Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Guidance Navigation and Control”

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 163 records · Page 9
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1999

Management of Guidance, Navigation, and Control Technologies for Spacecraft Formations Under the NASA Cross Enterprise Technology Development Program (CETDP)

Breakthrough technology development is critical to securing the future of our space industry. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Cross-Enterprise Technology Development Program (CETDP) is developing critical space technologies that enable innovative and less costly missions, and spawn new mission opportunities through revolutionary, long-term, high-risk, high-payoff technology advances. The CETDP is a NASA-wide activity managed by the Advanced Technology and Mission Studies Division (AT&MS) at Headquarters Office of Space Science. Program management for CETDP is distributed across the multiple NASA Centers and draws on expertise throughout the Agency. The technology research activities are organized along Project-level divisions called thrust areas that are directly linked to the Agency's goals and objectives of the Enterprises: Earth Science, Space Science, Human Exploration and Development of Space; and the Office of the Chief Technologist's (OCT) strategic technology areas. Cross-Enterprise technology is defined as long-range strategic technologies that have broad potential to span the needs of more than one Enterprise. Technology needs are identified and prioritized by each of the primary customers. The thrust area manager (TAM) for each division is responsible for the ultimate success of technologies within their area, and can draw from industry, academia, other government agencies, other CETDP thrust areas, and other NASA Centers to accomplish the goals of the thrust area. An overview of the CETDP and description of the future directions of the thrust area called Distributed Spacecraft are presented in this paper. Revolutionary technologies developed within this thrust area will enable the implementation of a spatially distributed network of individual vehicles, or assets, collaborating as a single collective unit, and exhibiting a common system-wide capability to accomplish a shared objective. With such a capability, new Earth and space science measurement concepts become a reality.

Hartman, Kathy↗
NASA NTRS1999

Management of Guidance, Navigation and Control Technologies for Spacecraft Formations under the NASA Cross-Enterprise Technology Development Program (CETDP)

Breakthrough technology development is critical to securing the future of our space industry. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Cross-Enterprise Technology Development Program (CETDP) is developing critical space technologies that enable innovative and less costly missions, and spawn new mission opportunities through revolutionary, long-term, high-risk, high-payoff technology advances. The CETDP is a NASA-wide activity managed by the Advanced Technology and Mission Studies Division (AT&MS) at Headquarters Office of Space Science. Program management for CETDP is distributed across the multiple NASA Centers and draws on expertise throughout the Agency. The technology research activities are organized along Project-level divisions called thrust areas that are directly linked to the Agency's goals and objectives of the Enterprises: Earth Science, Space Science, Human Exploration and Development of Space; and the Office of the Chief Technologist's (OCT) strategic technology areas. Cross-Enterprise technology is defined as long-range strategic technologies that have broad potential to span the needs of more than one Enterprise. Technology needs are identified and prioritized by each of the primary customers. The thrust area manager (TAM) for each division is responsible for the ultimate success of technologies within their area, and can draw from industry, academia, other government agencies, other CETDP thrust areas, and other NASA Centers to accomplish the goals of the thrust area. An overview of the CETDP and description of the future directions of the thrust area called Distributed Spacecraft are presented in this paper. Revolutionary technologies developed within this thrust area will enable the implementation of a spatially distributed network of individual vehicles, or assets, collaborating as a single collective unit, and exhibiting a common system-wide capability to accomplish a shared objective. With such a capability, new Earth and space science measurement concepts become a reality.

Hartman, Kathy↗
NASA NTRS2002

The Microwave Anisotropy Probe (MAP): Guidance, Navigation, and Control Hardware Suite

The Microwave Anisotropy Probe (MAP) was launched June 30, 2001 to create an all-sky map of the Cosmic Microwave Background. The mission's hardware suite included two Lockheed Martin AST-201 star trackers, two Kearfott Two-Axis Rate Assemblies (TARAs) mounted to provide X, Y and redundant Z-axis rates, two Adcole Digital Sun Sensor (DSS) heads sharing one set of electronics, twelve Adcole Coarse Sun Sensor (CSS) eyes, three Ithaco E-sized Reaction Wheel Assemblies (RWAs), and a Propulsion Subsystem that employed eight PRIMEX Rocket Engine Modules (REMs). This hardware has allowed MAP to meet its various Orbit and Attitude Control Requirements, including performing a complex zero-momentum scan, meeting its attitude determination requirements, and maintaining a trajectory that places MAP in a lissajous orbit around the second Sun-Earth Lagrange point (L2) via phasing loops and a lunar gravity assist. Details of MAP's attitude determination, attitude control, and trajectory design are presented separately. This paper will focus on the performance of the hardware components mentioned above, as well as the significant lessons learned through the use of these components. An emphasis will be placed on spacecraft design modifications that were needed to accommodate existing hardware designs into the MAP Observatory design.

Ward, David K.↗
NASA NTRS1998

Flight Testing of an Airport Surface Guidance, Navigation, and Control System

This document describes operations associated with a set of flight experiments and demonstrations using a Boeing-757-200 (B-757) research aircraft as part of low visibility landing and surface operations (LVLASO) research activities. To support this experiment, the B-757 performed flight and taxi operations at the Hartsfield-Atlanta International Airport (ATL) in Atlanta, GA. The B-757 was equipped with experimental displays that were designed to provide flight crews with sufficient information to enable safe, expedient surface operations in any weather condition down to a runway visual range (RVR) of 300 feet. In addition to flight deck displays and supporting equipment onboard the B-757, there was also a ground-based component of the system that provided for ground controller inputs and surveillance of airport surface movements. The integrated ground and airborne components resulted in a system that has the potential to significantly improve the safety and efficiency of airport surface movements particularly as weather conditions deteriorate. Several advanced technologies were employed to show the validity of the operational concept at a major airport facility, to validate flight simulation findings, and to assess each of the individual technologies performance in an airport environment. Results show that while the maturity of some of the technologies does not permit immediate implementation, the operational concept is valid and the performance is more than adequate in many areas.

Young, Steven D.↗
NASA NTRS2008

Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Design in a Mass Reduction Exercise

Early Orion GN&C system designs optimized for robustness, simplicity, and utilization of commercially available components. During the System Definition Review (SDR), all subsystems on Orion were asked to re-optimize with component mass and steady state power as primary design metrics. The objective was to create a mass reserve in the Orion point of departure vehicle design prior to beginning the PDR analysis cycle. The Orion GN&C subsystem team transitioned from a philosophy of absolute 2 fault tolerance for crew safety and 1 fault tolerance for mission success to an approach of 1 fault tolerance for crew safety and risk based redundancy to meet probability allocations of loss of mission and loss of crew. This paper will discuss the analyses, rationale, and end results of this activity regarding Orion navigation sensor hardware, control effectors, and trajectory design.

Crain, Timothy↗
NASA NTRS2008

Guidance, Navigation and Control (GN&C): Best Practices for Human-Rated Spacecraft Systems

In 2007 the NESC completed an in-depth assessment to identify, define and document engineering considerations for the Design Development Test and Evaluation (DDT&E) of human-rated spacecraft systems. This study had been requested by the Astronaut Office at JSC to help them to better understand what is required to ensure safe, robust, and reliable human-rated spacecraft systems. The 22 GN&C engineering Best Practices described in this paper are a condensed version of what appears in the NESC Technical Report. These Best Practices cover a broad range from fundamental system architectural considerations to more specific aspects (e.g., stability margin recommendations) of GN&C system design and development. 15 of the Best Practices address the early phases of a GN&C System development project and the remaining 7 deal with the later phases. Some of these Best Practices will cross-over between both phases. We recognize that this set of GN&C Best Practices will not be universally applicable to all projects and mission applications.

Lebsock, Ken↗
NASA NTRS2011

Benefits of Operational Consideration into the Guidance, Navigation, and Control Design of Spacecraft

The following paper points out historical examples where operational consideration into the GN&C design could have helped avoid operational complexity, reduce costs, ensure the ability for a GN&C system to be able to adapt to failures, and in some cases might have helped save mission objectives. A costly repeat of mistakes could befall a program if previous operational lessons, especially from operators of vehicles with similar GN&C systems, are not considered during the GN&C design phase of spacecraft. The information gained from operational consideration during the design can lead to improvements of the design, allow less ground support during operations, and prevent repetition of previous mistakes. However, this benefit can only occur if spacecraft operators adequately capture lessons learned that would improve future designs for operations and those who are designing spacecraft incorporate inputs from those that have previously operated similar GN&C systems.

Morris, Mark C.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Bayesian Software Health Management for Aircraft Guidance, Navigation, and Control

Modern aircraft, both piloted fly-by-wire commercial aircraft as well as UAVs, more and more depend on highly complex safety critical software systems with many sensors and computer-controlled actuators. Despite careful design and V&V of the software, severe incidents have happened due to malfunctioning software. In this paper, we discuss the use of Bayesian networks (BNs) to monitor the health of the on-board software and sensor system, and to perform advanced on-board diagnostic reasoning. We will focus on the approach to develop reliable and robust health models for the combined software and sensor systems.

Schumann, Johann↗
NASA NTRS2015

Flight Testing of Guidance, Navigation and Control Systems on the Mighty Eagle Robotic Lander Testbed

During 2011 a series of progressively more challenging flight tests of the Mighty Eagle autonomous terrestrial lander testbed were conducted primarily to validate the GNC system for a proposed lunar lander. With the successful completion of this GNC validation objective the opportunity existed to utilize the Mighty Eagle as a flying testbed for a variety of technologies. In 2012 an Autonomous Rendezvous and Capture (AR&C) algorithm was implemented in flight software and demonstrated in a series of flight tests. In 2012 a hazard avoidance system was developed and flight tested on the Mighty Eagle. Additionally, GNC algorithms from Moon Express and a MEMs IMU were tested in 2012. All of the testing described herein was above and beyond the original charter for the Mighty Eagle. In addition to being an excellent testbed for a wide variety of systems the Mighty Eagle also provided a great learning opportunity for many engineers and technicians to work a flight program.

Hannan, Mike↗
NASA NTRS2017

In-Flight Guidance, Navigation, and Control Performance Results for the GOES-16 Spacecraft

The Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite-R Series (GOES-R), which launched in November 2016, is the first of the next generation geostationary weather satellites. GOES-R provides 4 times the resolution, 5 times the observation rate, and 3 times the number of spectral bands for Earth observations compared with its predecessor spacecraft. Additionally, Earth relative and Sun-relative pointing and pointing stability requirements are maintained throughout reaction wheel desaturation events and station keeping activities, allowing GOES-R to provide continuous Earth and sun observations. This paper reviews the pointing control, pointing stability, attitude knowledge, and orbit knowledge requirements necessary to realize the ambitious Image Navigation and Registration (INR) objectives of GOES-R. This paper presents a comparison between low-frequency on-orbit pointing results and simulation predictions for both the Earth Pointed Platform (EPP) and Sun Pointed Platform (SPP). Results indicate excellent agreement between simulation predictions and observed on-orbit performance, and compliance with pointing performance requirements. The EPP instrument suite includes 6 seismic accelerometers sampled at 2 KHz, allowing in-flight verification of jitter responses and comparison back to simulation predictions. This paper presents flight results of acceleration, shock response spectrum (SRS), and instrument line of sight responses for various operational scenarios and instrument observation modes. The results demonstrate the effectiveness of the dual-isolation approach employed on GOES-R. The spacecraft provides attitude and rate data to the primary Earth-observing instrument at 100 Hz, which are used to adjust instrument scanning. The data must meet accuracy and latency numbers defined by the Integrated Rate Error (IRE) requirements. This paper discusses the on-orbit IRE results, showing compliance to these requirements with margin. During the spacecraft checkout period, IRE disturbances were observed and subsequently attributed to thermal control of the Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) mounting interface. Adjustments of IMU thermal control and the resulting improvements in IRE are presented. Orbit knowledge represents the final element of INR performance. Extremely accurate orbital position is achieved by GPS navigation at Geosynchronous Earth Orbit (GEO). On-orbit performance results are shown demonstrating compliance with the stringent orbit position accuracy requirements of GOES-R, including during station keeping activities and momentum desaturation events. As we show in this paper, the on-orbit performance of the GNC design provides the necessary capabilities to achieve GOES-R mission objectives.

Chapel, Jim↗