Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Payloads Operations and Integration Center (POIC) Status
No abstract available
Pirani, Joseph↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “space flight operations”
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.
Multi-mission, interactive 3D visualization in a web browser for robotic system and space flight mission development and operations
In this paper we will discuss the Ranger system architecture, rendering performance, current use cases and deployments, system development challenges, as well as a newly implemented fully immersive VR system capability.
Wenzel, S.↗
Conceptual Inquiry of the Space Shuttle and International Space Station GNC Flight Controllers
The concept of Mission Control was envisioned by Christopher Columbus Kraft in the 1960's. Instructed to figure out how to operate human space flight safely, Kraft envisioned a room of sub-system experts troubleshooting problems and supporting nominal flight activities under the guidance of one Flight Director who is responsible for the success of the mission. To facilitate clear communication, MCC communicates with the crew through a Capsule Communicator (CAPCOM) who is an astronaut themselves. Gemini 4 was the first mission to be supported by such a MCC and successfully completed the first American EVA. The MCC seen on television is called the Flight Control Room (FCR, pronounced ficker) or otherwise known as the front room. While this room is the most visible aspect, it is a very small component of the entire control center. The Shuttle FCR is known as the White FCR (WFCR) and Station's as FCR-1. (FCR-1 was actually the first FCR built at JSC which was used through the Gemini, Apollo and Shuttle programs until the WFCR was completed in 1992. Afterwards FCR-1 was refurbished first for the Life Sciences Center and then for the ISS in 2006.) Along with supporting the Flight Director, each FCR operator is also the supervisor for usually two or three support personnel in a back room called the Multi-Purpose Support Room (MPSR, pronounced mipser). MPSR operators are more deeply focused on their specific subsystems and have the responsible to analyze patterns, and diagnose and assess consequences of faults. The White MPSR (WMPSR) operators are always present for Shuttle operations; however, ISS FCR controllers only have support from their Blue MPSR (BMPSR) while the Shuttle is docked and during critical operations. Since ISS operates 24-7, the FCR team reduces to a much smaller Gemini team of 4-5 operators for night and weekend shifts when the crew is off-duty. The FCR is also supported by the Mission Evaluation Room (MER) which is a collection of contractor engineers who provide analysis and long-term troubleshooting support. Each MER operator is an expert in a very small portion of a sub-system and each FCR console usually interfaces with several MER positions.
Kranzusch, Kara↗
CFD 2030 Grand Challenge: CFD-in-the-Loop Monte Carlo Flight Simulation for Space Vehicle Design
Flight qualification of space vehicles is markedly different from those typically employed for aircraft. The concept of an extensive flight test campaign for a space vehicle does not exist, and vehicle designers must look to alternative techniques for demonstrating robust and reliable performance of their vehicles prior to operational flight. A space vehicle may undergo only a handful of flight tests in its development cycle, with each flight representing a drastically different flight phase or flight configuration. For instance, NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) launch vehicle and Orion spacecraft will only see a total of four flight demonstrations before flying a crew on its first operational mission, and each flight demonstrates a unique vehicle configuration and/or set of flight conditions. The SLS will be flown only one time before it becomes operational (Artemis 1). The Orion spacecraft Crew Module (CM) will have been tested twice, once on a Delta IV launch vehicle (Exploration Flight Test 1) and once as a fully integrated system with the SLS launch vehicle (Artemis 1). The Orion Launch abort system will have been tested twice, once in a pad abort scenario (Pad Abort 1) and once in an inflight abort scenario (Ascent Abort 2) on a modified Peacekeeper booster. Both of these latter tests involve only a boiler plate CM, not a functional Orion spacecraft. Thus, unlike aircraft, there is very little opportunity for engineers to assess and evaluate their preflight predictions. Instead, space vehicle designers rely on Monte Carlo flight simulations with detailed dispersions of predicted nominal flight behavior to determine how robust their design is to errors and uncertainties in the flight conditions their vehicle may encounter. These Monte Carlo analyses entail thousands of trajectory simulations to demonstrate that the vehicle can meet design requirements at a specified level of reliability. From an aerodynamics and aerothermodynamics perspective, these trajectory simulations are fueled by an extensive aerodynamic database that covers the complete range of expected flight conditions, vehicle configurations, and flight attitudes expected in a given mission. Today, these databases amount to a table of engineering parameters that can be quickly interrogated by the trajectory simulator. The aerodynamic and aerothermodynamic databases are assembled via a series of ground tests, empirical and analytical analysis, physics-based computational analysis, applicable past flight performance data, and in some cases, engineering judgment. These databases generally take years to assemble for a new space vehicle system and in the case of SLS/Orion, over a decade of test and analysis have been expended to develop the extensive databases required to cover the myriad of configurations and potential flight conditions required for the system. Recently, it has been proposed that Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD) and computing capability may be reaching a point where it is foreseeable that CFD could be integrated directly into the production trajectory simulation tools used to design NASA’s space vehicles. To demonstrate this, NASA has embarked on two demonstrations of this type of capability, one where six degree of freedom flight trajectory simulation equations are embedded in an existing CFD solver and another where a production CFD solver is loosely coupled with a production trajectory simulation tool. These efforts represent an initial demonstration of a future approach to flight trajectory simulation, but they are a far cry from the capability required to perform a full-up CFD-in-the-loop Monte Carlo trajectory simulation. Therefore, this represents a viable grand challenge for computational methods addressing space vehicle design and development. The final paper/presentation will discuss the many hurdles, beyond simply raw computational power, to realizing this grand challenge and how they map directly to the CFD Vision 2030 ojectives. Among these are the wide range of flight conditions, including accelerating/decelerating flight, encountered by a space vehicle during launch and/or entry. The vehicle can also encounter numerous configuration changes, some of which can be quite drastic, during the course of its flight, so robust, automated geometry modeling, grid generation, and adaptation will play a huge role in reaching this goal. Multiply this by 1000’s of trajectory simulations occurring simultaneously in a given Monte Carlo analysis, and the problem readily scales to absorb virtually any size of supercomputer envisioned today. The concept of CFD-in-the-loop Monte Carlo trajectory simulation poses a formidable challenge for emerging and future computing systems, and it has the potential to shave years off the development cycle for aerodynamic and aerothermodynamic performance predictions as compared to today’s space vehicle design approach.
CFD 2030↗
NASA Commercial Crew Program and Medical Operational Challenges
This abstract is submitted as part of the USSPACECOM Command Surgeon’s panel demonstrating the medical capabilities and challenges involved in human space flight support operations. BACKGROUND: NASA embarked on the Commercial Crew Program to launch astronauts into low-earth orbit from US soil and dock with the International Space Station (ISS). The eventual industry providers selected were SpaceX (SpX) and Boeing. These commercial transportation systems are vital to ensure crew availability on ISS for research and discovery. OVERVIEW: NASA/SpaceX Demo-2 (DM2) mission launched from the Kennedy Space Center in 2020 as the historic first crewed test-flight of the Crew Dragon spacecraft with two NASA Astronauts onboard. DM2 represented the first flight in 9-years from US soil since STS-135 in 2011. The 63-day mission ended with splashdown in the Gulf of Mexico, the first US water recovery in 45-years since Apollo-Soyuz. Validation of system hardware and operations allowed four-person crews to launch on subsequently missions (Crew-1, Crew-2, Crew-3, Crew-4, Crew-5 to date), which included International Partner crewmembers. DISCUSSION: A multitude of operational, training, medical, and technical issues needed to be addressed between NASA Medical Operations, the commercial provider SpaceX, and the Department of Defense. These included Flight rule development, occupant protection, pressurized suit testing, communication plans during mission phases, and emergency simulations for supporting Flight Surgeons and Biomedical Engineers. In providing crew experience with expected launch and entry G-force profile, Centrifuge training was established. Preventive health measures via the Health Stabilization Program were especially vital during the global COVID-19 pandemic. Unique aspects arise for SpX Dragon parachute splashdown and shipboard recovery operations in the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico. The new Commercial Crew Program is indeed a wonderfully challenging and exciting era for human spaceflight.
Joseph Dervay↗
Hybridized Agile Software Development of Flight Control Team Tools for International Space Station's Payload Operations Integration Center
Ground systems operations at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Payload Operations and Integration Center (POIC) at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) recently increased via a High Operations Tempo (HOT) initiative, in order to support more science activities with a fourth crew member on the International Space Station (ISS). The Flight Control Team's (FCT) need to support this increasing pace of payload science operations was the impetus for creating a series of new tools. While their need was clear, the full scope and user experience for each tool was not as well-understood, thus establishing a fixed set of initial requirements was not feasible. A hybridized Agile Software Development (ASD) paradigm was created to take advantage of this uncertainty, plan for it, permit the exploration of novel concepts, and also facilitate a rapid and flexible response to inevitably changing requirements. The POIC's hybridized ASD approach places preeminent focus on providing customer value through the delivery of high quality, customer-focused solutions in short timeframes. This has been successfully achieved through creating unprecedented modes of cooperation and collaboration between operations and software development teams, frequent user evaluations of the software with well-defined feedback mechanisms, increased human factors involvement, and a dedication to successful outcomes by the whole of the POIC. Since space science operations and software development are not typically so closely linked, this paper discusses an approach that offers an optimal way to provide an increased return on investment and a faster time-to-completion than traditional software development paradigms, while aiming at delivering high quality products and customer-driven value.
Albers, Cerese M.↗
Using microsoft excel applications in the graduate intern program at Goddard Space Flight Center
An outline of the Project Operations Branch at Goddard Space Flight Center is presented that describes the management of the division and each subgroup's responsibility. The paper further describes the development of software tools for the Macintosh personal computer, and their impending implementation. A detailed step by step procedure is given for using these software tools.
Antoine, Lisa↗
The Application of Advanced Cultivation Techniques in the Long Term Maintenance of Space Flight Plant Biological Systems
The development of the International Space Station (ISS) presents extensive opportunities for the implementation of long duration space life sciences studies. Continued attention has been placed in the development of plant growth chamber facilities capable of supporting the cultivation of plants in space flight microgravity conditions. The success of these facilities is largely dependent on their capacity to support the various growth requirements of test plant species. The cultivation requirements for higher plant species are generally complex, requiring specific levels of illumination, temperature, humidity, water, nutrients, and gas composition in order to achieve normal physiological growth and development. The supply of water, nutrients, and oxygen to the plant root system is a factor, which has proven to be particularly challenging in a microgravity space flight environment. The resolution of this issue is particularly important for the more intensive crop cultivation of plants envisaged in Nasa's advanced life support initiative. BioServe Space Technologies is a NASA, Research Partnership Center (RPC) at the University of Colorado, Boulder. BioServe has designed and operated various space flight plant habitat systems, and placed specific emphasis on the development and enhanced performance of subsystem components such as water and nutrient delivery, illumination, gas exchange and atmosphere control, temperature and humidity control. The further development and application of these subsystems to next generation habitats is of significant benefit and contribution towards the development of both the Space Plant biology and the Advanced Life Support Programs. The cooperative agreement between NASA Ames Research center and BioServe was established to support the further implementation of advanced cultivation techniques and protocols to plant habitat systems being coordinated at NASA Ames Research Center. Emphasis was placed on the implementation of passive-based water and nutrient support systems and techniques, which can be used to minimize demands on power, mass, and operational complexity in space flight studies. This effort has direct application to the development of next-generation space flight plant chambers such as the Plant Research Unit (PRU). Work was also directed at the development of in-flight plant preservation techniques and protocols consistent with the interest in applying recent developments in gene chip micro array technologies. Cultivation technologies and protocols were evaluated in a 55 day space flight plant growth study, conducted on the ISS, mission 9A (10/7/02 - 12/7/02).
Heyenga, A. G.↗
Precision Cleaning and Verification Processes Used at Marshall Space Flight Center for Critical Hardware Applications
This presentation discuss the Marshall Space Flight Center Operations and Responsibilities. These are propulsion, microgravity experiments, international space station, space transportation systems, and advance vehicle research.
Caruso, Salvadore V.↗
Collaboration Between NASA Centers of Excellence on Autonomous System Software Development
Software for space systems flight operations has its roots in the early days of the space program when computer systems were incapable of supporting highly complex and flexible control logic. Control systems relied on fast data acquisition and supervisory control from a roomful of systems engineers on the ground. Even though computer hardware and software has become many orders of magnitude more capable, space systems have largely adhered to this original paradigm In an effort to break this mold, Kennedy Space Center (KSC) has invested in the development of model-based diagnosis and control applications for ten years having broad experience in both ground and spacecraft systems and software. KSC has now partnered with Ames Research Center (ARC), NASA's Center of Excellence in Information Technology, to create a new paradigm for the control of dynamic space systems. ARC has developed model-based diagnosis and intelligent planning software that enables spacecraft to handle most routine problems automatically and allocate resources in a flexible way to realize mission objectives. ARC demonstrated the utility of onboard diagnosis and planning with an experiment aboard Deep Space I in 1999. This paper highlights the software control system collaboration between KSC and ARC. KSC has developed a Mars In-situ Resource Utilization testbed based on the Reverse Water Gas Shift (RWGS) reaction. This plant, built in KSC's Applied Chemistry Laboratory, is capable of producing the large amount of Oxygen that would be needed to support a Human Mars Mission. KSC and ARC are cooperating to develop an autonomous, fault-tolerant control system for RWGS to meet the need for autonomy on deep space missions. The paper will also describe how the new system software paradigm will be applied to Vehicle Health Monitoring, tested on the new X vehicles and integrated into future launch processing systems.
Goodrich, Charles H.↗
The Role and Training of NASA Astronauts in the Post-Shuttle Era
In May 2010 the National Research Council (NRC) was asked by NASA to address several questions related to the Astronaut Corps. The NRC's Committee on Human Spaceflight Crew Operations was tasked to: 1. How should the role and size of the activities managed by the Johnson Space Center Flight Crew Operations Directorate change following space shuttle retirement and completion of the assembly of the International Space Station (ISS)? 2. What are the requirements for crew-related ground-based facilities after the Space Shuttle program ends? 3. Is the fleet of aircraft used for training the Astronaut Corps a cost-effective means of preparing astronauts to meet the requirements of NASA's human spaceflight program? Are there more cost-effective means of meeting these training requirements? Although the future of NASA's human spaceflight program has garnered considerable discussion in recent years, and there is considerable uncertainty about what that program will involve in the coming years, the committee was not tasked to address whether or not human spaceflight should continue, or what form it should take. The committee's task restricted it to studying those activities managed by the Flight Crew Operations Directorate, or those closely related to its activities, such as crew-related ground-based facilities and the training aircraft.
Source record↗
Spacelab - A key element in the Space Shuttle Space Transportation System
Spacelab will be a key element in the Space Transportation System (STS) to be initiated with the advent of the first operational flight of Space Shuttle in 1980. Spacelab is an international, cooperative venture between the European Space Agency (ESA) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), which is structured to provide the scientific community an earthlike laboratory in space by 1980. The responsibilities of both ESA and NASA are divided into design and development to be accomplished by ESA and the experiment integration and operation with the Space Shuttle by NASA. While the Spacelab is a key element in the STS, it is highly dependent on other elements in the system for its resources and payload support capabilities. This paper presents the relationship of the Spacelab to other elements and the operational planning that NASA is undertaking to make the Spacelab a flexible and efficient laboratory in space.
Lee, T. J.↗
Preparing for the High Frontier: The Role and Training of NASA Astronauts in the Post- Space Shuttle Era
In May 2010, the National Research Council (NRC) was asked by NASA to address several questions related to the Astronaut Corps. The NRC s Committee on Human Spaceflight Crew Operations was tasked to answer several questions: 1. How should the role and size of the activities managed by the Johnson Space Center Flight Crew Operations Directorate change after space shuttle retirement and completion of the assembly of the International Space Station (ISS)? 2. What are the requirements for crew-related ground-based facilities after the Space Shuttle program ends? 3. Is the fleet of aircraft used for training the Astronaut Corps a cost-effective means of preparing astronauts to meet the requirements of NASA s human spaceflight program? Are there more cost-effective means of meeting these training requirements? Although the future of NASA s human spaceflight program has garnered considerable discussion in recent years and there is considerable uncertainty about what the program will involve in the coming years, the committee was not tasked to address whether human spaceflight should continue or what form it should take. The committee s task restricted it to studying activities managed by the Flight Crew Operations Directorate or those closely related to its activities, such as crew-related ground-based facilities and the training aircraft.
Source record↗
Logistics and operations integration requirements to support Space Station servicing of free flying spacecraft - OMV flight operation
The logistics of OMV free-flyer servicing are examined, with emphasis on integrating the OMV operations into the overall STS-Space Station system. The depletion rate of consumables and lifetimes of free-flyer components are known quantities, which permits definition of a predictable maintenance schedule. Servicing with an OMV will depend on the position and capabilities of the OMV, Shuttle and Station when free-flyer maintenance is needed. Optimized orbital servicing of free-flyers will involve coordination of and resolution of schedule conflicts among STS, the OMV and the Station. The scheduled availability of any of the three components will be predicted in terms of probabilities that any one of the components will not be needed for another mission while performing the mission they are on.
Bell, Jerome A.↗
The Final Count Down: A Review of Three Decades of Flight Controller Training Methods for Space Shuttle Mission Operations
Operations of human spaceflight systems is extremely complex; therefore, the training and certification of operations personnel is a critical piece of ensuring mission success. Mission Control Center (MCC-H), at the Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas, manages mission operations for the Space Shuttle Program, including the training and certification of the astronauts and flight control teams. An overview of a flight control team s makeup and responsibilities during a flight, and details on how those teams are trained and certified, reveals that while the training methodology for developing flight controllers has evolved significantly over the last thirty years the core goals and competencies have remained the same. In addition, the facilities and tools used in the control center have evolved. Changes in methodology and tools have been driven by many factors, including lessons learned, technology, shuttle accidents, shifts in risk posture, and generational differences. Flight controllers share their experiences in training and operating the space shuttle. The primary training method throughout the program has been mission simulations of the orbit, ascent, and entry phases, to truly train like you fly. A review of lessons learned from flight controller training suggests how they could be applied to future human spaceflight endeavors, including missions to the moon or to Mars. The lessons learned from operating the space shuttle for over thirty years will help the space industry build the next human transport space vehicle.
Dittermore, Gary↗
Marshall Space Flight Center's Tower Vector Magnetograph: Upgrades, Hardware, and Operations for the HESSI Mission
The Marshall Space Flight Center's (MSFC) solar group announces the successful upgrade of our tower vector magnetograph. In operation since 1973, the last major alterations to the system (which includes telescope, filter, polarizing optics, camera, and data acquisition computer) were made in 1982, when we upgraded from an SEC Vidicon camera to a CCD. In 1985, other changes were made which increased the field-of-view from 5 x 5 arc min (2.4 arc sec per pixel) to 6 x 6 arc min with a resolution of 2.81 arc sec. In 1989, the Apollo Telescope Mount H-alpha telescope was coaligned with the optics of the magnetograph. The most recent upgrades (year 2000), funded to support the High Energy Solar Spectroscopic Imager (HESSI) mission, have resulted in a pixel size of 0.64 arc sec over a 7 x 5.2 arc min field-of-view (binning 1x1). This poster describes the physical characteristics of the new system and compares spatial resolution, timing, and versatility with the old system. Finally, we provide a description of our Internet web site, which includes images of our most recent observations, and links to our data archives, as well as the history of magnetography at MSFC and education outreach pages.
Adams, M. L.↗
Recent technology products from Space Human Factors research
The goals of the NASA Space Human Factors program and the research carried out concerning human factors are discussed with emphasis given to the development of human performance models, data, and tools. The major products from this program are described, which include the Laser Anthropometric Mapping System; a model of the human body for evaluating the kinematics and dynamics of human motion and strength in microgravity environment; an operational experience data base for verifying and validating the data repository of manned space flights; the Operational Experience Database Taxonomy; and a human-computer interaction laboratory whose products are the display softaware and requirements and the guideline documents and standards for applications on human-computer interaction. Special attention is given to the 'Convoltron', a prototype version of a signal processor for synthesizing the head-related transfer functions.
Jenkins, James P.↗
NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO)
Introduction: NASA is preparing to land the first woman and first person of color on the Moon within the next decade, and ensuring the success of these missions will depend on our preparation on the ground in multiple ground-based lunar environment analogs. To achieve this, NASA has used full mission class analogs, of which NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) is the longest continuously running example. Discussion: NEEMO is NASA’s long-standing undersea high-fidelity spaceflight mission analog. It focuses on exploration science, EVA techniques and tools, and maturing ISS IVA flight hardware and operations concepts. NEEMO crews are composed of groups of US and International Partner (IP) astronauts, engineers and scientists who live, work and explore in a challenging environment analogous to the environment experienced currently on ISS and what is expected for future deep space exploration destinations. NEEMO missions are conducted at Aquarius Reef Base (ARB), which includes a shore base in Tavernier, FL, and the world's only undersea research station, the Aquarius habitat, which is located 5.4 miles (9 kilometers) off Key Largo in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. ARB is owned and operated by Florida International University (FIU). Aquarius was selected due to its remote and extreme location and its ability to provide the unique isolation and risk factors that spaceflight presents. NEEMO missions allow for evaluations of end-to-end EVA and Science exploration concepts of operations with a crew that is in situ in a true extreme environment. They also allow for evaluations of flight hardware and ops tools that are either pondered or destined for ISS or Gateway in the near future. NEEMO missions feature flight-like interactions between the crew and a Mission Control Center (MCC )and Science Team, which in turn allows evaluation of mission and science operations decision making and communications techniques. One reason NEEMO missions are of such high fidelity is that so many of the participants are experienced human space flight end operators. The majority of crewmembers are trained astronauts, and many of the MCC operators have credentials as current or former certified ISS MCC operators (e.g., CapCom, EVA Officer, etc.). Mission products are generated daily by the ground team and are modeled on ISS products (but modified as needed). A planning team manages the constantly evolving mission timelines in response to the ever-changing constraints and opportunities. During NEEMO missions, suited EVA crewmembers (using diving helmets) have clear voice communications with each other, the habitat, and the MCC and Science Team back on shore. Each EVA crewmember also sends helmet cam video to the habitat and MCC and Science Teams. Appropriate communications latencies are inserted for the destination being simulated as well. NEEMO missions are made possible by a broad collaboration of participants. Astronauts from all of the ISS partner agencies are eligible for crew assignment. Often the crew includes a NASA scientist, doctor or engineer with a particular skill to contribute. Sometimes crewmembers come from external entities–generally institutes or universities. Objectives come from a wide variety of sources as well, from within NASA, IPs, government agencies, academia, commercial companies and research institutes. A typical NEEMO mission is a collaboration between at least 5 NASA centers. To date, 23 NEEMO missions have been conducted since 2001, and NEEMO 24 is planned for 2022. Conclusion: NEEMO is a high-fidelity mission analog conducted in an extreme subsea environment. It features experienced end-operators in human spaceflight, from the astronaut crewmembers to key personnel staffing Mission Control. Acknowledgments: The authors wish to thank FIU and NASA’s HEO SEI/Strategic Analysis and Exploration Integration and Science Directorate organizations for the continued support that makes the NEEMO Project possible.
M L Reagan↗