Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Lunar Navigation”

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 145 records · Page 8
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Flexible Data and Frame Synchronization Structure for the LunaNet PNT Signal

A LunaNet Lunar Augmented Navigation Service (LANS) is being developed to enable a position, navigation, and timing service for future Lunar operations [1]. The signal includes two components. An in-phase data channel signal is spread by a 1.023 MCPS ranging code that provides a high-rate data message at 250 bps and is encoded by a strong Low Density Parity Check (LDPC) code. A pilot channel with a 5.115 MCPS spreading code is also provided. The pilot code is configured with a secondary (overlay) code that does not currently provide absolute time or frame Synchronization as is the case for L1C [2] [3]. This work shows the advantage of implementing an overlay structure that provides absolute time for the LunaNet LANS signal structure known as the Augmented Forward Signal (AFS). The LunaNet AFS structure was developed to service two classes of user receivers. The first class is a low-complexity user receiver that only receives the 1.023 MCPS signal and does not use the 5.115 MCPS pilot channel. For this class of user, a data frame Sync word is needed. The second class of receiver is a high-end receiver that can processes both data and pilot channels to take advantage of the higher chip rate pilot channel for enhanced robustness and improved accuracy. In the current draft LunaNet LANS AFS design, these users must employ the frame Sync word in the data channel and obtain absolute time after decoding the AFS navigation message [2]. The signal structure would greatly benefit from the addition of a pilot overlay structure that provides absolute time and robust frame Sync for high-end users as done for L1C [3]. To provide a more robust and interoperable AFS structure, this work summarizes a study and recommends alternatives for a new overlay code on the pilot channel that provides absolute time and a Sync word approach on the data channel. The overlay code and Sync word are designed to allow for flexible and robust data synchronization for both low- complexity and high-end user receivers. The new overlay code structure permits frame synchronization performance that is as good as or better than the L1 C signal, while enabling a determination of absolute time upon frame Sync to aid high-end assisted LANS AFS user receivers at low signal to noise levels. We also present the design of rate-matched 5G new radio (5GNR) LDPC codes that fit within the current 6000-symbol frame size along with a time of interval (TOI) word, frame ID (FID) word, and the remaining LunaNet AFS data message blocks. The paper describes and demonstrates robust frame Synchronization performance of the overlay code and Synch word approaches. The results are described in terms of probability of missed detection and probability of false alarm for a correct frame Synchronization at low Eb/No levels expected for decoding the TOI word and LDPC encoded data. Advantages of the proposed data Synchronization structure will be described along with use cases for low-end and high-end receivers. Practical implementation considerations will also be described.

Philip Dafesh↗
NASA NTRS2012

LiAISON-Supplemented Navigation for Geosynchronous and Lunar L1 Orbiter

A high-fidelity simulation is developed to test the theory that relative range and range-rate measurements between a satellite in a geosynchronous orbit and a satellite in orbit about the Earth-Moon L1 point may be used to improve the navigation accuracy of both satellites, compared with ground-only tracking. Recent research has determined that satellite-to-satellite range measurements between these two orbits are su cient to perform absolute state estimation as well as relative state estimation of both satellites - a technology known as LiAISON (Linked Autonomous Interplanetary Satellite Orbit Navigation). This study quanties the improvement in accuracy when LiAISON is used to supplement ground tracking of one or both satellites in a very realistic simulation. Orbit determination techniques show that the inclusion of LiAISON measurements with ground tracking observations can greatly improve absolute position and velocity estimates for both satellites in geosynchronous orbit and about the Earth-Moon L1 point.

satellite-to-satellite tracking (SST)↗
NASA NTRS2012

LiAISON-supplemented navigation for geosynchronous and Lunar L1 orbiters

A high-fidelity simulation is developed to test the theory that relative range and range-rate measurements between a satellite in a geosynchronous orbit and a satellite in orbit about the Earth-Moon L₁ point may be used to improve the navigation accuracy of both satellites, compared with ground-only tracking. Recent research has determined that satellite-to-satellite range measurements between these two orbits are sufficient to perform absolute state estimation as well as relative state estimation of both satellites–a technology known as LiAISON(Linked Autonomous Interplanetary Satellite Orbit Navigation). This study quantifies the improvement in accuracy when LiAISON is used to supplement ground tracking of one or both satellites in a very realistic simulation. Orbit determination techniques show that the inclusion of LiAISON measurements with ground tracking observations can greatly improve absolute position and velocity estimates for both satellites in geosynchronous orbit and about the Earth-Moon L₁ point.

Anderson, Rodney L.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Investigating Low-Altitude Constellations of Ad-Hoc Lunar PNT System for Distributed Spacecraft Autonomy

In this study, we examine a low-altitude Lunar Position, Navigation, and Timing (LPNT) constellations and the localization performance of Centralized Extended Kalman Filter (CEKF) and Decentralized Extended Kalman Filter (DEKF) algorithms. The primary investigation involves a 100-node swarm operating at a 100 km altitude, in contrast to previous studies that examined a 21-node asset in a frozen-orbit at 5,500 km. The autonomous operation of large-scale swarm is based on two-way Inter-Satellite Link (ISL) measurements, which involve pseudoranges and relative velocities among swarm nodes. We perform a numerical assessment of the two filtering approaches, utilizing ‘fully sampled’ measurements from all available assets as well as ‘two ISL’ measurements where each spacecraft is restricted to only two antennas. This research includes an analysis of CEKF under 2-ISL constraints and evaluates the performance of DEKF in a 100-node swarm, which has not been explored in previous studies. In addition, we examine the impact of increasing the sampling frequency for DEKF, showing that the update cycle can be shortened from a 10-minute interval. A novel approach for ‘2-ISL limited’ DEKF will also be introduced, using a matching formulation that exhaustively enumerates all potential matches. This study provides valuable insights into large-scale distributed swarm operations, considering various filter configurations, sampling frequencies, matching strategies, and scalability of CEKF and DEKF for low-altitude LPNT applications. The Lunar PNT technology plays a key role in providing reliable and robust navigation services on the Moon's surface and the South pole, where the primary Lunar missions are planned. To support upcoming Lunar missions, including small satellites from NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services program, the Lunar PNT system must be adaptable to smaller platforms like CubeSats. Driven by the growing involvement of public and private exploration partnerships, the traditional low Earth orbit missions are shifting to beyond geosynchronous orbit [1]. These upcoming missions aim to foster a sustainable and innovative exploration program, in collaboration with commercial and international partners, to facilitate human expansion throughout the solar system and return new knowledge and opportunities to Earth [2]. As part of this trend, there are increasing efforts to utilize science missions in Lunar orbit to develop a non-dedicated and ad-hoc PNT network system. Two traditional approaches, the Deep Space Network (DSN) and the weak signal Global Positioning System (GPS), are established deep-space navigation technologies for missions beyond the geosynchronous orbit. Beginning in 1958, the DSN was developed to communicate with the Explorer 1 spacecraft based on the use of radiometric tracking in spacecraft navigation [3]. The DSN is capable of providing nearly unfettered coverage to spacecraft beyond low-Earth orbit (LEO), however, increased space mission volume has created concerns about future expectations of DSN usage for spacecraft navigation [4]. For cislunar mission applications, the position accuracy using DSN achieves 100 m (3σ) with at least three geometrically diverse ground stations when using radiometric tracking alone [5]. The DSN's dependence on Earth-based ground stations restricts its operational capabilities to periods of Earth visibility. This limitation, coupled with its poor localization performance, renders the DSN unsuitable for future lunar missions that demand continuous tracking and precise positioning. To satisfy the increasing requirements of DSN in Lunar applications, spacecrafts are also required to improve their onboard antenna power and efficiency of the transmission. However, there is an important aggregate cost trade between adding capabilities to every spacecraft and adding to a capacity on the ground that serves multiple spacecraft [6]. A weak GPS system can provide PNT service while the user spacecraft is bound to the Moon, leveraging a single, steerable high gain antenna with the relatively narrow beam which includes all the sources in its field of view [7]. However, the higher the altitude the receiver is above the GPS constellations, the poorer and the weaker are the relative geometry and the received signal powers, respectively, leading to a significant navigation accuracy reduction [8]. The transmitted power becomes weaker with increasing distance from the Earth as well as signals tracked from one of the side lobes of the GPS antenna pattern. As a results, the number of visible satellites and relative geometric condition of the GPS satellites at very high altitude drops dramatically and reduces the navigation solution accuracy. Therefore, the weak GPS system is also not an ideal way to provide PNT service to upcoming Lunar missions when considering its limited geometric condition and the recued navigation accuracy. Another navigation approach on the Moon is being developed, similar to the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) on Earth, aiming to offer navigation service with continuous 24/7 coverage across the entire Lunar surface. For example, lunar communications relay and navigation systems (LCRNS) by NASA and Lunar navigation satellite systems (LNSS) by JAXA are designed to serve as dedicated Position, Navigation, and Timing (PNT) systems for the Moon. However, designing a dedicated LNSS and PNT service involves additional challenges, which are unique to the lunar environment, including limited payload capacity for the CubeSat platform, i.e., the size, weight, and power (SWaP) of the onboard clock, limited lunar ground monitoring stations, and limited financial investment as compared to the legacy Earth-GPS [9]. NASA’s focus on utilizing CubeSat platforms on the Moon leads to an alternative Lunar navigation platform that leverages the existing Lunar science and exploration assets. The small satellites used in Lunar missions can be used to create a low-cost, autonomous, ad-hoc, and on-demand mission-centric Lunar PNT swarm capable of providing PNT services to these low-cost lunar missions [10]. As upcoming Lunar missions will often operate at low-altitude about 30 km to 100 km for scientific observations and mapping purposes, the low-altitude orbital constellations could be employed to create an ad-hoc Lunar PNT system. However, several issues must be addressed, such as the instability of these orbits, which often require maintenance or are only suitable for short-duration missions, operating for fewer than 90 days. Additionally, at an altitude of 100 km, the satellites have a limited period during which they are above the horizon and capable of providing PNT service to users. The implementation of a non-dedicated, ad-hoc Lunar navigation constellation facilitates on-demand PNT services. A preliminary study of ad-hoc Lunar PNT system was conducted using 21 spacecraft in 5,5000 km altitude frozen orbits to test its feasibility and a basic performance of orbital asset localization among ad-hoc Lunar constellations in small satellites format [10]. These swarm assets are designed for autonomous localization with minimal Earth interaction, reducing dependency on bandwidth and ground resources. The design in [10] demonstrated the feasibility of a decentralized PNT approach, specifically employing a DEKF approach for state estimation, which helps minimize onboard operating costs. The DEKF method distributes computation across individual satellites, which lightens the computational load while maintaining accuracy in orbit ephemeris and clock offsets, similar to centralized systems [11]. In a follow-on study [12], each spacecraft was limited to 2 communications antennae, forcing the selection of measurements and scheduling spacecraft activities to perform the measurements. A matching algorithm is implemented to select the best measurements and schedule position estimation updates. The decentralized localization performance is also investigated with increasing levels of network degradation for swarm assets considering the impact of intermittent and permanent communication failure, to demonstrate the robustness and fidelity of the decentralized Lunar PNT service [13]. This study confirmed that the ad-hoc PNT constellations in frozen orbit are highly robust and resilient to communication failures. However, unlike frozen orbit swarm assets, the low-altitude satellites have a limited ground view at an altitude of 100 km, where the ad-hoc Lunar constellation consists of 98 low-altitude satellites, evenly distributed across seven circular polar orbital planes, alongside two satellites in a frozen orbit at an altitude of 5,500 km (Figure 1). Therefore, the number of satellites visible to ground users is significantly limited in low-altitude orbit constellations. As each visibility of a spacecraft remains intact for only a few ticks before it moves out of the field of view, the ground user encounters challenges in maintaining continuous navigation service, resulting in sparse availability and provision of Lunar PNT system. Consequently, service availability is primarily restricted to the Lunar South Pole region (Figure 2). Given these limitations and concerns, the localization performance of low-altitude swarm assets will be assessed in this study. We focus on the investigation of the localization performance of low-altitude swarm assets and ground users near the Lunar South Pole. The overall flow of the Lunar PNT simulation incorporates the DEKF approach of asset localization and the weighted least-squares approach in user localization (Figure 3). The autonomous Lunar PNT simulation is primarily implemented in MATLAB, where the DEKF based on the matching scheduler is implemented with Google’s OR-tools as a model builder and Gurobi optimization tool as a backend solver. The General Mission Analysis Tool (GMAT) is utilized to generate ephemeris data for swarm assets, and accounts for satellite orbital details, mass, and perturbations like solar radiation pressure and drag coefficients. Each ephemeris dataset is produced in the Moon International Celestial Reference Frame (ICRF) inertial coordinate system. For state estimation, the distributed swarm assets rely on two-way Inter-Satellite Link (ISL) measurements, which involve tracking pseudoranges and relative velocities between visible satellites and anchor nodes during each observation. Numerical evaluations of the decentralized localization process are conducted to demonstrate the feasibility of the low-altitude PNT system in providing reliable navigation services. The main approach involves using DEKF and CEKF to localize 100 satellites in low-altitude constellations, where the CEKF is implemented to serve as a baseline for comparing the performance of distributed algorithms. In both cases, we evaluate ‘fully sampled’ measurements from all available assets, and ‘two ISL’ measurements when spacecraft are constrained to have only two antennas. We test four estimation techniques: CEKF fully sampled, CEKF two ISL, DEKF fully sampled, and DEKF two ISL filters. As the DEKF update cycle is comprised of network setup, communication, and computations, a global broadcast network and 2-way ISL network setup will take from 4 to 6 minutes as maximum [12]. In this simulation, the DEKF update cycle is set to 10 minutes, including a 4-minute latency for obtaining and computing the actual measurement updates. We experiment an increased update cycle to demonstrate the feasibility and evaluate the impact on localization performance using various tuning values for measurement noise covariances (Figures 4 and 5). By comparing centralized and decentralized approaches using a matching algorithm, we analyze the influence of cross-correlation factors in the covariance matrix, assuming 100% reliability of all assets and measurements. The increased frequency and the adjustments of tuning parameters reveal distinct error patterns between the two scenarios. The localization accuracy of the swarm assets and ground users is assessed by taking the median error across 100 assets and one ground user (84.9°S, 137.5°E) over 7-day simulation period (Table 1). Since the user localization accuracy is significantly affected by the performance of the swarm assets, it is crucial to maintain high localization accuracy within the swarm. This study will continue to explore decentralized filtering for autonomous LPNT operations, with further investigation of an 'iterative' matching approach which enumerates every valid matching pair, planned for the following month.

Yeji Kim↗
NASA NTRS2010

Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) Guidance, Navigation and Control (GN&C) Overview

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration s (NASA) Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) launched on June 18, 2009 from the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station aboard an Atlas V launch vehicle and into a direct insertion trajectory to the oon. LRO, which was designed, built, and operated by the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, MD, is gathering crucial data on the lunar environment that will help astronauts prepare for long-duration lunar expeditions. The mission has a nominal life of 1 year as its seven instruments find safe landing sites, locate potential resources, characterize the radiation environment, and test new technology. To date, LRO has been operating well within the bounds of its requirements and has been collecting excellent science data images taken from the LRO Camera Narrow Angle Camera of the Apollo landing sites appeared on cable news networks. A significant amount of information on LRO s science instruments is provided at the LRO mission webpage. LRO s Guidance, Navigation and Control (GN&C) subsystem is made up of an onboard attitude control system (ACS) and a hardware suite of sensors and actuators. The LRO onboard ACS is a collection of algorithms based on high level and derived requirements, and reflect the science and operational events throughout the mission lifetime. The primary control mode is the Observing mode, which maintains the lunar pointing orientation and any offset pointing from this baseline. It is within this mode that all science instrument calibrations, slews and science data is collected. Because of a high accuracy requirement for knowledge and pointing, the Observing mode makes use of star tracker (ST) measurement data to determine an instantaneous attitude pointing. But even the star trackers alone do not meet the tight requirements, so a six-state Kalman Filter is employed to improve the noisy measurement data. The Observing mode obtains its rate information from an inertial reference unit (IRU) and in the event of an IRU failure, the rate data is be derived from the star tracker, but with degraded pointing performance. The Delta-V control mode responsibility is to maintain attitude pointing during the cruise trajectory, insertion burns and lunar orbit maintenance by adjustments made to the spacecraft s velocity magnitude and vector direction. The ACS also provides for a thruster based system momentum management algorithm (known as Delta-H) to maintain the system and wheel momentum to within acceptable levels. In the event an anomaly causes the LRO spacecraft to lose the ability to maintain its current attitude pointing, a Sun Safe mode is included in the ACS for the purpose of providing a known power and thermally safe coarse inertial sun attitude for an indefinite period of time, within the manageable limits of the reaction wheels. The Sun Safe mode is also the initial spacecraft control mode off of the launch vehicle and provides for a means to null tip-off rates immediately after separation. The nominal configuration is to use the IRU for rate information in the controller. In the event of a gyro failure a gyroless control mode was developed that computes rate information from the CSS data.

Garrick, Joseph↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

International Coordination and Cooperation on LunaNet Spectrum

LunaNet is planned to be the network of networks operated by a set of cooperating organizations to provide interoperable Communications, networking, Position, Navigation, and Timing (CPNT) services to users on and around the Moon based on a framework of mutually agreed-upon standards, protocols, frequency bands and interface requirements. LunaNet follows a service-oriented architecture that is agnostic about the types of organizations that provide services, e.g., government, industry, or academia. LunaNet is open, scalable, resilient, secure, and extensible. To achieve these goals, LunaNet Service Providers (LNSP) must coordinate with each other to define and develop the architecture, to plan initial and evolved capabilities, and to operate their networks. One of the central LunaNet tenets is the use of shared spectrum. For example, the Lunar Augmented Navigation Service (LANS) acts like a Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) such as the US Global Positioning System (GPS) or European Galileo but the LNSPs’ contributions to LunaNet must use the same frequency band (2483.5 MHz-2500.0 MHz) and transmit the same waveform synchronized by highly accurate clocks so that Users ‘see’ one virtual network and use the same multilateration algorithm to determine their positions. This necessitates a high degree of spectrum coordination. NASA’s Lunar and Human Spaceflight Spectrum Management Team has been actively supporting development of the LunaNet Interoperability Specification (LNIS), soliciting inputs from spectrum policy and planning experts across NASA, ESA and JAXA. Cislunar spectrum use considerations have been studied and adjudicated within the Space Frequency Coordination Group (SFCG) and inform the ongoing discussion of a lunar communication and navigation architecture within the existing radio regulatory framework of the International Telecommunication Union, leading to the 2027 World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC-27). The frequency plan contained in the publicly released draft of the LunaNet Interoperability Specification reflects the initial phase of exploration (roughly to 2030) defining an optimal set of radio frequencies in appropriately allocated services consistent with WRC-23 decisions for use by known or planned CPNT applications, while striving to maximize coexistence and compatibility amongst cislunar systems and other systems within the near-Earth regime (< 2 million km from Earth). Important considerations include: protection of extremely sensitive receive-only radio astronomy systems on the lunar far side, known as the Shielded Zone of the Moon (SZM); compatibility between Direct with Earth (DWE) communications links and links needed to support relay satellites in lunar orbit with their customer systems on orbit or on the lunar surface; compatibility between multiple lunar surface communications systems and capabilities over varied and challenging terrain and distances; as well as ensuring compatibility and interoperability between navigation systems which either leverage Earth-based or in-situ lunar systems. In addition, the lunar CPNT architecture is envisioned to be the basis – with adjustments – of the future Mars CPNT architecture as we expand into the solar system using Interplanetary Networking (IPN). The second phase of lunar spectrum definition will address planned international capabilities for the next decade that will require action at WRC-27 and beyond. This paper will discuss each of these considerations in more depth and how the current LunaNet frequency plan addresses them.

LunaNet↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Assessing Utility of Different Orbits for a Lunar PNT Constellation

"As the Artemis program establishes a long-term presence on the lunar surface, lunar surface users will need an accurate source of Position, Navigation, and Timing (PNT). Under the LunaNet framework, NASA has proposed the Lunar Navigation System (LNS), a constellation of satellites in lunar orbit which will broadcast LunaNet’s Augmented Forward Signal (AFS) [1] to the lunar surface. LNS will have the objective of providing user position accuracies of 10 m and timing accuracies of 10 microseconds on the lunar surface and up to 200 km above the surface. Several classes of orbits are possibilities for the LNS constellation, including circular orbits, eccentric orbits, and various families of 3-body orbits. Each of these orbit classes have both advantages and disadvantages in their utility as PNT constellations. In this study we examine a wide variety of potential LNS constellations and evaluate their performance against several metrics, including: a. Dilution of Precision (DOP) performance over the lunar service volume and the South Pole region, during both the constellation buildup and after the constellation is completed. b. Number of satellites required to achieve required DOP performance. c. Relative dynamics of LNS satellites with respect to surface users. d. Signal in space error (SISE) performance, assuming orbit determination that includes the Global Positioning System (GPS), crosslinks, and monitor sites on the surface of the moon. e. Constellation insertion, station keeping, and disposal costs. f. Specific Concept of Operations (CONOPS) and engineering challenges associated with establishing and operating the constellations. (E.g., frequent station keeping, variable signal strength, divergent CONOPS for different planes of the constellation.) The system’s performance is considered both independently and in combination with other proposed systems, such as NASA’s Lunar Communication Relay and Navigation System (LCRNS) and ESA’s Moonlight constellation. The study concludes that a 3-plane Walker constellation at 6 lunar radii (slightly higher than GPS’s 4.2 earth radii from a geometry perspective, but significantly closer in an absolute sense) is a good candidate for the LNS constellation, providing the user with good SISE and DOP performance, while not requiring excessive station keeping or complex CONOPS. However, other viable concepts exist and could be chosen if early South Pole coverage is a driving factor in the system design."

navigation↗