Class D spaces admitting an electromagnetic field
Expanding solutions of Einstein-Maxwell equations in D class spaces admitting null and nonnull electromagnetic field
Cahen, M.↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “Class D”
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.
Low-cost, Risk-Reduction Testing of Class D Spacecraft Photovoltaic Systems
The end-to-end verification of a spacecraft photovoltaic power generation system requires light! A low-cost, portable, and end-to-end photovoltaic-system test appropriate for NASAs new generation of Class D missions is presented. High risk, low-cost, and quick-turn satellites rarely have the resources to execute the traditional approaches from higher-class (A-C) missions. The Class D approach, as demonstrated on the Lunar Atmospheric and Dust Environment Explorer (LADEE), utilizes a portable, metal-halide, theatre lamp for an end-to-end photovoltaic system test. While not as precise and comprehensive as the traditional Large Area Pulsed Solar Simulator (LAPSS) test, the LADEE method leverages minimal resources into an ongoing assessment program that can be applied through numerous stages of the mission. The project takes a true Class D approach in assessing the technical value of a costly, high-fidelity performance test versus a simpler approach with less programmatic risk. The resources required are a fraction of that for a LAPSS test, and is easy to repeat due to its portability. Further, the test equipment can be handed down to future projects without building an on-site facility.At the vanguard of Class D missions, the LADEE team frequently wrestled with and challenged the status quo. The philosophy of risk avoidance at all cost, typical to Class A-C missions, simply could not be executed. This innovative and simple testing solution is contextualized to NASA Class D programs and a specific risk encountered during development of the LADEE Electrical Power System (EPS). Selection of the appropriate lamp and safety concerns are discussed, with examples of test results. Combined with the vendors panel-level data and periodic inspection, the method ensures system integrity from Integration and Test (IT) through launch. Following launch, mission operations tools are utilized to assess system performance based on a scant amount of available data.
photovoltaic↗
Low-Cost, Class D Testing of Spacecraft Photovoltaic Systems Can Reduce Risk
The end-to-end verification of a spacecraft photovoltaic power generation system requires light! A lowcost, portable, and end-to-end photovoltaic-system test appropriate for NASA's new generation of Class D missions is presented. High risk, low-cost, and quick-turn satellites rarely have the resources to execute the traditional approaches from higher-class (A-C) missions. The Class D approach, as demonstrated on the Lunar Atmospheric and Dust Environment Explorer (LADEE), utilizes a portable, metalhalide, theatre lamp for an end-to-end photovoltaic system test. While not as precise and comprehensive as the traditional Large Area Pulsed Solar Simulator (LAPSS) test, the LADEE method leverages minimal resources into an ongoing assessment program that can be applied through numerous stages of the mission. The project takes a true Class D approach in assessing the technical value of a costly, highfidelity performance test versus a simpler approach with less programmatic risk. The resources required are a fraction of that for a LAPSS test, and is easy to repeat due to its portability. Further, the test equipment can be handed down to future projects without building an on-site facility. At the vanguard of Class D missions, the LADEE team frequently wrestled with and challenged the status quo. The philosophy of risk avoidance at all cost, typical to Class A-C missions, simply could not be executed. This innovative and simple testing solution is contextualized to NASA Class D programs and a specific risk encountered during development of the LADEE Electrical Power System (EPS). Selection of the appropriate lamp and safety concerns are discussed, with examples of test results. Combined with the vendor's panellevel data and periodic inspection, the method ensures system integrity from Integration and Test (I&T) through launch. Following launch, mission operations tools are utilized to assess system performance based on a scant amount of available data.
power systems↗
ARC Class D Missions Using COTS Parts
NASA Ames' strategy in using COTS EEE parts for Class D and sub-Class D missions. This Powerpoint presentation discusses the methodology used to enable the use of cheap and widely available COTS EEE parts for spaceflight missions. This methodology has proven to be highly successful over the last dozen years on 30+ nanosat projects.
COTS EEE parts↗
CYGNSS: Lessons We are Learning from a Class D Mission
CYGNSS: Lessons Learned from NASA Class D Mission and how they selected their parts for the program to include balance between cost, risk, schedule and technology available as well as balancing cost restraints with mission risk profile.
Class D Missions↗
SMD Class D standard MAR
Overview presentation for a streamlined Class D mission assurance requirements document developed by an Agency-wide team for NASA Science Mission Directorate
SMA↗
Systems Engineering Lessons Learned for Class D Missions
One of NASA's goals within human exploration is to determine how to get humans to Mars safely and to live and work on the Martian surface. To accomplish this goal, several smaller missions act as stepping-stones to the larger end goal. NASA uses these smaller missions to develop new technologies and learn about how to survive outside of Low Earth Orbit for long periods. Additionally, keeping a cadence of these missions allows the team to maintain proficiency in the complex art of bringing spacecraft to fruition. Many of these smaller missions are robotic in nature and have smaller timescales, whereas there are others that involve crew and have longer mission timelines. Given the timelines associated with these various missions, different levels of risk and rigor need to be implemented to be more in line with what is appropriate for the mission. Thus, NASA has four different classifications that range from Class A to Class D based on the mission details. One of these projects is the Resource Prospector (RP) Mission, which is a multi-center and multi-institution collaborative project to search for volatiles in the polar regions of the Moon. The RP mission is classified as a Class D mission and as such, has the opportunity to more tightly manage, and therefore accept, greater levels of risk. The requirements for Class D missions were at the forefront of the design and thus presented unique challenges in vehicle development and systems engineering processes. This paper will discuss the systems engineering process at NASA and how that process is tailored for Class D missions, specifically the RP mission.
Rojdev, Kristina↗
Analysis and design of a class-D amplifier
Analysis of a basic class-D amplifier circuit configuration shows its adaptability to a variety of applications. The feedback, input and output configuration and the frequency spectrum of the pulse-width-modulated signal are analyzed.
Source record↗
Class D Management Implementation Approach of the First Orbital Mission of the Earth Venture Series
A key element of the National Research Council's Earth Science and Applications Decadal Survey called for the creation of the Venture Class line of low-cost research and application missions within NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration). One key component of the architecture chosen by NASA within the Earth Venture line is a series of self-contained stand-alone spaceflight science missions called "EV-Mission". The first mission chosen for this competitively selected, cost and schedule capped, Principal Investigator-led opportunity is the CYclone Global Navigation Satellite System (CYGNSS). As specified in the defining Announcement of Opportunity, the Principal Investigator is held responsible for successfully achieving the science objectives of the selected mission and the management approach that he/she chooses to obtain those results has a significant amount of freedom as long as it meets the intent of key NASA guidance like NPR 7120.5 and 7123. CYGNSS is classified under NPR 7120.5E guidance as a Category 3 (low priority, low cost) mission and carries a Class D risk classification (low priority, high risk) per NPR 8705.4. As defined in the NPR guidance, Class D risk classification allows for a relatively broad range of implementation strategies. The management approach that will be utilized on CYGNSS is a streamlined implementation that starts with a higher risk tolerance posture at NASA and that philosophy flows all the way down to the individual part level.
Wells, James E.↗
Low-Cost, Class D Testing of Spacecraft Photovoltaic Systems Can Reduce Risk
The end-to-end verification of a spacecraft photovoltaic power generation system requires light! Specifically, the standard practice for doing so is the Large Area Pulsed Solar Simulation (LAPSS). A LAPSS test can characterize a photovoltaic system's efficiency via its response to rapidly applied impulses of simulated sunlight. However, a Class D program on a constrained budget and schedule may not have the resources to ship an entire satellite for a LAPSS test alone. Such was the case with the Lunar Atmospheric and Dust Environment Explorer (LADEE) program, which was also averse to the risk of hardware damage during shipment. When the Electrical Power System (EPS) team was denied a spacecraft-level LAPSS test, the lack of an end-to-end power generation test elevated to a project-level technical risk. The team pulled together very limited resources to not only eliminate the risk, but build a process to monitor the health of the system through mission operations. We discuss a process for performing a low-cost, end-to-end test of the LADEE photovoltaic system. The approach combines system-level functional test, panel-level performance results, and periodic inspection (and repair) up until launch. Following launch, mission operations tools are utilized to assess system performance based on a scant amount of data. The process starts in manufacturing at the subcontractor. The panel manufacturer provides functional test and LAPSS data on each individual panel. We apply an initial assumption that the per-panel performance is sufficient to meet the power generation requirements. The manufacturer's data is also carried as the performance allocation for each panel during EPS system modeling and initial mission operations. During integration and test, a high-power, professional theater lamp system provides simulated sunlight to each panel on the spacecraft, thereby permitting a true end-to-end system test. A passing test results in a step response to nearly full-rated current at the appropriate solar array switch in the power system. A metal-halide bulb, infrared imagers, and onboard spacecraft measurements are utilized to minimize risk of thermal damage during test. Data is provided to support test results for both passing and marginal panels. Prior to encapsulation in the launch vehicle, each panel is inspected for damage by the panel manufacturer. Cracked cells or other damage is amended on-site. Because the photovoltaic test system is inexpensive and portable, each repaired panel can be re-verified immediately. Post-launch, the photovoltaic system is again characterized for per-panel deviations from the manufacturer's performance test. This proved especially tricky as the LADEE spacecraft performs only one current measurement on the entire array. The algorithm for Matlab tools to assess panel performance based on spacecraft attitude is discussed. While not as precise and comprehensive as LAPSS, the LADEE approach leverages minimal resources into an ongoing assessment program that can be applied through numerous stages of the mission. The project takes a true Class D approach in assessing the technical value of a spacecraft level performance test versus the programmatic risk of shipping the spacecraft to another facility. The resources required are a fraction of that for a LAPSS test, and is easy to repeat. Further, the test equipment can be handed down to future projects without building an on-site facility.
photovoltaic↗
EMI / EMC Design for Class D Payloads (Resource Prospector / NIRVSS)
EMI/EMC techniques are applied to a Class D instrument (NIRVSS) to achieve low noise performance and reduce risk of EMI/EMC testing failures and/or issues during system integration and test. Basic techniques are not terribly expensive or complex, but do require close coordination between electrical and mechanical staff early in the design process. Low-cost methods to test subsystems on the bench without renting an EMI chamber are discussed. This method was applied to the NIRVSS instrument and achieved improvements up to 59dB on conducted emissions measurements between hardware revisions.
low noise↗
What Risks are Acceptable for a Class D Project?
This talk is intended to help small project proposers to navigate the process of deciding what risks would be acceptable in their Class D projects, as well as steering away from misinterpretations of risk to mean “doing something different”. This will be largely NASA centric, largely focused on science missions, but there will be more general takeaways.
risk↗
A class D dc amplifier with isolated output
Design and development of transformer coupled output circuit for class D dc amplifier
Honnell, M. A.↗
Initial Analysis of Digitally Enabled Cooperative Operations in Class D Terminal Airspace
The primary contribution of this paper is an initial analysis of integrating digitally enabled cooperative operations (or digital operations for short) with Visual Flight Rules (VFR) and Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations in the terminal airspace around a Class D airport, specifically around Fort Worth Alliance airport (KAFW). Enabled by connected digital technologies and automated information exchange, digital operations as envisioned would utilize cooperative practices and operator-responsible separation to ensure safety. In the present study, three conflict management configurations for digital operations were analyzed: 1) centralized with a single instance of a conflict management service to model a scenario with only one fleet operator conducting digital operations or all fleet operators utilizing the same service, 2) federated with two different instances to model a scenario with two different fleet operators conducting digital operations, and 3) fully distributed with a different instance for each digital operation. In simulations in which recorded tracks for VFR and IFR operations were played back and digital operations were modeled that would nominally arrive at KAFW once every 20 minutes (given no conflict resolution maneuvers), there were one or fewer losses of separation (LOS) across the three conflict management configurations. The same result was seen in simulations in which digital operations would nominally arrive at KAFW once every 10 minutes. However, in simulations in which digital operations would nominally arrive at KAFW once every 5 minutes, the number of LOS ranged between six and ten. This highlights the need for follow-on research to investigate the extent to which additional capabilities for digital operations, such as complexity management and/or flow organization, may be needed.
digitally enabled cooperative operations↗
Initial Analysis of Digitally Enabled Cooperative Operations in Class D Terminal Airspace
The primary contribution of this paper is an initial analysis of integrating digitally enabled cooperative operations (or digital operations for short) with Visual Flight Rules (VFR) and Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations in the terminal airspace around a Class D airport, specifically around Fort Worth Alliance airport (KAFW). Enabled by connected digital technologies and automated information exchange, digital operations as envisioned would utilize cooperative practices and operator-responsible separation to ensure safety. In the present study, three conflict management configurations for digital operations were analyzed: 1) centralized with a single instance of a conflict management service to model a scenario with only one fleet operator conducting digital operations or all fleet operators utilizing the same service, 2) federated with two different instances to model a scenario with two different fleet operators conducting digital operations, and 3) fully distributed with a different instance for each digital operation. In simulations in which recorded tracks for VFR and IFR operations were played back and digital operations were modeled that would nominally arrive at KAFW once every 20 minutes (given no conflict resolution maneuvers), there were one or fewer losses of separation (LOS) across the three conflict management configurations. The same result was seen in simulations in which digital operations would nominally arrive at KAFW once every 10 minutes. However, in simulations in which digital operations would nominally arrive at KAFW once every 5 minutes, the number of LOS ranged between six and ten. This highlights the need for follow-on research to investigate the extent to which additional capabilities for digital operations, such as complexity management and/or flow organization, may be needed.
digitally enabled cooperative operations, digital ↗
Isolated output for class-D dc amplifiers
Transformer-coupled output stage is used with pulse-width modulated class-D dc amplifiers. Circuit is comprised of two channels corresponding to negative and positive input signals. Amplitude of secondary-current triangular pulse is function of duration of driving pulse. Therefore, circuit converts pulse-width modulated driving signal to pulse-amplitude modulated signal.
Honnel, M. A.↗
Flight Team Development in Support of LCROSS - A Class D Mission
The LCROSS (Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite) project presented a number of challenges to the preparation for mission operations. A class D mission under NASA s risk tolerance scale, LCROSS was governed by a $79 million cost cap and a 29 month schedule from "authority to proceed" to flight readiness. LCROSS was NASA Ames Research Center s flagship mission in its return to spacecraft flight operations after many years of pursuing other strategic goals. As such, ARC needed to restore and update its mission support infrastructure, and in parallel, the LCROSS project had to newly define operational practices and to select and train a flight team combining experienced operators and staff from other arenas of ARC research. This paper describes the LCROSS flight team development process, which deeply involved team members in spacecraft and ground system design, implementation and test; leveraged collaborations with strategic partners; and conducted extensive testing and rehearsals that scaled in realism and complexity in coordination with ground system and spacecraft development. As a testament to the approach, LCROSS successfully met its full mission objectives, despite many in-flight challenges, with its impact on the lunar south pole on October 9, 2009.
Tompkins, Paul D.↗
Can Large Strategic Science Missions Benefit from Class-D/SmallSat Lesson’s Learned?
This presentation is a set of charts presented at the 2024 AIAA ASCEND conference. This report is the result of an activity sponsored by Dr. Wanda Peters, Deputy Associate Administrator of Programs, who tasked Florence Tan and Carolyn Mercer with gathering insights from SmallSat/ Class D missions that could be extrapolated to enhance Class A-C missions.
SmallSats↗