Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “maneuver decisions”

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

SOHO Mission Interruption Joint NASA/ESA Investigation Board

Contact with the SOlar Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) spacecraft was lost in the early morning hours of June 25, 1998, Eastern Daylight Time (EDT), during a planned period of calibrations, maneuvers, and spacecraft reconfigurations. Prior to this the SOHO operations team had concluded two years of extremely successful science operations. A joint European Space Agency (ESA)/National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) engineering team has been planning and executing recovery efforts since loss of contact with some success to date. ESA and NASA management established the SOHO Mission Interruption Joint Investigation Board to determine the actual or probable cause(s) of the SOHO spacecraft mishap. The Board has concluded that there were no anomalies on-board the SOHO spacecraft but that a number of ground errors led to the major loss of attitude experienced by the spacecraft. The Board finds that the loss of the SOHO spacecraft was a direct result of operational errors, a failure to adequately monitor spacecraft status, and an erroneous decision which disabled part of the on-board autonomous failure detection. Further, following the occurrence of the emergency situation, the Board finds that insufficient time was taken by the operations team to fully assess the spacecraft status prior to initiating recovery operations. The Board discovered that a number of factors contributed to the circumstances that allowed the direct causes to occur. The Board strongly recommends that the two Agencies proceed immediately with a comprehensive review of SOHO operations addressing issues in the ground procedures, procedure implementation, management structure and process, and ground systems. This review process should be completed and process improvements initiated prior to the resumption of SOHO normal operations.

Source record↗

Fuzzy logic, neural networks, and soft computing

The past few years have witnessed a rapid growth of interest in a cluster of modes of modeling and computation which may be described collectively as soft computing. The distinguishing characteristic of soft computing is that its primary aims are to achieve tractability, robustness, low cost, and high MIQ (machine intelligence quotient) through an exploitation of the tolerance for imprecision and uncertainty. Thus, in soft computing what is usually sought is an approximate solution to a precisely formulated problem or, more typically, an approximate solution to an imprecisely formulated problem. A simple case in point is the problem of parking a car. Generally, humans can park a car rather easily because the final position of the car is not specified exactly. If it were specified to within, say, a few millimeters and a fraction of a degree, it would take hours or days of maneuvering and precise measurements of distance and angular position to solve the problem. What this simple example points to is the fact that, in general, high precision carries a high cost. The challenge, then, is to exploit the tolerance for imprecision by devising methods of computation which lead to an acceptable solution at low cost. By its nature, soft computing is much closer to human reasoning than the traditional modes of computation. At this juncture, the major components of soft computing are fuzzy logic (FL), neural network theory (NN), and probabilistic reasoning techniques (PR), including genetic algorithms, chaos theory, and part of learning theory. Increasingly, these techniques are used in combination to achieve significant improvement in performance and adaptability. Among the important application areas for soft computing are control systems, expert systems, data compression techniques, image processing, and decision support systems. It may be argued that it is soft computing, rather than the traditional hard computing, that should be viewed as the foundation for artificial intelligence. In the years ahead, this may well become a widely held position.

Zadeh, Lofti A.↗

A Prognostics Framework Development for Swarm Satellite Formations

Prognostics is the science of predicting the failure(s) of a component or a system and understanding how the performance will change in the event of a failure or degradation mechanism. With accurate predictions of possible failures, autonomous mitigative actions can be taken to correct/repair any issues or alert human operators of a failure threshold exceedance requiring condition-based maintenance. Although there is extensive research on failure predictions for a component or a system, there are significantly more opportunities to foray into failure predictions and prognostics for a system of systems such as an airspace consisting of multiple aircraft, a fleet of unmanned aerial vehicles, and a swarm of intelligent satellite systems. Failure prediction and mitigation are particularly important in autonomous systems such as satellite swarm systems that need effective resource management and minimal human interactions. Based on NASA's decadal survey, there is a clear need to prioritize the development of satellite swarm technology for studies of space physics and Earth science. The science community will propose future missions that return in-situ measurements from a 3-D (three-dimensional) volume of space, with relative spacecraft motion and inter-satellite baselines controlled according to the mission objectives. For such multi-spacecraft missions, it is required that ground operations resources do not scale with the number of satellites, thus compromising the swarm or leading to inefficiencies in resource allocation. Swarms of tens or hundreds of small satellites will require autonomy in attitude control, navigation and failure. Although significant research has been conducted in the areas of autonomous formation flying algorithms, less attention has been given to the development of resilient systems robust to failures.The focus of this research paper is the integration of model-based prognostics into the swarm dynamics control and decision-making algorithms. We simulate swarm management strategies for a subsystem failure to demonstrate the importance of failure predictions by comparing two cases: (i) no health information is provided to the system and utilized in the decision-making process and (2) system health information is obtained using prognostics and employed by the control system. One example scenario presented is for the GPS (Global Positioning System) system of an individual satellite to perform off-nominally due to increasing estimated error. In this scenario, the keep-out zone for that satellite would become more conservative, thereby decreasing the risk of collision. This is achieved via tuning the individual artificial repulsive functions assigned to each satellite.This paper is structured as follows. First we provide an overview of current swarm technology development, where we specifically use the term swarm to define multiple satellites flying in formation in similar orbits, with cross-link communication and station-keeping capabilities. Second, we give an introduction to the Swarm Orbital Dynamics Advisor (SODA), a tool that accepts high-level configuration commands and provides the orbital maneuvers required to achieve the prescribed formation configuration. Third, we provide the details of the model-based prognostics algorithm implementation in SODA. Finally, we present different case studies for potential component/subsystem failures and the swarm responses based with and without failure prediction information.

prognostics↗

Automated Target Planning for FUSE Using the SOVA Algorithm

The SOVA algorithm was originally developed under the Resilient Systems and Operations Project of the Engineering for Complex Systems Program from NASA s Aerospace Technology Enterprise as a conceptual framework to support real-time autonomous system mission and contingency management. The algorithm and its software implementation were formulated for generic application to autonomous flight vehicle systems, and its efficacy was demonstrated by simulation within the problem domain of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle autonomous flight management. The approach itself is based upon the precept that autonomous decision making for a very complex system can be made tractable by distillation of the system state to a manageable set of strategic objectives (e.g. maintain power margin, maintain mission timeline, and et cetera), which if attended to, will result in a favorable outcome. From any given starting point, the attainability of the end-states resulting from a set of candidate decisions is assessed by propagating a system model forward in time while qualitatively mapping simulated states into margins on strategic objectives using fuzzy inference systems. The expected return value of each candidate decision is evaluated as the product of the assigned value of the end-state with the assessed attainability of the end-state. The candidate decision yielding the highest expected return value is selected for implementation; thus, the approach provides a software framework for intelligent autonomous risk management. The name adopted for the technique incorporates its essential elements: Strategic Objective Valuation and Attainability (SOVA). Maximum value of the approach is realized for systems where human intervention is unavailable in the timeframe within which critical control decisions must be made. The Far Ultraviolet Spectroscopic Explorer (FUSE) satellite, launched in 1999, has been collecting science data for eight years.[1] At its beginning of life, FUSE had six gyros in two IRUs and four reaction wheels. Over time through various failures, the satellite has been left with one reaction wheel on the vehicle skew axis and two gyros. To remain operational, a control scheme has been implemented using the magnetic torque rods and the remaining momentum wheel.[2] As a consequence, there are attitude regions where there is insufficient torque authority to overcome environmental disturbances (e.g. gravity gradient torques). The situation is further complicated by the fact that these attitude regions shift inertially with time as the spacecraft moves through earth s magnetic field during the course of its orbit. Under these conditions, the burden of planning targets and target-to-target slew maneuvers has increased significantly since the beginning of the mission.[3] Individual targets must be selected so that the magnetic field remains roughly aligned with the skew wheel axis to provide enough control authority to the other two orthogonal axes. If the field moves too far away from the skew axis, the lack of control authority allows environmental torques to pull the satellite away from the target and can potentially cause it to tumble. Slew maneuver planning must factor the stability of targets at the beginning and end, and the torque authority at all points along the slew. Due to the time varying magnetic field geometry relative to any two inertial targets, small modifications in slew maneuver timing can make large differences in the achievability of a maneuver.

Heatwole, Scott↗

Operability on the Europa Clipper Mission: Challenges and Opportunities

Flight and ground system operability has been a focus area on the Europa Clipper Project since early in its formulation phase. This has given the operations team the opportunity to influence the design, with a goal of increasing overall system operability. This paper presents example operability challenges, opportunities, and solutions arising from the pre-Critical Design Review (CDR) system design. The integrated wing assembly design directly couples a scientific instrument (the REASON sounding radar) to the spacecraft’s power source (solar array wing panels). Impacts to mission operations of this design include: increased slew durations; solar array pointing constraints during inner cruise, Europa flybys, and orbit trim maneuvers; and stray light intrusions into the stellar reference units’ keep out zones. The use of CCSDS File Delivery Protocol (CFDP) Class-2 for reliable downlink of the large volume of Europa Clipper science data is described, along with nominal and off-nominal use cases. The effort to improve post-launch spacecraft visibility by adding a third low-gain antenna to the spacecraft is detailed. The design of the bulk data store has necessitated the implementation of accountable data products (ADPs), accountability identifiers (AIDs), and metadata packets to provide end-to-end science data accountability. To streamline and automate the flight rules generation and checking process, a first order and temporal logic-based solution of expressing flight rules without ambiguity, and whose programmatic implementation can be automated, is proposed. The focus on operability has had a positive influence on Europa Clipper design decisions, although cost, schedule, budget, heritage, and other technical concerns have many times outweighed operability concerns. However, experience to date demonstrates that this approach to operability results in more thorough, balanced consideration of the effect of early design trades and decisions on the operations phase of a mission than seen in many previous missions, and provides operations development insight into prioritizing work to go.

Signorelli, Joel↗

Operability on the Europa Clipper Mission: Challenges and Opportunities

Flight and ground system operability has been a focus area on the Europa Clipper Project since early in its formulation phase. This has given the operations team the opportunity to influence the design, with a goal of increasing overall system operability. This paper presents example operability challenges, opportunities, and solutions arising from the Critical Design Review (CDR) system design. The integrated wing assembly design directly couples a scientific instrument (the REASON sounding radar) to the spacecraft’s power source (solar array wing panels). Impacts to mission operations of this design include: increased slew durations; solar array pointing constraints during inner cruise, Europa flybys, and orbit trim maneuvers; and stray light intrusions into the stellar reference units’ keep out zones. The use of CCSDS File Delivery Protocol (CFDP) Class-2 for reliable downlink of the large volume of Europa Clipper science data is described, along with nominal and off-nominal use cases. The effort to improve post-launch spacecraft visibility by adding a third low-gain antenna to the spacecraft is detailed. The design of the bulk data store has necessitated the implementation of accountable data products (ADPs), accountability identifiers (AIDs), and metadata packets to provide end-to-end science data accountability. To streamline and automate the flight rules generation and checking process, a first order and temporal logic-based solution of expressing flight rules without ambiguity, and whose programmatic implementation can be automated, is proposed. The focus on operability has had a positive influence on Europa Clipper design decisions, although cost, schedule, budget, heritage, and other technical concerns have many times outweighed operability concerns. However, experience to date demonstrates that this approach to operability results in more thorough, balanced consideration of the effect of early design trades and decisions on the operations phase of a mission than seen in many previous missions, and provides operations development insight into prioritizing work to go.

Kumar, Meghana↗

Sensitivity Analysis of Hybrid Propulsion Transportation System for Human Mars Expeditions

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration continues to develop and refine various transportation options to successfully field a human Mars campaign. One of these transportation options is the Hybrid Transportation System which utilizes both solar electric propulsion and chemical propulsion. The Hybrid propulsion system utilizes chemical propulsion to perform high thrust maneuvers, where the delta-V is most optimal when ap- plied to save time and to leverage the Oberth effect. It then utilizes solar electric propulsion to augment the chemical burns throughout the interplanetary trajectory. This eliminates the need for the development of two separate vehicles for crew and cargo missions. Previous studies considered single point designs of the architecture, with fixed payload mass and propulsion system performance parameters. As the architecture matures, it is inevitable that the payload mass and the performance of the propulsion system will change. It is desirable to understand how these changes will impact the in-space transportation system's mass and power requirements. This study presents an in-depth sensitivity analysis of the Hybrid crew transportation system to payload mass growth and solar electric propulsion performance. This analysis is used to identify the breakpoints of the current architecture and to inform future architecture and campaign design decisions.

Chai, Patrick R.↗

Simulation Technology at NASA

NASA Ames Research Center is home to several high-fidelity research flight and air-traffic control simulation facilities which, together with an experienced workforce, produce high-quality research data and findings that have proven to be applicable in the real world. These assets include the Vertical Motion Simulator (VMS), Crew Vehicle Systems Research Facility (CVSRF), Future Flight Central (FFC) air traffic control tower simulator, and several air-traffic control (ATC) simulators. The VMS combines a high-fidelity simulation capability with an adaptable simulation environment, enabling customization for numerous human-in-the-loop research applications. The distinctive feature of the VMS is its unparalleled large amplitude, high-fidelity motion capability. In over 30 years of continuous operation, the VMS has contributed significantly to the body of knowledge in a range of disciplines directly benefiting several aerospace programs and flight safety, including the design and development of flight control systems for the Joint Strike Fighter, Space Shuttle Orbiter, and rotorcraft. It continues to be used for researching new vehicle configurations, vehicle control and safety, transfer-of-training, etc., by NASA, other government agencies, and Industry.The CVSRF includes two motion-based flight simulators: a Boeing 747-400 full flight simulator and the reconfigurable Advanced Concepts Flight Simulator (ACFS). These simulators are primarily used to research air-traffic management concepts and procedures, advanced navigation and avionics concepts, and cockpit human factors. FFC is a full-sized control tower simulator with a 360-degree external field-of-view display system and reconfigurable system architecture. FFC and the ATC simulators are used for testing air-traffic management automation and decision support tools and demonstrate their feasibility in a realistic environment prior to technology transfer for implementation in the National Airspace System (NAS).To support integrated simulations and flight-tests for NASA's Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in the National Airspace System (NAS) Project, NASA developed a distributed test environment incorporating Live, Virtual, Constructive, (LVC) concepts. Development of the software enabling the LVC is conducted primarily at the Distributed Simulation Research Lab (DSRL) at NASA Ames. The LVC components provide the core infrastructure supporting simulation of UAS operations by integrating live and virtual aircraft in a realistic air traffic environment. This provides the ability to conduct tests more efficiently by promoting the use of existing distributed assets. The LVC infrastructure was used in several human-in-the-loop simulations to evaluate acceptance of Detect and Avoid (DAA) advisories used by UAS pilots to maintain well clear of other virtual traffic and to negotiate maneuvers with air traffic control. It is currently being used to support testing of self-separation algorithms between unmanned and manned aircraft in live flight. Further simulations with more comprehensive air traffic scenarios mixing live and virtual aircraft is planned.In the current fiscal environment, maintaining and upgrading these high-fidelity simulation assets and retaining the skilled workforce necessary to meet future research needs is the primary non-technical challenge.

CVSRF↗

Shuttle Program Loads Integration: Going From Concept to Operations and Staying Successful

From the beginning of the Shuttle Program to its end, integrated loads and dynamics analyses and tests have been critical in shaping the vehicle design and operational decisions for NASA and its customers. Starting with scaled models and simple mathematical simulations of the structural dynamics, engineers defined the required structural stiffness and predicted the limit loads for each element of the system. Early structural tests provided reasonable confidence that the models and predictions were good. The first launch of the Space Shuttle brought surprises, though, when the ignition overpressure event caused a forward fuel tank support strut to buckle, among several unexpected effects. The launch pad and other ground equipment became an integral part of the system integration, especially where the acoustic and pressure environments of ignition and lift-off were concerned. Following the Challenger accident, operating limits were changed in response to new understandings of how the integrated system performed. Controlling loads while maximizing performance was a key tenet of the Performance Enhancement design process, which enabled construction of the International Space Station. During the return to flight after the Columbia accident, engineers grew to understand that loads during the roll maneuver were also important to the vehicle s structural margin and life. At this point the crawler transport from the Vehicle Assembly Building to the launch pad also became a part of the integrated loads analysis. Even in the last years of the Space Shuttle Program, new data still provided interesting insights into this complicated and fascinating spaceship. This paper will present some examples of the important findings by the team of specialists that supported the Integrated Loads and Dynamics Panel for the Space Shuttle Program.

Bernstein, Karen↗

Internship Abstract - Aerosciences and Flight Mechanics Intern

Mars is a hard place to land on, but my internship with NASA's Aerosciences & Flight Mechanics branch has shown me the ways in which men and women will one day land safely. I work on Mars Aerocapture, an aeroassist maneuver that reduces the fuel necessary to "capture" into Martian orbit before a descent. The spacecraft flies through the Martian atmosphere to lose energy through heating before it exits back into space, this time at a slower velocity and in orbit around Mars. Spacecraft will need to maneuver through the Martian atmosphere to accurately hit their orbit, and they will need to survive the generated heat. Engineering teams need simulation data to continue their designs, and the guidance algorithm that ensures a proper orbit insertion needs to be refined - two jobs that fell to me at the summer's start. Engineers within my branch have developed two concept aerocapture vehicles, and I run simulations on their behavior during the maneuver. I also test and refine the guidance algorithm. I spent the first few weeks familiarizing myself with the simulation software, troubleshooting various guidance bugs and writing code. Everything runs smoothly now, and I recently sent my first set of trajectory data to a Thermal Protection System group so they can incorporate it into their heat-bearing material designs. I hope to generate plenty of data in the next few weeks for various engineering groups before my internship ends mid-August. My major accomplishment so far is improving the guidance algorithm. It is a relatively new algorithm that promises higher accuracy and fuel efficiency, but it hasn't undergone extensive testing yet. I've had the opportunity to work with the principal developer - a professor at Iowa State University - to find and fix several issues. I was also assigned the task of expanding the branch's aerodynamic heating simulation software. I am excited to do this because engineers in the future will use my work to generate meaningful data and make design decisions. My internship has taught me to how to teach myself. There are no tutors, study sessions or professor office hours. When I am given an assignment I am expected to figure out how to accomplish it, and I have grown in my problem solving abilities. My summer experience has reinforced my drive to work at NASA, and I can definitely see myself working full time on the aerocapture project, or something similar.

Rangel, John↗

Enhanced/Synthetic Vision and Head-Worn Display Technologies for Terminal Maneuvering Area NextGen Operations

NASA is researching innovative technologies for the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) to provide a "Better-Than-Visual" (BTV) capability as adjunct to "Equivalent Visual Operations" (EVO); that is, airport throughputs equivalent to that normally achieved during Visual Flight Rules (VFR) operations rates with equivalent and better safety in all weather and visibility conditions including Instrument Meteorological Conditions (IMC). These new technologies build on proven flight deck systems and leverage synthetic and enhanced vision systems. Two piloted simulation studies were conducted to access the use of a Head-Worn Display (HWD) with head tracking for synthetic and enhanced vision systems concepts. The first experiment evaluated the use a HWD for equivalent visual operations to San Francisco International Airport (airport identifier: KSFO) compared to a visual concept and a head-down display concept. A second experiment evaluated symbology variations under different visibility conditions using a HWD during taxi operations at Chicago O'Hare airport (airport identifier: KORD). Two experiments were conducted, one in a simulated San Francisco airport (KSFO) approach operation and the other, in simulated Chicago O'Hare surface operations, evaluating enhanced/synthetic vision and head-worn display technologies for NextGen operations. While flying a closely-spaced parallel approach to KSFO, pilots rated the HWD, under low-visibility conditions, equivalent to the out-the-window condition, under unlimited visibility, in terms of situational awareness (SA) and mental workload compared to a head-down enhanced vision system. There were no differences between the 3 display concepts in terms of traffic spacing and distance and the pilot decision-making to land or go-around. For the KORD experiment, the visibility condition was not a factor in pilot's rating of clutter effects from symbology. Several concepts for enhanced implementations of an unlimited field-of-regard BTV concept for low-visibility surface operations were determined to be equivalent in pilot ratings of efficacy and usability.

Arthur, Jarvis J., III↗

Haystack Ultra-Wideband Satellite Imaging Radar Measurements of the Orbital Debris Environment: 2014-2017

Since the founding of the NASA Orbital Debris Program Office (ODPO) in 1979, the knowledge that orbital debris poses a risk to operational satellites and human spaceflight has been publically available. Services that rely on satellite-based technology such as communications, internet, navigation, and weather forecasting, to name a few, are ubiquitous in modern society. The International Space Station (ISS) has been continuously inhabited by a crew of up to six astronauts since November 2000 and makes, on average, approximately one debris avoidance maneuver per year to avoid objects that are large enough to be tracked by ground-based radars. This places an increased need for understanding the current status of the debris environment (measurements), for the ability to predict the future environment (modeling), and for understanding risk factors for debris creating events (mitigation). For NASA, the measurements, modeling, and mitigation aspects of orbital debris are led by the NASA ODPO at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) in Houston, Texas.This report summarizes radar measurement data from the Haystack Ultra-wideband Satellite Imaging Radar (HUSIR) operated by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Lincoln Laboratory (MIT/LL) and provided to the NASA ODPO. The time period covered by this report includes data collected during the U.S. government fiscal year (FY) 2014 through FY2017. The U.S. government FY begins on 1 October and lasts through 30 September of a given year (i.e., FY2014 lasts from 1 October 1 2013 through 30 September 30 2014). At this report’s release, processed data was unavailable from the Haystack Auxiliary Radar (HAX) due to errors in the calibration data for the radar and limited transmit power; a decision was made by NASA not to collect low-power HAX radar data. This is being resolved by NASA and MIT/LL and data collected during this time period will be released in a separate report.

DRADIS↗

Risk Management of Jettisoned Objects in LEO

The construction and maintenance of the International Space Station (ISS) has led to the release of many objects into its orbital plane, usually during the course of an extra-vehicular activity (EVA). Such releases are often unintentional, but in a growing number of cases, the jettison has been intentional, conducted after a careful assessment of the net risk to the partnership and to other objects in space. Since its launch in 1998 the ISS has contributed on average at least one additional debris object that is simultaneously in orbit with the station, although the number varies widely from zero to eight at any one moment. All of these objects present potential risks to other objects in orbit. Whether it comes from known and tracked orbiting objects or from unknown or untrackable objects, collision with orbital debris can have disastrous consequences. Objects greater than 10cm are generally well documented and tracked, allowing orbiting spacecraft or satellites opportunities to perform evasive maneuvers (commonly known as Debris Avoidance Maneuvers, or DAMs) in the event that imminent collision is predicted. The issue with smaller debris; however, is that it is too numerous to be tracked effectively and yet still poses disastrous consequences if it intercepts a larger object. Due to the immense kinetic energy of any item in orbit, collision with debris as small as 1cm can have catastrophic consequences for many orbiting satellites or spacecraft. Faced with the growing orbital debris threat and the potentially catastrophic consequences of a collision-generated debris shower originating in an orbit crossing the ISS altitude band, in 2007 the ISS program manger asked program specialists to coordinate a multilateral jettison policy amongst the ISS partners. This policy would define the acceptable risk trade rationale for intentional release of a debris object, and other mandatory constraints on such jettisons to minimize the residual risks whenever a jettison was accepted. Although ISS-related debris often presents untenable risks to the EVA crew, IVA crew, or to a departing cargo vehicle for a controlled disposal, such released objects also present a ballistic nuisance to the visiting vehicle traffic, and a potential fragmentation threat to the hundreds of other functional and debris objects whose perigees lie below the ISS orbital altitude. Thus, every such jettison decision is a conscious risk trade.

Bacon, John B.↗

Probabilistic Modeling of a Three-Stage Human Landing System Architecture

Space Policy Directive-1 has led to NASA partnerships with commercial entities on procurement which includes the development of the Human Landing System (HLS) [1]. With the goal of delivering human crew to the lunar surface by 2024, system uncertainties become an important obstacle to the maturation of multiple new, driving technologies and mission concepts of the HLS program. As unmitigated uncertainties have previously led to failed development programs, these risks and their impacts must be understood and handled to ensure program success [2]. Sources of uncertainty include novel engine designs and configurations, increased reliance on cryogenic fluid management(CFM), and refueling technologies—which propagate as high-level performance metrics such as overall propellant mass and engine performance. Also, the occurrence of operational uncertainties—e.g. launch conditions or need to abort during the mission—can cause cascading effects on the rest of the mission that are difficult to definitively quantify, and are outside the scope of control. These concrete examples and other occurrences can be categorized as either epistemic or aleatory uncertainties.Epistemic uncertainty arises due to a lack of knowledge and can be alleviated with design and program maturation. Aleatory uncertainty is due to the inherent randomness of the system and cannot be directly reduced, unlike epistemic uncertainty. Robust design and probabilistic methods can compensate for aleatory effects. A taxonomy of uncertainty is referred to for this work [3]. In this paper, a probabilistic methodology to handle uncertainties has been demonstrated on a three-element HLS concept [1, 4], which allows tracking of current best estimates of the concept and assessment of concept design robustness against uncertainties. A sample case has been completed for this abstract, and an expansion on the methodology will be included in the final paper. This methodology has two key parts: first, the creation of a dynamic architecture model of a three-element HLS concept; and second, its use with surrogate modeling and range estimating techniques to capture and propagate uncertainties. This abstract will cover the basics of the approach used, and further details and justifications will be in the final paper.The mission profile associated with this three-element concept (Fig 1) was modeled as a set of mission events that facilitated mass changes, idles, or spacecraft maneuvers. The mission profile scope starts with each element’s NRHO orbit insertion and aggregation and ends at post-sortie rendezvous with Orion. More detail on the mission profile will be in the final paper. The DYnamic Rocket EQuation Tool (DYREQT), a space systems synthesis and sizing framework used by NASA, was used as the physics framework to model the HLS architecture for applying the probabilistic methodology [5, 6]. Specifically, a parametric representation of the lander, ascent, and transfer elements and the mission profile of each element was established, with vehicle and mission parameters available as inputs to allow for a dynamic model. Each vehicle stage was modeled with high-level performance metrics, using Isp and propellant mass fraction (PMF) to remain parametric. For the probabilistic analysis, uncertainties of interest within the HLS concept were enumerated and represented as parameters within the DYREQT model as inputs for vehicle stages or mission profile events. These parameters were frozen at their nominal values for the purposes of baselining architecture performance and sizing the vehicle appropriately based on reference documentation [1]. Range estimating—a probabilistic method that combines Monte Carlo sampling, focus on critical parameters, and heuristics to assess risk and opportunities—is traditionally used with Mass Equipment Lists (MELs), but has been adapted with operational parameters as well as vehicle parameters in theDYREQT model to capture mission uncertainty alongside vehicle uncertainty [7, 3]. This method was selected due to its application and insight on a system from a bottom-up perspective, independence from historical rules of thumb, and ability to generate sensitivities based on design decisions and uncertainties. As a sample case for the abstract, the boiloff rates of the vehicle elements and the loiter times during the mission (simulating launch time variations and changing window of opportunities) were used with range estimating to provide preliminary results. To perform the range estimation portion of this methodology (depicted in Fig. 3, further details in final paper), the DYREQT model was sampled using a Design of Experiments (DoE) to efficiently explore the architecture design space with respect to the sample set of uncertainty parameters; 5,000 cases via Latin Hypercube Sampling were computed on the DYREQT architecture model. Then, the results were used to create surrogate models, multivariate regressions that can visualize hypercube trends in the design space, of the architecture with respect to the uncertainty parameters. Range estimating was applied to the surrogates instead of the actual models, which saves computational expense due to the bulk of cases needed for the Monte Carlo simulation as part of range estimating. Uncertainty parameters were sampled independently from triangular distributions using the DoE ranges as ‘min’ and ‘max’, and the nominal value as ‘most likely’. Based engineering intuition, some uncertainty parameters are correlated—e.g. if the main propellant has a high boil-off rate, the oxidizer should follow suit as both are related to CFM technology.While a Monte Carlo simulation samples all inputs as independent, the results would show model correlations; thus, it is efficient to sample the inputs as correlated. Using a correlation matrix constructed for the uncertainty parameters, previously independent samples were transformed to perform a Correlated Monte Carlo. A table for the DoE ranges and probability distribution parameters is shown in Table 1, and more details on Correlated Monte Carlo Simulations will be discussed in the final paper. The model’s resulting DoE showed that multivariate polynomial equations fit via least squares method captured its behavior accurately for the sample case. For the Correlated Monte Carlo Simulation, a positive correlation between fuel and oxidizer boiloff rates was used as a demonstration. 10,000 cases were computed with the surrogates and the launched masses for each vehicle element was collated. The results can be displayed in a probability density function (PDF), showing the impact of the uncertainty parameters chosen. Integrating the PDFs will yield a cumulative distribution function (CDF) that shows the cumulative probability of a given value on the x-axis. For the sample case, the elements’ launch mass margin was calculated and represented in as CDFs, as a demonstrated representation of figures of merit for the HLS concept. For the lander and ascent elements, the NRHO mass insertion limit is 16t; the transfer element has a limit of 30t [1]. It can be seen with Figure 2 that this probabilistic methodology can provide insight into mass margin with respect to the uncertainties being modeled. Currently, the results show that the lander (descent) vehicle element has the most restrictive design space; it is the only element to show a 10% probability of negative margin. Further analysis on the Monte Carlo results will show sensitivities for driving constraints and parameters for architecture feasibility, which can lead to establishing potential mission rules.The combination of range estimating with a parametric architecture model for HLS demonstrated the capability of this probabilistic methodology in a sample case. As the HLS development progresses, this methodology has the potential for keeping current best estimates of architecture performance for awarded concepts due to the flexibility in DYREQT’s modeling framework and its parametric nature. Concept maturation and increased epistemic knowledge can be injected into the model probabilistic modeling, and thus continue to track probability of mission success.

Stephanie Y Zhu↗

Investigating On-Orbit Attitude Determination Anomalies for the Solar Dynamics Observatory Mission

The Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) was launched on February 11, 2010 from Kennedy Space Center on an Atlas V launch vehicle into a geosynchronous transfer orbit. SDO carries a suite of three scientific instruments, whose observations are intended to promote a more complete understanding of the Sun and its effects on the Earth's environment. After a successful launch, separation, and initial Sun acquisition, the launch and flight operations teams dove into a commissioning campaign that included, among other things, checkout and calibration of the fine attitude sensors and checkout of the Kalman filter (KF) and the spacecraft s inertial pointing and science control modes. In addition, initial calibration of the science instruments was also accomplished. During that process of KF and controller checkout, several interesting observations were noticed and investigated. The SDO fine attitude sensors consist of one Adcole Digital Sun Sensor (DSS), two Galileo Avionica (GA) quaternion-output Star Trackers (STs), and three Kearfott Two-Axis Rate Assemblies (hereafter called inertial reference units, or IRUs). Initial checkout of the fine attitude sensors indicated that all sensors appeared to be functioning properly. Initial calibration maneuvers were planned and executed to update scale factors, drift rate biases, and alignments of the IRUs. After updating the IRU parameters, the KF was initialized and quickly reached convergence. Over the next few hours, it became apparent that there was an oscillation in the sensor residuals and the KF estimation of the IRU bias. A concentrated investigation ensued to determine the cause of the oscillations, their effect on mission requirements, and how to mitigate them. The ensuing analysis determined that the oscillations seen were, in fact, due to an oscillation in the IRU biases. The low frequencies of the oscillations passed through the KF, were well within the controller bandwidth, and therefore the spacecraft was actually following the oscillating biases, resulting in movement of the spacecraft on the order of plus or minus 20 arcsec. Though this level of error met the ACS attitude knowledge requirement of [35, 70, 70] arcsec, 3 sigma, the desire of the ACS and instrument teams was to remove as much of the oscillation as possible. The Kearfott IRUs have an internal temperature controller, designed to maintain the IRU temperature at a constant temperature of approximately 70 C, thus minimizing the change in the bias drift and scale factors of the mechanical gyros. During ground testing of the observatory, it was discovered that the 83-Hz control cycle of the IRU heaters put a tremendous amount of stress on the spacecraft battery. Analysis by the power systems team indicated that the constant charge/discharge on the battery due to the IRU thermal control cycle could potentially limit the life of the battery. After much analysis, the decision was made not to run the internal IRU heaters. Analysis of on orbit data revealed that the oscillations in the IRU bias had a connection to the temperature of the IRU; changes in IRU temperature resulted in changes in the amplitude and period of the IRU biases. Several mitigating solutions were investigated, the result of which was to tune the KF with larger IRU noise assumptions which allows the KF to follow and correct for the time-varying IRU biases.

Vess, Melissa F.↗

NASA Tech Briefs, January 2012

Contents of this issue are: (1) Energy-Based Tetrahedron Sensor for High-Temperature, High-Pressure Environments (2) Handheld Universal Diagnostic Sensor (3) Large-Area Vacuum Ultraviolet Sensors (4) Fiber Bragg Grating Sensor System for Monitoring Smart Composite Aerospace Structures (5) Health-Enabled Smart Sensor Fusion Technology (6) Extended-Range Passive RFID and Sensor Tags (7) Hybrid Collaborative Learning for Classification and Clustering in Sensor Networks (8) Self-Healing, Inflatable, Rigidizable Shelter (9) Improvements in Cold-Plate Fabrication (10) Technique for Radiometer and Antenna Array Calibration - TRAAC (11) Real-Time Cognitive Computing Architecture for Data Fusion in a Dynamic Environment (12) Programmable Digital Controller (13) Use of CCSDS Packets Over SpaceWire to Control Hardware (14) Key Decision Record Creation and Approval Module (15) Enhanced Graphics for Extended Scale Range (16) Debris Examination Using Ballistic and Radar Integrated Software (17) Data Distribution System (DDS) and Solar Dynamic Observatory Ground Station (SDOGS) (18) Integration Manager (19) Eclipse-Free-Time Assessment Tool for IRIS (20) Automated and Manual Rocket Crater Measurement Software (21) MATLAB Stability and Control Toolbox Trim and Static Stability Module (22) Patched Conic Trajectory Code (23) Ring Image Analyzer (24) SureTrak Probability of Impact Display (25) Implementation of a Non-Metallic Barrier in an Electric Motor (26) Multi-Mission Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator Heat Exchangers for the Mars Science Laboratory Rover (27) Uniform Dust Distributor for Testing Radiative Emittance of Dust-Coated Surfaces (28) MicroProbe Small Unmanned Aerial System (29) Highly Stable and Active Catalyst for Sabatier Reactions (30) Better Proton-Conducting Polymers for Fuel-Cell Membranes (31) CCD Camera Lens Interface for Real-Time Theodolite Alignment (32) Peregrine 100-km Sounding Rocket Project (33) SOFIA Closed- and Open-Door Aerodynamic Analyses (34) Sonic Thermometer for High-Altitude Balloons (35) Near-Infrared Photon-Counting Camera for High-Sensitivity Observations (36) Integrated Optics Achromatic Nuller for Stellar Interferometry (37) High-Speed Digital Interferometry (38) Ultra-Miniature Lidar Scanner for Launch Range Data Collection (39) Shape and Color Features for Object Recognition Search (40) Explanation Capabilities for Behavior-Based Robot Control (41) A DNA-Inspired Encryption Methodology for Secure, Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (42) Quality Control Method for a Micro-Nano-Channel Microfabricated Device (43) Corner-Cube Retroreflector Instrument for Advanced Lunar Laser Ranging (44) Electrospray Collection of Lunar Dust (45) Fabrication of a Kilopixel Array of Superconducting Microcalorimeters with Microstripline Wiring Spacecraft Attitude Tracking and Maneuver Using Combined Magnetic Actuators (46) Coherent Detector for Near-Angle Scattering and Polarization Characterization of Telescope Mirror Coatings

Source record↗

Autonomous Navigation, Guidance, and Control Software in a Low SWaP Box

Onboard autonomy is a necessity for responsive space operations. Autonomous navigation, guidance, and control (NGC) enables space missions to reduce their dependence on high demand ground assets and costly ground personnel. It also allows for in-situ decision making and higher return on mission data. A flight software and hardware system providing this capability, called “autoNGC,” is currently being developed at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center for infusion into multiple future missions. The autoNGC flight software is built on the plug-and-play architecture of the core Flight System (cFS) consisting of the standard cFS apps and newly developed autoNGC interface apps and libraries. The various apps cooperate through communication over the message-based software bus. With the plug-and-play architecture of autoNGC, cFS apps can easily be added and replaced to meet the needs of different missions, even after launch. The first flight software release of autoNGC is targeted for Summer 2024 to provide autonomous navigation at the Moon and beyond. It can perform sensor fusion of multiple measurement types including pseudo-range from a Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) receiver (including weak signal), 1-way and 2-way range and Doppler from ground stations (i.e., direct to Earth (DTE)), bearing and range from optical camera images, and accelerometer data. Accurate onboard navigation and timing is obtained through the Goddard Enhanced Onboard Navigation System (GEONS) software library which fuses different measurement types through an extended Kalman filter (EKF) framework. Optical measurements that are ingested in GEONS are first extracted from optical images by the cFS Goddard Image Analysis and Navigation Tool (cGIANT) app. If the imaged body is far enough away that it appears as a pixel or cluster of pixels, then bearing angles to the body centroid can be provided. If the body is close enough and the shape is known coarsely, then bearing angles and range to the body centroid can be derived from the limb. Bearing angles to individual surface features can also be extracted (i.e., terrain relative navigation (TRN)). Onboard guidance and control capabilities are being developed for a future release to perform autonomous station-keeping and trajectory correction maneuvers in multiple orbital regimes. Capabilities to enable distributed systems missions and constellations, such as crosslink measurements, and onboard time management are being developed as well. The first hardware implementation of autoNGC is a minimal size, weight, and power (SWaP) design allowing for inclusion into CubeSats and SmallSat-size buses. Advancements in miniaturized space processors, such as the SpaceCube 3.0 Mini and the SpaceCube Mini-Z are utilized for low SWaP while maintaining a high level of performance. The current enclosure design is 12 cm x 17 cm x 13.5 cm. The box mass is expected to be less than 2 kg, and the nominal power is 21 W. In order to accommodate a wide range of missions, the hardware interfaces are designed for flexibility with a variety of sensor inputs. Through comprehensive testing in the software-in-the-loop, processor-in-the-loop, and hardware-in-the-loop test beds that are concurrently being developed, autoNGC is expected to achieve TRL 6 by late 2024.

Sun Hur-Diaz↗

Monitoring Airspace Complexity and Determining Contributing Factors

The national airspace has evolved over many years to accommodate increased traffic demand [1] while simultaneously maintaining one of the safest forms of transportation [2], [3]. One of the reasons for this success is the ability of the system and the operators to adapt and accommodate to situations that routinely disrupt optimal operations. These situations may include: adverse weather, delays, early arrivals, equipment outages, and other factors that are outside the operators ability to control. These factors can lead to states where automation is unable to properly handle these issues and therefore air traffic controllers and pilots have to intervene, ultimately increasing communication between operators resulting in higher workload. As controller workload increases to handle sub-optimal operating conditions this can be viewed as an increase in complexity. The reasoning for this is because humans are now required to make tactical decisions in response to external factors, resulting in a departure from the strategic plan where operations would be more efficiently managed. Human operators control airspace complexity under rigid regulations that are constantly changing. The airspace is divided into sectors and the number of aircraft assigned to each controller is limited for safe handling. There has been past work that devised airspace complexity metrics in commercial aviation and related these metrics to controller workload (e.g., [4],[5]). The upper bounds on the system load are pre-determined. Such bounds on complexity make for a safe system, but the system cannot scale and adapt to autonomous, dense, and heterogeneous traffic, including the many types of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) envisioned to be added to the operations. We hypothesize that, as traffic density and heterogeneity grow, and other key metrics change, there will be phase transitions at which the way traffic should be managed changes significantly [6]. We offer a method for in-time detection of contributing factors that lead to phase transitions, characterized by increased complexity. To the best of our knowledge, there is no tool similar to our proposed effort that identifies such contributing factors or precursor patterns. To define the scope we are proposing to measure complexity from the viewpoint of the Terminal Radar Approach Control Facilities (TRACON) controller’s perspective. In particular we are analyzing arrivals into KSFO. With safety as the top concern for airspace operators, it is important to recognize that as density and heterogeneity grow, the focus of the system will change. Times of the day when the airspace has low density and heterogeneity, the flights will follow more efficient paths where the aircraft move on established routes that are more or less directly to the destination. However, when density and heterogeneity increases, the system will begin changing focus to avoiding conflicts and collisions and route the flights in a more flexible way. Higher flexibility requires more communication and coordination between controllers and pilots which the current automation is unable to handle. This paper proposes a novel approach that monitors airspace complexity at multiple scales, uses a Machine Learning-based tool that predicts when operations will transition to a regime of greater complexity, and identifies actions that can reduce the complexity while still maintaining efficient and safe operations. We demonstrate our proposed approach using data from multiple complementary sources. This includes, but is not limited to: historical aircraft surveillance data from NASA’s Sherlock Data Warehouse [7], METAR weather data, and airport configuration data from Aviation System Performance Metrics (ASPM). The surveillance data flight paths are sampled at a variable sample rate — increasing as the aircraft approaches the airport. This is due to how Sherlock manages flight track stitching between different radar facilities which have different sampling rates. The weather and performance data are logged at defined intervals throughout the day at a courser refresh rate. In addition to the logged data and metrics, we leverage pre-defined Standard Terminal Arrival Routes (STARs) procedures to characterize the path of each flight. Each flight files for one of these routes in the flight plan well before entering the terminal airspace, and approximately follows the route until it leaves the STAR, typically on the final fix of a runway transition. However, most flights do not always fly the full STAR procedure to completion [8], but the majority do adhere to the fixes within the common route of the procedure. Our approach leverages fixes in the common route of each of the STARs to build a reference path to the airport. This allows us to characterize the flight paths in what we are defining as the “maneuvering area” (the airspace between the STAR and before the flight is lined up on the runway’s final approach) to determine how off nominal the flights are to calculate its complexity score. Determining airspace complexity is a concept that does not have a concrete answer. In designing this metric, we consider what increases the workload for the air traffic controllers. Consequently more specialized vectoring maneuvers results in higher workload. Accordingly, we start with a theory: each flight has a direct path it takes from the STAR’s common route to the final approach’s outer marker fix for the flight’s landing runway. It is important to note that the direct path is only used as a reference. If the majority of the flights have a large consistent offset as compared to other routes it does not necessarily mean that those flights have higher complexity. We are merely building a distribution based on this direct path for that particular STAR and runway pair to determine the normal mode of operations for that route. Flights that are in the upper tail of these distributions will result in higher complexity scores and flights that fly in the median will represent the normal mode of operations and therefore will have lower complexity scores. Since flights following each STAR route take different paths to the airport, we have a different distribution for each STAR route and therefore can model these distributions to compute a complexity score from their respective normalized distributions. To evaluate the effectiveness of our proposed airspace complexity metric we will compare against an established approach based on trajectory clustering [9]. This unsupervised learning technique consists of the following steps: (1) identify the general maneuvering areas (waypoints) by performing $\kappa$-means or DBSCAN clustering on locations where aircraft frequently turn based on the surveillance radar track data, (2) map flight trajectories onto sequences of waypoints, and (3) cluster the sequences based on their common subsequences. From a high-level perspective, this baseline model learns nominal operations in the airspace through the sequence of waypoints that are representative of where aircraft change direction and defines deviations from the nominal operations as “complex.” Therefore, more deviations from the nominal operations correspond to higher complexity values. For our validation, we re-implemented this technique and tune model hyper-parameters to correctly detect waypoints for the arrival traffic into the San Francisco bay area. We will compute the complexity measure over a one-year period using our proposed technique as well as the baseline. Our validation will be based on each technique’s ability to detect a set of undesirable outcomes (e.g., go-arounds, holding patterns, average time in the airspace, etc.). Since our current complexity metric is derived from the offset from the direct reference path, it’s important to understand what causes these offsets. In many of the flights with high offset distance, flights performing holding patterns and S turns can be observed. These maneuvering tactics are utilized to add distance between the aircraft and the destination runway to prevent multiple flights from having conflicting arrival times. In order to predict a rise in complexity (or the precursor to complexity), it’s necessary to be able to identify these potential conflicts (which in turn, result in higher offsets). To do this, we define a “representative flight” for each STAR route and runway pair. This flight is approximately the path the flight would take if there was a clear path with no other flights in the airspace — including the time remaining to the airport. We first identify the flights for a given STAR runway pair using the offset to the reference path distributions that fall between the 44-55 percentiles. This yields the flights that conform to the most normal mode of operation. Each of these flights is partitioned based on the percent complete from the entry point into the maneuvering areas from 0\% – 100\% complete. Then for each percent “bin”, we take the median value of the flight’s latitude/longitude coordinates, airspeed, and (non causal) time remaining to the airport to construct a lookup table for each percent complete bin on a given route. As a flight enters the maneuvering area, we can find the estimated arrival time of a flight to the airport by finding the closest point to the representative path’s percent complete bin (relative to the flight’s current position at any snapshot in the airspace) and therefore retrieve the corresponding remaining time left on the “representative path”. We assume that the flight will follow the representative path to completion when deriving these estimates. We can then compare these estimated arrival times against other flights for the same snapshot in time to identify potential conflicts. If more flights are estimated to arrive within a tolerance window than there are runways available, then we have a potential conflict. We can use this derived measure along with other factors expected to add disruption to the operation such as weather and runway configuration changes as an input to machine learning tools to detect precursors that increases in our complexity measure. This novel method will assist in uncovering insights into the contributing factors that lead to increased complexity that may allow for in-time responses to avoid reaching a high complexity state in the airspace.

complexity↗