Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO)”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2009

Epithermal Neutron Observations and Lunar South Pole Targeting for LCROSS Impact Planning using the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO), Lunar Exploring Neutron Detector (LEND)

LCROSS impact targeting and planning efforts included quantifying South Polar epithermal neutron flux depressions in early LEND mapped results to maximize the expected plume Hydrogen (H) yield. Epithermal neutron surface fluxes are a key geochemical indicator of surface Hydrogen (H) concentration inferred to be elevated in polar permanent shadow regions (PSR). LCROSS impact target regions were delineated as (PSR) using illumination modeling of polar topography. To quantify targets potential yield for LCROSS, LEND epithermal neutron flux observations were integrated over LCROSS targets of interest and compared to background observations. Discussion will define methods review impact prior estimates and contrast post impact results.

McClanahan, T. P.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Stationkeeping for the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO)

The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) is scheduled to launch in 2008 as the first mission under NASA's Vision for Space Exploration. Following several weeks in a quasi-frozen commissioning orbit, LRO will fly in a 50 km mean altitude lunar polar orbit. During the one year mission duration, the orbital dynamics of a low lunar orbit force LRO to perform periodic sets of stationkeeping maneuvers. This paper explores the characteristics of low lunar orbits and explains how the LRO stationkeeping plan is designed to accommodate the dynamics in such an orbit. The stationkeeping algorithm used for LRO must meet five mission constraints. These five constraints are to maintain ground station contact during maneuvers, to control the altitude variation of the orbit, to distribute periselene equally between northern and southern hemispheres, to match eccentricity at the beginning and the end of the sidereal period, and to minimize stationkeeping deltaV. This paper addresses how the maneuver plan for LRO is designed to meet all of the above constraints.

Beckman, Mark↗
NASA NTRS2007

Stationkeeping for the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO)

The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) is scheduled to launch in 2008 as the first mission under NASA's Vision for Space Exploration. Follo wing several weeks in a quasi-frozen commissioning orbit, LRO will fl y in a 50 km mean altitude lunar polar orbit. During the one year mis sion duration, the orbital dynamics of a low lunar orbit force LRO to perform periodic sets of stationkeeping maneuvers. This paper explor es the characteristics of low lunar orbits and explains how the LRO s tationkeeping plan is designed to accommodate the dynamics in such an orbit. The stationkeeping algorithm used for LRO must meet five miss ion constraints. These five constraints are to maintain ground statio n contact during maneuvers, to control the altitude variation of the orbit, to distribute periselene equally between northern and southern hemispheres, to match eccentricity at the beginning and the end of the sidereal period, and to minimize stationkeeping (Delta)V. This pape r addresses how the maneuver plan for LRO is designed to meet all of the above constraints.

Beckman, Mark↗
NASA NTRS2010

Launch and Commissioning of the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO)

The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) launched on June 18, 2009 from the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. LRO, designed, built, and operated by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, MD, is gathering crucial data on the lunar environment that will help astronauts prepare for long-duration lunar expeditions. To date, the Guidance, Navigation and Control (GN&C) subsystem has operated nominally and met all requirements. However, during the early phase of the mission, the GN&C Team encountered some anomalies. For example, during the Solar Array and High Gain Antenna deployments, one of the safing action points tripped, which was not expected. Also, the spacecraft transitioned to its safe hold mode, SunSafe, due to encountering an end of file for an ephemeris table. During the five-day lunar acquisition, one of the star trackers triggered the spacecraft to transition into a safe hold configuration, the cause of which was determined. These events offered invaluable insight to better understand the performance of the system they designed. An overview of the GN&C subsystem will be followed by a mission timeline. Then, interesting flight performance as well as anomalies encountered by the GN&C Team will be discussed in chronological order.

Shah, Neerav↗
NASA NTRS2010

Solar Array Disturbances to Spacecraft Pointing During the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) Mission

The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO), the first spacecraft to support NASA s return to the Moon, launched on June 18, 2009 from the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station aboard an Atlas V launch vehicle. It was initially inserted into a direct trans-lunar trajectory to the Moon. After a five day transit to the Moon, LRO was inserted into the Lunar orbit and successfully lowered to a low altitude elliptical polar orbit for spacecraft commissioning. Successful commissioning was completed in October 2009 when LRO was placed in its near circular mission orbit with an approximate altitude of 50km. LRO will spend at least one year orbiting the Moon, collecting lunar environment science and mapping data, utilizing a suite of seven instruments to enable future human exploration. The objective is to provide key science data necessary to facilitate human return to the Moon as well as identification of opportunities for future science missions. LRO's instrument suite will provide the high resolution imaging data with sub-meter accuracy, highly accurate lunar cartographic maps, mineralogy mapping, amongst other science data of interest. LRO employs a 3-axis stabilized attitude control system (ACS) whose primary control mode, the "Observing Mode", provides Lunar nadir, off-nadir, and inertial fine pointing for the science data collection and instrument calibration. This controller combines the capability of fine pointing with on-demand large angle full-sky attitude reorientation. It provides simplicity of spacecraft operation as well as additional flexibility for science data collection. A conventional suite of ACS components is employed in the Observing Mode to meet the pointing and control objectives. Actuation is provided by a set of four reaction wheels developed in-house at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC). Attitude feedback is provided by a six state Kalman filter which utilizes two SELEX Galileo Star Trackers for attitude updates, and a single Honeywell Miniature Inertial Measurement Unit (MIMU) to provide body rates for attitude propagation. Rate is computed by differentiating accumulated angle provided by the MIMU. The Observing Mode controller is required to maintain fine pointing while a large fully-articulated solar array (SA) maintains its panel normal to the solar incidence. This paper describes the disturbances to the attitude control resulting from the SA articulation. Observing Mode performance in the presence of this disturbance was assessed while the spacecraft was in an initial elliptical low altitude orbit during the commissioning phase, which started about two weeks after launch and lasted for 90 days. LRO demonstrated excellent pointing performance during Observing Mode nadir and inertial attitude target operations during this phase. Transient LRO attitude errors observed during commissioning resulted primarily from three sources, Diviner instrument calibrations, RW zero crossings, and SA articulation. Even during times of considerable disturbance from SA articulation, the attitude errors were maintained below the statistical attitude error requirement level of 15 arc-sec (3 sigma).

Calhoun, Philip↗
NASA NTRS2010

Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO): Observations for Lunar Exploration and Science

The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) was implemented to facilitate scientific and engineering-driven mapping of the lunar surface at new spatial scales and with new remote sensing methods, identify safe landing sites, search for in situ resources, and measure the space radiation environment. After its successful launch on June 18,2009, the LRO spacecraft and instruments were activated and calibrated in an eccentric polar lunar orbit until September 15, when LRO was moved to a circular polar orbit with a mean altitude of 50 km. LRO will operate for at least one year to support the goals of NASA's Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD), and for at least two years of extended operations for additional lunar science measurements supported by NASA's Science Mission Directorate (SMD). LRO carries six instruments with associated science and exploration investigations, and a telecommunications/radar technology demonstration. The LRO instruments are: Cosmic Ray Telescope for the Effects of Radiation (CRaTER), Diviner Lunar Radiometer Experiment (DLRE), Lyman-Alpha Mapping Project (LAMP), Lunar Exploration Neutron Detector (LEND), Lunar Orbiter Laser Altimeter (LOLA), and Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera (LROC). The technology demonstration is a compact, dual-frequency, hybrid polarity synthetic aperture radar instrument (Mini-RF). LRO observations also support the Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite (LCROSS), the lunar impact mission that was co-manifested with LRO on the Atlas V (401) launch vehicle. This paper describes the LRO objectives and measurements that support exploration of the Moon and that address the science objectives outlined by the National Academy of Science's report on the Scientific Context for Exploration of the Moon (SCEM). We also describe data accessibility by the science and exploration community.

Vondrak, Richard↗
NASA NTRS2010

Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) Sun Safe Mode

The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO), a spacecraft designed and built at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration s (NASA) Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) in Greenbelt, MD, was launched on June 18, 2009 from Cape Canaveral. It is currently in orbit about the Moon taking detailed science measurements and providing a highly accurate mapping of the suface in preparation for the future return of astronauts to a permanent moon base. Onboard the spacecraft is a complex set of algorithms designed by the attitude control engineers at GSFC to control the pointig for all operational events, including anomalies that require the spacecraft to be put into a well known attitude configuration for a sufficiently long duration to allow for the investigation and correction of the anomaly. GSFC level requirements state that each spacecraft s control system design must include a configuration for this pointing and lso be able to maintain a thermally safe and power positive attitude. This stable control algorithm for anomalous events is commonly referred to as the safe mode and consists of control logic thatwill put the spacecraft in this safe configuration defined by the spacecraft s hardware, power and environment capabilities and limitations. The LRO Sun Safe mode consists of a coarse sun-pointing set of algorithms that puts the spacecraft into this thermally safe and power positive attitude and can be achieved wihin a required amount of time from any initial attitude, provided that the system momentum is within the momentum capability of the reaction wheels. On LRO the Sun Safe mode makes use of coarse sun sensors (CSS), an inertial reference unit (IRU) and reaction wheels (RW) to slew the spacecraft to a solar inertial pointing. The CSS and reaction wheels have some level of redundancy because of their numbers. However, the IRU is a single-point-failure piece of hardware. Without the rate information provided by the IRU, the Sun Safe control algorithms could not maintain the required pointing, so a sub-mode of the Sun Safe mode that does not use the IRU was designed. This submode, referred to as the Sun Safe Gyroless control mode, consists of an algorithm that estimates rate information from the CSS and the RW measurements. RW momentum information is used to estimate the body rate parallel to the target sunline, which CSS alone would not be able to observe. Sun Safe can be autonomously, or via ground command, entered from any other control mode and in the event the IRU is not providing rate information, the control mode is switched to the gyroless submode. This paper looks at the design of the Sun Safe modes and discusses the constraints placed on the algorithm and how the mode wored around these constraints. Items of particular interest include CSS placement on the Solar Array (SA) and its implications to design, estimation of body rate information for the Sun Safe Gyroless control mode, and the effect of solar eclipse on each of the Sun Safe modes. Placing CSS on the SA was necessary for the means to put the Sun along the targeted sun-line, nominally normal to the SA panels, for all operational considerations. This had design implications for determining a sun vector during normal SA operations, if one or both gimbals become inoperable and when the SA is in a stowed configuration. The ability of body rate estimation in Sun Safe Gyroless not only uses CSS sun vector data but requires RW momentum measuremens to estimate rates parallel to the sun-line. LRO encounters solar eclipses of some length for most of its orbits about the Moon. With the lack of CSS measurement data a design was implemented in both Sun Safe and Sun Safe Gyroless, they differ because of having or not having IRU measurement data, to carry the spacecraft through these eclipse periods. This paper also includes some discussion of sun avoidance and how it affected design decisions during nominal and eclipse perids for each of the Sun Safe modes.

Garrick, Joseph↗
NASA NTRS2008

Special ISO Class 6 Cleanroom for the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) Project

The parameters and restrictions for a horizontal flow ISO Class 6 Clean room to support the assembly of the new LRO (Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter) were unusual. The project time line was critical. A novel Clean room design was developed and built within the time restraints. This paper describes the design criteria, timing, successful performance, and future benefits of this unique Clean room project.

Matthews, Richard A.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) Rapid Thermal Design Development

The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) project had a rapid development schedule starting with project conception in spring of 2004, instrument and launch vehicle selection late in 2005 and then launch in early 2009. The lunar thermal environment is one of the harshest in our solar system with the heavy infrared loading of the moon due to low albedo, lack of lunar atmosphere, and low effective regolith conduction. This set of constraints required a thermal design which maximized performance (minimized radiator area and cold control heater power) and minimized thermal hardware build at the orbiter level (blanketing, and heater service). The orbiter design located most of the avionics on an isothermalized heat pipe panel called the IsoThermal Panel (ITP). The ITP was coupled by dual bore heat pipes to an Optical Solar Reflector (OSR) covered heat pipe radiator. By coupling all of the avionics to one system, the hardware was simplified. The seven instruments were mainly heritage instruments which resulted in their desired radiators being located by their heritage design. This minimized instrument redesigns and therefore allowed them to be delivered earlier, though it resulted in a more complex orbiter level blanket and heater service design. Three of the instruments were mounted on a tight pointing M55J optical bench that needed to be covered in heaters to maintain pointing. Two were mounted to spacecraft controlled radiators. One was mounted to the ITP Dual Bores. The last was mounted directly to the bus structure on the moon facing panel. The propulsion system utilized four-20 pound insertion thrusters and eight-5 pound attitude control thrusters (ACS) in addition to 1000 kg of fuel in two large tanks. The propulsion system had a heater cylinder and a heated mounting deck for the insertion thrusters which coupled most of the propulsion design together simplifying the heater design. The High Gain Antenna System (HGAS) and Solar Array System (SAS) used dual axis actuator gimbal systems. HGAS required additional boom heaters to cool the approximately 10 W of RF losses thru the rotary joints and wave guides from the 40 W Ka system. By design this module needed a fair amount of heater, blanketing, and radiator complexity. The SAS system required a separate cable wrap radiator to help cool the Solar Array harness which dissipated 30 W thru the actuators and cable wraps. This module also was complex.

Baker, Charles↗
NASA NTRS2011

Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) Thermal On-Orbit Performance

The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) was launched on June 18, 2009. The nominal mission ended on September 15, 2010 and LRO is now on a four-year extended mission. The LRO performances in hot and cold cases are compared to pre-launch analysis predicts, and operational lessons learned are discussed. One instrument has required tighter-than-anticipated thermal control, and two others have frequently requested unanticipated calibration maneuvers that had to be evaluated for their thermal performance. A series of off nadir thermal analyses of the entire orbiter were performed prior to launch, and these predictions are compared to actual maneuvers, with a discussion of the process by which maneuvers can be rapidly evaluated for thermal concerns. On December 21st, 2010, LRO experienced its first severe Lunar Eclipse. Operationally, this required the Spacecraft to pre-heat its main avionics panel in order to minimize control heater power during the period when the Earth blocks the sun from the moon. The operational design and in-flight performance are summarized.

Baker, Charles↗
NASA NTRS2008

Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) Navigation Overview

This viewgraph presentation is an overview of the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO), with emphasis on the navigation and plans for the mission. The objective of the LRO mission is to conduct investigations that will be specifically target to prepare for and support future human exploration of the Moon. There is a review of the scientific instruments on board the LRO and an overview of the phases of the planned trajectory.

Lamb, Rivers↗
NASA NTRS2010

A General Closed-Form Solution for the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) Antenna Pointing System

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration s (NASA) Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) launched on June 18, 2009 from the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station aboard an Atlas V launch vehicle into a direct insertion trajectory to the Moon LRO, designed, built, and operated by the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, MD, is gathering crucial data on the lunar environment that will help astronauts prepare for long-duration lunar expeditions. During the mission s nominal life of one year its six instruments and one technology demonstrator will find safe landing site, locate potential resources, characterize the radiation environment and test new technology. To date, LRO has been operating well within the bounds of its requirements and has been collecting excellent science data images taken from the LRO Camera Narrow Angle Camera (LROC NAC) of the Apollo landing sites have appeared on cable news networks. A significant amount of information on LRO s science instruments is provided at the LRO mission webpage. LRO s Attitude Control System (ACS), in addition to controlling the orientation of the spacecraft is also responsible for pointing the High Gain Antenna (HGA). A dual-axis (or double-gimbaled) antenna, deployed on a meter-long boom, is required to point at a selected Earth ground station. Due to signal loss over the distance from the Moon to Earth, pointing precision for the antenna system is very tight. Since the HGA has to be deployed in spaceflight, its exact geometry relative to the spacecraft body is uncertain. In addition, thermal distortions and mechanical errors/tolerances must be characterized and removed to realize the greatest gain from the antenna system. These reasons necessitate the need for an in-flight calibration. Once in orbit around the moon, a series of attitude maneuvers was conducted to provide data needed to determine optimal parameters to load onboard, which would account for the environmental and mechanical errors at any antenna orientation. The nominal geometry for the HGA involves an outer gimbal axis that is exactly perpendicular to the inner gimbal axis, and a target direction that is exactly perpendicular to the outer gimbal axis. For this nominal geometry, closed-form solutions of the desired gimbal angles are simple to get for a desired target direction specified in the spacecraft body fame. If the gimbal axes and the antenna boresight are slightly misaligned, the nominal closed-form solution is not sufficiently accurate for computing the gimbal angles needed to point at a target. In this situation, either a general closed-form solution has to be developed for a mechanism with general geometries, or a correction scheme has to be applied to the nominal closed-form solutions. The latter has been adopted for Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) as can be seen in Reference 1, and the former has been used for LRO. The advantage of the general closed-form solution is the use of a small number of parameters for the correction of nominal solutions, especially in the regions near singularities. Singularities here refer to cases when the nominal closed-form solutions have two or more solutions. Algorithm complexity, however, is the disadvantage of the general closed-form solution.

Shah, Neerav↗
NASA NTRS2011

Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) Observations with the Lunar Exploration Neutron Detector (LEND): Neutron Suppression Regions (NSR) and Polar Hydrogen

Orbital detection of neutrons has become the dominant remote sensing technique for detecting and inferring H concentrations and its spatial distribution beneath planetary surfaces [Lawrence et al, (2010) Icarus, 205, pp. 195-209, Mitrofanov et al (2007) Science 297(5578), 78-81]. Indications for the presence of localized and relatively high water content was provided by LRO and LCROSS. LEND identified Cabeus, as the most promising LCROSS impact site [Mitrofanov I. et al. (2010) Science, 330, 483], and instruments onboard LRO and LCROSS have measured signatures of water, H2 and other volatiles in the impact plume [Colaprete A. et al. (2010) Science, 339,463, Gladstone R. et al. (2010) Science, 330, 472].

Chin, G.↗
NASA NTRS2010

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

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

Garrick, Joseph↗
NASA NTRS2010

A Modified Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) High Gain Antenna (HGA) Controller Based on Flight Performance

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) was launched on June 18, 2009 and is currently in a 50 km mean altitude polar orbit around the Moon. LRO was designed and built by the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, MD. The spacecraft is three-axis stabilized via the attitude control system (ACS), which is composed of various control modes using different sets of sensors and actuators. In addition to pointing the spacecraft, the ACS is responsible for pointing LRO s two appendages, the Solar Array (SA) and the High Gain Antenna (HGA). This study reviews LRO s HGA control system. Starting with an overview of the HGA system, the paper delves into the single input single output (SISO) linear analysis followed by the controller design. Based on flight results, an alternate control scheme is devised to address inherent features in the flight control system. The modified control scheme couples the HGA loop with the spacecraft pointing control loop, and through analysis is shown to be stable and improve transient performance. Although proposed, the LRO project decided against implementing this modification.

Shah, Neerav↗
NASA NTRS2010

Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) Thruster Control Mode Design and Flight Experience

National Aeronautics and Space Administration s (NASA) Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) in Greenbelt, MD, designed, built, tested, and launched the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station on June 18, 2009. The LRO spacecraft is the first operational spacecraft designed to support NASA s return to the Moon, as part of the Vision for Space Exploration. LRO was launched aboard an Atlas V 401 launch vehicle into a direct insertion trajectory to the Moon. Twenty-four hours after separation the propulsion system was used to perform a mid-course correction maneuver. Four days after the mid-course correction a series of propulsion maneuvers were executed to insert LRO into its commissioning orbit. The commission period lasted eighty days and this followed by a second set of thruster maneuvers that inserted LRO into its mission orbit. To date, the spacecraft has been gathering invaluable data in support of human s future return to the moon. The LRO Attitude Control Systems (ACS) contains two thruster based control modes: Delta-H and Delta-V. The design of the two controllers are similar in that they are both used for 3-axis control of the spacecraft with the Delta-H controller used for momentum management and the Delta-V controller used for orbit adjust and maintenance maneuvers. In addition to the nominal purpose of the thruster modes, the Delta-H controller also has the added capability of performing a large angle slew maneuver. A suite of ACS components are used by the thruster based control modes, for both initialization and control. For initialization purposes, a star tracker or the Kalman Filter solution is used for providing attitude knowledge and upon entrance into the thruster based control modes attitude knowledge is provided via rate propagation using a inertial reference unit (IRU). Rate information for the controller is also supplied by the IRU. Three-axis control of the spacecraft in the thruster modes is provided by eight 5-lbf class attitude control thrusters configured in two sets of four thrusters for redundancy purposes. Four additional 20-lbf class thrusters configured in two sets of two thrusters are used for Lunar Orbit Insertion maneuvers. The propulsion system is one the few systems on-board the LRO spacecraft that has built in redundancy. The Delta-H controller consists of a Proportional-Derivative (PD) controller with a structural filter on the thrusters and a Proportional controller on the reaction wheels. The PD control that employs the thrusters is used for attitude and rate control. The Proportional controller on the reaction wheels is used for commanding the wheels to a new momentum state. The ground commands used for the Delta-H controller are the system momentum vector, reaction wheel momentum, maximum expected command time, and which set of attitude control thrusters to use. The ability to command both the system momentum vector and reaction wheel momentum in the Delta-H controller provides both a capability and an additional source of operator error. Large angle slews via the Delta-H controller is achievable via this commands because these commands are used for the exit mode criteria. Setting these commands to non-consistent values prevents the mode from exiting nominally.

Hsu, Oscar C.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) Command and Data Handling Flight Electronics Subsystem

A document describes a high-performance, modular, and state-of-the-art Command and Data Handling (C&DH) system developed for use on the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) mission. This system implements a complete hardware C&DH subsystem in a single chassis enclosure that includes a processor card, 48 Gbytes of solid-state recorder memory, data buses including MIL-STD-1553B, custom RS-422, SpaceWire, analog collection, switched power services, and interfaces to the Ka-Band and S-Band RF communications systems. The C&DH team capitalized on extensive experience with hardware and software with PCI bus design, SpaceWire networking, Actel FPGA design, digital flight design techniques, and the use of VxWorks for the real-time operating system. The resulting hardware architecture was implemented to meet the LRO mission requirements. The C&DH comprises an enclosure, a backplane, a low-voltage power converter, a single-board computer, a communications interface board, four data storage boards, a housekeeping and digital input/output board, and an analog data acquisition board. The interfaces between the C&DH and the instruments and avionics are connected through a SpaceWire network, a MIL-STD-1553 bus, and a combination of synchronous and asynchronous serial data transfers over RS-422 and LVDS (low-voltage differential-signaling) electrical interfaces. The C&DH acts as the spacecraft data system with an instrument data manager providing all software and internal bus scheduling, ingestion of science data, distribution of commands, and performing science operations in real time.

Nguyen, Quang↗
NASA NTRS2009

The Lunar Regolith as a Remote Sensing Target for the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO)

Of the 6 instruments and one technology demonstration aboard the LRO, only CRaTER does not measure some kind of interaction of particles with the lunar regolith. LEND detects neutron fluence that contains information about the number density of protons in the upper regolith. To infer the presence of protons, the PI must assume a model that characterizes the surface as a collection of atoms. Thus, LEND does not sense the regolith as a structure. LROC, LOLA, and LAMP sense reflected photons whose wavelength is much shorter than the median particle size in the regolith. The photons interact with electrons, either in atomic shells or in chemical bonds. These interactions occur within a nanometer or so of the surface of a particle. Thus, the particles are macroscopic objects and models of the reflection process invoke ray-tracing optics. DIVINER senses photons that have been emitted by surface particles through thermal phonon processes. The wavelengths detected by the instrument are of the same order as the median particle size, and the photons contain information on particle dimensions as well as the molecular bonds in the constituent compounds. The Mini-RF synthetic aperture radar generates and detects photons of a few centimeters wavelength that interact with the regolith as a dielectric, the dielectric properties of the particulate component being described through effective medium theory. However, the interaction with rocks (macroscopic objects of interest to geologists) can be characterized using Fresnel or Mie models of electromagnetic properties.

Mendell, Wendell W.↗