions, opportunities exist to identify needs and requirements early in the mission design process. Need to understand additional needs and commitments for meeting the needs of the disaster community. Opportunity to maximize disaster response and mitigation from the Decadal Survey Missions. Additional needs or capabilities may require agency contributions.

Kessler, Jason L.↗
NASA NTRS2011

A History of Space Shuttle Main Engine (SSME) Redline Limits Management

The Space Shuttle Main Engine (SSME) has several "redlines", which are operational limits designated to preclude a catastrophic shutdown of the SSME. The Space Shuttle Orbiter utilizes a combination of hardware and software to enable or disable the automated redline shutdown capability. The Space Shuttle is launched with the automated SSME redline limits enabled, but there are many scenarios which may result in the manual disabling of the software by the onboard crew. The operational philosophy for manually enabling and disabling the redline limits software has evolved continuously throughout the history of the Space Shuttle Program, due to events such as SSME hardware changes and updates to Space Shuttle contingency abort software. In this paper, the evolution of SSME redline limits management will be fully reviewed, including the operational scenarios which call for manual intervention, and the events that triggered changes to the philosophy. Following this review, improvements to the management of redline limits for future spacecraft will be proposed.

Arnold, Thomas M.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Docking Offset Between the Space Shuttle and the International Space Station and Resulting Impacts to the Transfer of Attitude Reference and Control

The Space Shuttle does not dock at an exact 90 degrees to the International Space Station (ISS) x-body axis. This offset from 90 degrees, along with error sources within their respective attitude knowledge, causes the two vehicles to never completely agree on their attitude, even though they operate as a single, mated stack while docked. The docking offset can be measured in flight when both vehicles have good attitude reference and is a critical component in calculations to transfer attitude reference from one vehicle to another. This paper will describe how the docking offset and attitude reference errors between both vehicles are measured and how this information would be used to recover Shuttle attitude reference from ISS in the event of multiple failures. During STS-117, ISS on-board Guidance, Navigation and Control (GNC) computers began having problems and after several continuous restarts, the systems failed. The failure took the ability for ISS to maintain attitude knowledge. This paper will also demonstrate how with knowledge of the docking offset, the contingency procedure to recover Shuttle attitude reference from ISS was reversed in order to provide ISS an attitude reference from Shuttle. Finally, this paper will show how knowledge of the docking offset can be used to speed up attitude control handovers from Shuttle to ISS momentum management. By taking into account the docking offset, Shuttle can be commanded to hold a more precise attitude which better agrees with the ISS commanded attitude such that start up transients with the ISS momentum management controllers are reduced. By reducing start-up transients, attitude control can be transferred from Shuttle to ISS without the use of ISS thrusters saving precious on-board propellant, crew time and minimizing loads placed upon the mated stack.

Helms, W. Jason↗
NASA NTRS2011

COMPASS Final Report: Enceladus Solar Electric Propulsion Stage

The results of the NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) COllaborative Modeling and Parametric Assessment of Space Systems (COMPASS) internal Solar Electric Propulsion (SEP) stage design are documented in this report (Figure 1.1). The SEP Stage was designed to deliver a science probe to Saturn (the probe design was performed separately by the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center s (GSFC) Integrated Mission Design Center (IMDC)). The SEP Stage delivers the 2444 kg probe on a Saturn trajectory with a hyperbolic arrival velocity of 5.4 km/s. The design carried 30 percent mass, 10 percent power, and 6 percent propellant margins. The SEP Stage relies on the probe for substantial guidance, navigation and control (GN&C), command and data handling (C&DH), and Communications functions. The stage is configured to carry the probe and to minimize the packaging interference between the probe and the stage. The propulsion system consisted of a 1+1 (one active, one spare) configuration of gimbaled 7 kW NASA Evolutionary Xenon Thruster (NEXT) ion propulsion thrusters with a throughput of 309 kg Xe propellant. Two 9350 W GaAs triple junction (at 1 Astronomical Unit (AU), includes 10 percent margin) ultra-flex solar arrays provided power to the stage, with Li-ion batteries for launch and contingency operations power. The base structure was an Al-Li hexagonal skin-stringer frame built to withstand launch loads. A passive thermal control system consisted of heat pipes to north and south radiator panels, multilayer insulation (MLI) and heaters for the Xe tank. All systems except tanks and solar arrays were designed to be single fault tolerant.

Oleson, Steven R.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Solar Dynamics Observatory Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Overview

The Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) was designed and built at the Goddard Space Flight Center, launched from Cape Canaveral on February 11, 2010, and reached its final geosynchronous science orbit on March 16, 2010. The purpose of SDO is to observe the Sun and continuously relay data to a dedicated ground station. SDO remains Sun-pointing throughout most of its mission for the instruments to take measurements of the Sun. The SDO attitude control system (ACS) is a single-fault tolerant design. Its fully redundant attitude sensor complement includes sixteen coarse Sun sensors (CSSs), a digital Sun sensor (DSS), three two-axis inertial reference units (IRUs), and two star trackers (STs). The ACS also makes use of the four guide telescopes included as a part of one of the science instruments. Attitude actuation is performed using four reaction wheels assemblies (RWAs) and eight thrusters, with a single main engine used to provide velocity-change thrust for orbit raising. The attitude control software has five nominal control modes, three wheel-based modes and two thruster-based modes. A wheel-based Safehold running in the attitude control electronics box improves the robustness of the system as a whole. All six modes are designed on the same basic proportional-integral-derivative attitude error structure, with more robust modes setting their integral gains to zero. This paper details the final overall design of the SDO guidance, navigation, and control (GN&C) system and how it was used in practice during SDO launch, commissioning, and nominal operations. This overview will include the ACS control modes, attitude determination and sensor calibration, the high gain antenna (HGA) calibration, and jitter mitigation operation. The Solar Dynamics Observatory mission is part of the NASA Living With a Star program, which seeks to understand the changing Sun and its effects on the Solar System, life, and society. To this end, the SDO spacecraft carries three Sun-observing instruments: Helioseismic and Magnetic Imager (HMI), led by Stanford University; Atmospheric Imaging Assembly (AIA), led by Lockheed Martin Space and Astrophysics Laboratory; and Extreme Ultraviolet Variability Experiment (EVE), led by the University of Colorado. The basic mission is to observe the Sun for a very high percentage of the 5-year mission (10-year goal) with long stretches of uninterrupted observations and with constant, high-data-rate transmission to a dedicated ground station to be located in White Sands, New Mexico. These goals guided the design of the spacecraft bus that will carry and service the three-instrument payload. Overarching design goals for the bus are geosynchronous orbit, near-constant Sun observations with the ability to fly through eclipses, and constant HGA contact with the dedicated ground station. A three-axis stabilized ACS is needed both to point at the Sun accurately and to keep the roll about the Sun vector correctly positioned with respect to the solar north pole. This roll control is especially important for the magnetic field imaging of HM I. The mission requirements have several general impacts on the ACS design. Both the AIA and HMI instruments are very sensitive to the blurring caused by jitter. Each has an image stabilization system (ISS) with some ability to filter out high frequency motion, but below the bandwidth of the ISS the control system must compensate for disturbances within the ACS bandwidth or avoid exciting jitter at higher frequencies. Within the ACS bandwidth, the control requirement imposed by AIA is to place the center of the solar disk no more than 2 arc sec, 3 , from a body-defined target based on one of the GTs that accompany the instrument. This body-defined target, called the science reference boresight (SRB), was determined from the postlaunch orientation of the GTs by averaging the bounding telescope boresights for pitch to get a pitch SRB coordinate, and by averaging the bounding boresights for yaw toet the yaw SRB coordinate. The location of this SRB in the 0.5-deg field-of-view for each GT then becomes the central target for each telescope; one GT is selected for use as the ACS controlling guide telescope (CGT) at any given time. Fine Sun-pointing is effected based on this SRB for all three instruments when the Sun is within the linear range of the CGT. In addition to limiting jitter, HMI science requires averaging several observations, making the instrument sensitive to low frequency motion that induces differential motion between each observation. This requires the spacecraft attitude to be stable about the roll axis to approximately 10 arcsec over a ten-minute period. Instrument calibrations require that the spacecraft point the SRB up to 2.5 degrees in pitch and yaw away from the center of the Sun, placing the Sun outside the field-of-view of the guide telescopes. In such instances, when the GTs cannot provide the definitive target for the ACS, on-board attitude determination combined with ephemeris prediction of the Sun direction must provide the definitive target. EVE is capable of observing the Sun with less dependence on attitude control. However, the ground data processing needs for calibrations result in the most strict attitude knowledge requirements for the mission: [35,70,70] arcsec, 3 , of knowledge with respect to the center of the solar disk. In addition to driving the ACS sensor selection, the knowledge requirements, which have their effect primarily during Inertial mode calibrations, drive the accuracy requirements for the solar ephemeris. The need to achieve and maintain geosynchronous orbit (GEO) drove the need for high-efficiency propulsive systems and appropriate attitude control. The main engine provided high specific impulse for the maneuvers to attain GEO, while the smaller ACS thrusters managed the disturbance torques of the larger engine and provided the capability for much smaller adjustment burns on orbit. SDO s large solar profile means that solar radiation pressure is a large torque disturbance, and the momentum buildup from this disturbance and the GEO altitude drives the ACS to use thrusters to manage vehicle momentum. The demanding data capture budget for the mission, however, requires SDO to avoid frequent thruster maneuvers, while concerns about on-orbit jitter restrict the maximum desired wheel speeds desired from the RWAs. The plan for on-orbit wheel speed and momentum management will be discussed as well as what is now being done in operation after the jitter environment was characterized. The SDO ACS hardware complement is single-fault tolerant. Two main processors carry virtually identical copies of the command and data handling and ACS software, and two identical attitude control electronics (ACE) boxes carry Coldfire processors with contingency ACS software and other hardware interface cards; the ACE structure allows reaction wheels to be commanded by the Sun-pointing Safehold independent of the Mil Std 1553 data bus. The sixteen Adcole CSSs are grouped into primary and backup sets of eight sensors, each set providing the ability to calculate a sun vector. Each set of eight eyes provides full 4 -steradian coverage. The Adcole DSS comprises an optics head and a separate electronics box providing a 1553 data interface. The electronics box is mounted inside the Faraday cage created by the spacecraft bus module. The DSS head with its 32- deg square FOV is mounted on the instrument module with its boresight along the spacecraft X axis, nearly aligned with the Sun during observations. Adcole has designed the DSS calibration parameters so that the accuracy is 0.24 arcminutes within 10 deg of the boresight, and diminishes to 3 arcminutes as the Sun moves towards the edges of its FOV . This DSS calibration scheme provides higher accuracy attitude determination over the range of the instrument calibration maneuvers.

Morgenstern, Wendy M.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Relaxing USOS Solar Array Constraints for Russian Vehicle Undocking

With the retirement of Space Shuttle cargo delivery capability and the ten year life extension of the International Space Station (ISS) more emphasis is being put on preservation of the service life of ISS critical components. Current restrictions on the United States Orbital Segment (USOS) Solar Array (SA) positioning during Russian Vehicle (RV) departure from ISS nadir and zenith ports cause SA to be positioned in the plume field of Service Module thrusters and lead to degradation of SAs as well as potential damage to Sun tracking Beta Gimbal Assemblies (BGA). These restrictions are imposed because of the single fault tolerant RV Motion Control System (MCS), which does not meet ISS Safety requirements for catastrophic hazards and dictates 16 degree Solar Array Rotary Joint position, which ensures that ISS and RV relative motion post separation, does lead to collision. The purpose of this paper is to describe a methodology and the analysis that was performed to determine relative motion trajectories of the ISS and separating RV for nominal and contingency cases. Analysis was performed in three phases that included ISS free drift prior to Visiting Vehicle separation, ISS and Visiting Vehicle relative motion analysis and clearance analysis. First, the ISS free drift analysis determined the worst case attitude and attitude rate excursions prior to RV separation based on a series of different configurations and mass properties. Next, the relative motion analysis calculated the separation trajectories while varying the initial conditions, such as docking mechanism performance, Visiting Vehicle MCS failure, departure port location, ISS attitude and attitude rates at the time of separation, etc. The analysis employed both orbital mechanics and rigid body rotation calculations while accounting for various atmospheric conditions and gravity gradient effects. The resulting relative motion trajectories were then used to determine the worst case separation envelopes during the clearance analysis. Analytical models were developed individually for each stage and the results were used to build initial conditions for the following stages. In addition to the analysis approach, this paper also discusses the analysis results, showing worst case relative motion envelopes, the recommendations for ISS appendage positioning and the suggested approach for future analyses.

Menkin, Evgeny↗
NASA NTRS2010

Collective Intelligence and Three Aspects of Planning in Organizations: A NASA Example

For many complex sociotechnical systems, planning seems to require explicit coordination; certainly, in executing a plan the activities of different actors must be tightly coupled. However, distributing the needed planning information can be very burdensome and error prone, because different groups need different collections of information, updated or kept current on different time cycles. Further, the information needed to form successful plans is often highly distributed, and while feedback about the success of prior plans may exist, it may not be available to those in a position of using this to improve plans or to detect and resolve other problems in the system (Weick, 1995). Tools to support various aspects of planning have been developed, and can provide a huge benefit to the individuals working on that aspect. To be tractable, most solutions address a quite bounded slice of work, isolating it from the larger context. Prospective planning takes place over multiple, nested cycles of decision making. This builds a plan that specifies activities of different granularity. "Subplans" may specify multiple parallel activities by different groups and individuals, as well as sequential, nested actions by a single actor. Planning produces valuable, sharable, external, representations: in addition to prospective use, plans support retrospective assessment and also action in the present. Viewing planning in a larger context - both temporal and organizational -- enables noticing what one does not know and generating more systemic and effective solutions. Viewing a problem as one of collective intelligence invites thinking about the larger organizational context. Many approaches to supporting collective intelligence do not support execution of highly contingent actions, distributed across many players, and hence provide incomplete support for planning. However, CI technology maybe helpful in managing the processes of gathering information for decision making in planning and of distributing plan information to various actors, needed on various time cycles.

Billman, Dorrit↗
NASA NTRS2011

Multi-Maneuver Clohessy-Wiltshire Targeting

Orbital rendezvous involves execution of a sequence of maneuvers by a chaser vehicle to bring the chaser to a desired state relative to a target vehicle while meeting intermediate and final relative constraints. Intermediate and final relative constraints are necessary to meet a multitude of requirements such as to control approach direction, ensure relative position is adequate for operation of space-to-space communication systems and relative sensors, provide fail-safe trajectory features, and provide contingency hold points. The effect of maneuvers on constraints is often coupled, so the maneuvers must be solved for as a set. For example, maneuvers that affect orbital energy change both the chaser's height and downrange position relative to the target vehicle. Rendezvous designers use experience and rules-of-thumb to design a sequence of maneuvers and constraints. A non-iterative method is presented for targeting a rendezvous scenario that includes a sequence of maneuvers and relative constraints. This method is referred to as Multi-Maneuver Clohessy-Wiltshire Targeting (MM_CW_TGT). When a single maneuver is targeted to a single relative position, the classic CW targeting solution is obtained. The MM_CW_TGT method involves manipulation of the CW state transition matrix to form a linear system. As a starting point for forming the algorithm, the effects of a series of impulsive maneuvers on the state are derived. Simple and moderately complex examples are used to demonstrate the pattern of the resulting linear system. The general form of the pattern results in an algorithm for formation of the linear system. The resulting linear system relates the effect of maneuver components and initial conditions on relative constraints specified by the rendezvous designer. Solution of the linear system includes the straight-forward inverse of a square matrix. Inversion of the square matrix is assured if the designer poses a controllable scenario - a scenario where the the constraints can be met by the sequence of maneuvers. Matrices in the linear system are dependent on selection of maneuvers and constraints by the designer, but the matrices are independent of the chaser's initial conditions. For scenarios where the sequence of maneuvers and constraints are fixed, the linear system can be formed and the square matrix inverted prior to real-time operations. Example solutions are presented for several rendezvous scenarios to illustrate the utility of the method. The MM_CW_TGT method has been used during the preliminary design of rendezvous scenarios and is expected to be useful for iterative methods in the generation of an initial guess and corrections.

Dannemiller, David P.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Long Term Missions at the Sun-Earth Libration Point L1: ACE, SOHO, and WIND

Three heliophysics missions -- the Advanced Composition Explorer (ACE), Solar Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO), and the Global Geoscience WIND -- have been orbiting the Sun-Earth interior libration point L1 continuously since 1997, 1996, and 2004, respectively. ACE and WIND (both NASA missions) and SOHO (an ESA-NASA joint mission) are all operated from the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC). While ACE and SOHO have been dedicated libration point orbiters since their launches, WIND has had also a remarkable 10-year career flying a deep-space, multiple lunar-flyby trajectory prior to 2004. That era featured 36 targeted lunar flybys with excursions to both L1 and L2 before its final insertion in L1 orbit. A figure depicts the orbits of the three spacecraft, showing projections of the orbits onto the orthographic planes of a solar rotating ecliptic frame of reference. The SOHO orbit is a quasi-periodic halo orbit, where the frequencies of the in-plane and out-of-plane motions are practically equal. Such an orbit is seen to repeat itself with a period of approximately 178 days. For ACE and WIND, the frequencies of the in-plane and out-of-plane motions are unequal, giving rise to the characteristic Lissajous motion. ACE's orbit is of moderately small amplitude, whereas WIND's orbit is a large-amplitude Lissajous of dimensions close to those of the SOHO halo orbit. As motion about the collinear points is inherently unstable, stationkeeping maneuvers are necessary to prevent orbital decay and eventual escape from the L1 region. Though the three spacecraft are dissimilar (SOHO is a 3-axis stabilized Sun pointer, WIND is a spin-stabilized ecliptic pole pointer, and ACE is also spin-stabilized with its spin axis maintained between 4 and 20 degrees of the Sun), the stationkeeping technique for the three is fundamentally the same. The technique consists of correcting the energy of the orbit via a delta-V directed parallel or anti-parallel to the Spacecraft-to-Sun line. SOHO achieves this using thrusters oriented in line with the solar direction. WIND achieves the delta-V via pulsing radial thrusters when aligned with the Sun. ACE uses axial thrusters to apply delta-V with a component that is 94% or more aligned with the ACE-Sun line. Sunward thrust adds energy to the orbit preventing decay back toward Earth. Thrust directed anti-Sunward takes energy out of the L1 orbit, thereby preventing escape from the Earth-Moon system into independent heliocentric orbit. Libration point orbit stationkeeping delta-V costs grow exponentially with time elapsed from the last maneuver performed. The doubling time constant is approximately 16 days. For the sake of fuel conservation, and for limiting the absolute magnitude of propulsion performance errors, stationkeeping maneuvers should be performed before the delta-V grows too large; for our purposes 'too large' is considered to be greater than 0.5 m/sec. In practice, the typical interval between burns for this trio is about three months, and the typical delta-V is much smaller than 0.5 m/sec. Typical annual stationkeeping costs have been around 1.0 m/sec for ACE and WIND, and much less than that for SOHO. All three spacecraft have ample fuel remaining; barring contingencies all three could, in principle, be maintained at L1 for decades to come. This paper will review the L1 orbits and the mission history of ACE, WIND, and SOHO, and describe the stationkeeping techniques and orbit maneuver experience. The Lissajous phase control that was practiced for ACE during the period from 1999 to 2001 will also be briefly discussed. The final section will consider the future of these ongoing missions.

Roberts, Craig E.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Holographic Weapons Sight as Crew Optical Alignment Sight

Crew Optical Alignment Sights (COAS) are used by spacecraft pilots to provide a visual reference to a target spacecraft for lateral relative position during rendezvous and docking operations. NASA s Orion vehicle, which is currently under development, has not included a COAS in favor of automated sensors, but the crew office has requested such a device be added for situational awareness and contingency support. The current Space Shuttle COAS was adopted from Apollo heritage, weighs several pounds, and is no longer available for procurement which would make re-use difficult. In response, a study was conducted to examine the possibility of converting a commercially available weapons sight to a COAS for the Orion spacecraft. The device used in this study was the XPS series Holographic Weapon Sight (HWS) procured from L-3 EOTech. This device was selected because the targeting reticule can subtend several degrees, and display a graphic pattern tailored to rendezvous and docking operations. Evaluations of the COAS were performed in both the Orion low-fidelity mockup and rendezvous simulations in the Reconfigurable Operational Cockpit (ROC) by crewmembers, rendezvous engineering experts, and flight controllers at Johnson Space Center. These evaluations determined that this unit s size and mounting options can support proper operation and that the reticule visual qualities are as good as or better than the current Space Shuttle COAS. The results positively indicate that the device could be used as a functional COAS and supports a low-cost technology conversion solution.

Merancy, Nujoud↗
NASA NTRS2011

Development of a Smart Release Algorithm for Mid-Air Separation of Parachute Test Articles

The Crew Exploration Vehicle Parachute Assembly System (CPAS) project is currently developing an autonomous method to separate a capsule-shaped parachute test vehicle from an air-drop platform for use in the test program to develop and validate the parachute system for the Orion spacecraft. The CPAS project seeks to perform air-drop tests of an Orion-like boilerplate capsule. Delivery of the boilerplate capsule to the test condition has proven to be a critical and complicated task. In the current concept, the boilerplate vehicle is extracted from an aircraft on top of a Type V pallet and then separated from the pallet in mid-air. The attitude of the vehicles at separation is critical to avoiding re-contact and successfully deploying the boilerplate into a heatshield-down orientation. Neither the pallet nor the boilerplate has an active control system. However, the attitude of the mated vehicle as a function of time is somewhat predictable. CPAS engineers have designed an avionics system to monitor the attitude of the mated vehicle as it is extracted from the aircraft and command a release when the desired conditions are met. The algorithm includes contingency capabilities designed to release the test vehicle before undesirable orientations occur. The algorithm was verified with simulation and ground testing. The pre-flight development and testing is discussed and limitations of ground testing are noted. The CPAS project performed a series of three drop tests as a proof-of-concept of the release technique. These tests helped to refine the attitude instrumentation and software algorithm to be used on future tests. The drop tests are described in detail and the evolution of the release system with each test is described.

Moore, James W.↗
NASA NTRS2002

Automated Escape Guidance Algorithms for An Escape Vehicle

An escape vehicle was designed to provide an emergency evacuation for crew members living on a space station. For maximum escape capability, the escape vehicle needs to have the ability to safely evacuate a station in a contingency scenario such as an uncontrolled (e.g., tumbling) station. This emergency escape sequence will typically be divided into three events: The fust separation event (SEP1), the navigation reconstruction event, and the second separation event (SEP2). SEP1 is responsible for taking the spacecraft from its docking port to a distance greater than the maximum radius of the rotating station. The navigation reconstruction event takes place prior to the SEP2 event and establishes the orbital state to within the tolerance limits necessary for SEP2. The SEP2 event calculates and performs an avoidance burn to prevent station recontact during the next several orbits. This paper presents the tools and results for the whole separation sequence with an emphasis on the two separation events. The fust challenge includes collision avoidance during the escape sequence while the station is in an uncontrolled rotational state, with rotation rates of up to 2 degrees per second. The task of avoiding a collision may require the use of the Vehicle's de-orbit propulsion system for maximum thrust and minimum dwell time within the vicinity of the station vicinity. The thrust of the propulsion system is in a single direction, and can be controlled only by the attitude of the spacecraft. Escape algorithms based on a look-up table or analytical guidance can be implemented since the rotation rate and the angular momentum vector can be sensed onboard and a-priori knowledge of the position and relative orientation are available. In addition, crew intervention has been provided for in the event of unforeseen obstacles in the escape path. The purpose of the SEP2 burn is to avoid re-contact with the station over an extended period of time. Performing this maneuver properly requires knowledge of the orbital state, which is obtained during the navigation state reconstruction event. Since the direction of the delta-v of the SEPI maneuver is a random variable with respect to the Local Vertical Local Horizontal (LVLH) coordinate system, calculating the required SEP2 burn is a challenge. This problem was solved using a neural network as a model-free function approximation technique.

Flanary, Ronald↗
NASA NTRS2000

Orbiter Capability for Providing Water to the International Space Station according to the Most Probable Flight Attitudes

Water to be generated by, delivered to, and processed by the International Space Station (ISS) is a critical Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) element, especially for the early ISS missions. A significant portion of the water required by the ISS shall be provided by the Shuttle Transportation System (STS) Orbiter. The balance of water generated by the Orbiter Fuel Cells (FC), minus that water consumed by the Orbiter Flash Evaporator System (FES) and crew, is available for transfer to the ISS. During later missions, crew respired and perspired water, as well as effluent water from the Orbiter LiOH canisters, will be collected as condensate and available for transfer to the ISS. Orbiter radiator performance provides the most variance in determining the amount of net Orbiter water available for transfer to the ISS. As radiator performance decreases, the dependence upon the FES (and FC water) increases for rejecting Orbiter waste heat. Generally, radiator performance decreases as the ISS assembly size increases (especially as solar arrays are added), and also as beta angle increases. ISS solar array deployment necessitates the use of models with articulating solar arrays (for Earth local-vertical attitudes), as array position dramatically affects Orbiter radiator performance. Recent developments in the relaxation of beta angle limitations have also increased the complexity and difficulty of providing water to the ISS. Other factors that may hinder the ability to transfer water are the number of empty Contingency Water Containers (CWCs) available, duration of open-hatch time, crew activity timeline, and full CWC storage capability. A parametric study has been accomplished that provides a quick-reference table for determining expected water generation rates for ISS missions 2A.2 through 7A.1. An hourly Orbiter water generation rate is reported according to a matrix that consists of: (1) (six) significant changes in ISS assembly configuration; (2) (four) beta angles (0 deg. , +37 deg., +53 deg. , and +75 deg.); (3) the (three) most representative ISS attitudes (XPOP-O, XPOP-180 and +XVV); (4) (four) Orbiter radiator configurations (both stowed, starboard deployed, port deployed, and both deployed) and (5) the (two) conditions (radiator inlet temperatures and fuel cell power) most consistent with sleep and wake periods. Those permutations of higher probability of occurrence than others have been identified. Another parametric study has been accomplished that provides a quick-reference table for determining expected water generation rates for ISS assembly complete missions. An hourly Orbiter water generation rate is reported according to a matrix that consists of: (1) (seven) beta angles (-75 deg., -60 deg., -30 deg., 0 deg., +30 deg., +60 deg., and +75 deg.); (2) the (nine) PYR angles that define the corners of the envelope; (3) (four) Orbiter radiator configurations (both stowed, starboard deployed, port deployed, and both deployed) and (4) the (two) conditions (radiator inlet temperatures and fuel cell power) most consistent with sleep and wake periods.

Dunaway, Brian↗
NASA NTRS2008

Jet Propulsion Laboratory: Annual Report 2007

Many milestones are celebrated in the business of space exploration, but one of them that arrived this year has particular meaning for us. Half a century ago, on January 31, 1958, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory was responsible for creating America's first satellite, Explorer 1, and joined with the Army to launch it into orbit. That makes 2007 the 50th year we have been sending robotic craft from Earth to explore space. No other event before or since has had such a profound effect on JPL's basic identity, setting it on the path to become the world's leader in robotic solar system exploration. It is not lost on historians that Explorer 1, besides being America's first satellite, was also the first spacecraft from any country to deliver scientific results in its case, the discovery of the Van Allen Radiation Belts that surround Earth. Science, of course, has been the prime motivator for all the dozens of missions that we have lofted into space in the half-century since then. JPL has sent spacecraft to every planet in the solar system from Mercury to Neptune, some of them very sophisticated machines. But in one way or another, they all owe their heritage to the 31-pound bullet-shaped probe JPL shot into space in 1958. Although we have ranged far and wide across the solar system, we have a very strong contingent of satellites and instruments dedicated, like Explorer, to the environment of our home planet. JPL missions have been providing much of the data to establish the facts of global warming - most especially, the melting of ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica. During the past year, JPL and our parent organization, the California Institute of Technology, have created a task force to focus the special capabilities of the Laboratory and campus on ways to better understand the physics of global change. While Earth is a chaotic and dynamic system capable of large natural variations, evidence is mounting that human activities are playing an increasingly important role. A central piece of this effort is a search for novel energy sources to replace fossil fuels, the combustion of which adds carbon dioxide to our atmosphere. All of this is supported by our worldwide Deep Space Network, which provides the communication link between spacecraft and the ground. In addition, missions are infused with technologies developed by researchers working on projects for non-NASA sponsors as well as on pure research.

Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL)↗
NASA NTRS2006

Jet Propulsion Laboratory: Annual Report 2005

What an amazing host of new sights 2005 brought us. With impeccable choreography, one spacecraft sent an impactor slamming into a comet, reversing the traditional view of these space wayfarers by revealing it to be buried in deep drifts of a fine talcum-like powder. Another spacecraft delivered a probe from our European partners to the surface of Saturn's haze-shrouded moon Titan, disclosing a landscape eerily like Earth's, if we had methane rivers cascading down hillsides of ice. An orbiting observatory for the first time showed us the light from planets circling other stars, which astronomers previously knew to exist only from indirect clues. Throughout the year we also amassed continually expanding views of Earth as well as Mars, by far the most-explored planet after our own. In all, 18 spacecraft and five instruments were stationed across the solar system, studying our own world, other planets, comets and the deeper universe. These missions were enabled by the efforts of everyone at JPL. The Deep Space Network of communications complexes across three continents continued to experience a period of remarkable activity. Others were at work creating technologies both for NASA missions and other uses. JPL's contingent of scientific researchers was equally busy coordinating the science activities of our missions or pursuing independent investigations. None of this would be possible without the support of world-class business and administrative teams. All of our missions in one way or another support our nations Vision for Space Exploration, which envisages a gradually widening robotic and human presence across the solar system in the years ahead. The year was not without its challenges. NASA set forth to implement the Vision for Space Exploration, which resulted in some flight projects and technology efforts being terminated. To adjust to this new direction, it was necessary for us to reduce the JPL workforce by about five percent. Taking steps like this is painful, but we tried to make the process as orderly as possible. In the end, the adjustments made have left JPL on a healthy footing for the years ahead.

Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL)↗
NASA NTRS2011

Integrating Systems Health Management with Adaptive Controls for a Utility-Scale Wind Turbine

Increasing turbine up-time and reducing maintenance costs are key technology drivers for wind turbine operators. Components within wind turbines are subject to considerable stresses due to unpredictable environmental conditions resulting from rapidly changing local dynamics. Systems health management has the aim to assess the state-of-health of components within a wind turbine, to estimate remaining life, and to aid in autonomous decision-making to minimize damage. Advanced adaptive controls can provide the mechanism to enable optimized operations that also provide the enabling technology for Systems Health Management goals. The work reported herein explores the integration of condition monitoring of wind turbine blades with contingency management and adaptive controls. Results are demonstrated using a high fidelity simulator of a utility-scale wind turbine.

Frost, Susan A.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Behavioral Health and Performance Operations During the Space Shuttle Program

Prior to the Columbia STS 107 disaster in 2003, the Johnson Space Center s Behavioral Health and Performance Group (BHP) became involved in Space Shuttle Operations on an as needed basis, occasionally acting as a consultant and primarily addressing crew-crew personality conflicts. The BHP group also assisted with astronaut selection at every selection cycle beginning in 1991. Following STS 107, an event that spawned an increased need of behavioral health support to STS crew members and their dependents, BHP services to the Space Shuttle Program were enhanced beginning with the STS 114 Return to Flight mission in 2005. These services included the presence of BHP personnel at STS launches and landings for contingency support, a BHP briefing to the entire STS crew at L-11 months, a private preflight meeting with the STS Commander at L-9 months, and the presence of a BHP consultant at the L-1.5 month Family Support Office briefing to crew and family members. The later development of an annual behavioral health assessment of all active astronauts also augmented BHP s Space Shuttle Program specific services, allowing for private meetings with all STS crew members before and after each mission. The components of each facet of these BHP Space Shuttle Program support services will be presented, along with valuable lessons learned, and with recommendations for BHP involvement in future short duration space missions

Beven, G.↗