Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Mars architecture”

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

Marshall Application Realignment System (MARS) Architecture

The Marshall Application Realignment System (MARS) Architecture project was established to meet the certification requirements of the Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDAF) V2.0 Federal Enterprise Architecture Certification (FEAC) Institute program and to provide added value to the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Application Portfolio Management process. The MARS Architecture aims to: (1) address the NASA MSFC Chief Information Officer (CIO) strategic initiative to improve Application Portfolio Management (APM) by optimizing investments and improving portfolio performance, and (2) develop a decision-aiding capability by which applications registered within the MSFC application portfolio can be analyzed and considered for retirement or decommission. The MARS Architecture describes a to-be target capability that supports application portfolio analysis against scoring measures (based on value) and overall portfolio performance objectives (based on enterprise needs and policies). This scoring and decision-aiding capability supports the process by which MSFC application investments are realigned or retired from the application portfolio. The MARS Architecture is a multi-phase effort to: (1) conduct strategic architecture planning and knowledge development based on the DoDAF V2.0 six-step methodology, (2) describe one architecture through multiple viewpoints, (3) conduct portfolio analyses based on a defined operational concept, and (4) enable a new capability to support the MSFC enterprise IT management mission, vision, and goals. This report documents Phase 1 (Strategy and Design), which includes discovery, planning, and development of initial architecture viewpoints. Phase 2 will move forward the process of building the architecture, widening the scope to include application realignment (in addition to application retirement), and validating the underlying architecture logic before moving into Phase 3. The MARS Architecture key stakeholders are most interested in Phase 3 because this is where the data analysis, scoring, and recommendation capability is realized. Stakeholders want to see the benefits derived from reducing the steady-state application base and identify opportunities for portfolio performance improvement and application realignment.

Belshe, Andrea↗

Towards a Common Basis of Comparison Across a Broad Trade Space of Mars Architecture Options

Humanity’s fascination with Mars predates the advent of space access, but the coming-of-age of rocket propulsion in the mid-20th century provided the technological foundation for considering a human visit to the red planet. Werner von Braun’s “The Mars Project,” published in 1953, is acknowledged as the first integrated Mars mission architecture plan [1]; since then, the reformulation and refinement of Mars architectures and system concepts has been an ongoing activity, as continued study and planning for human Mars missions is necessary in order to incorporate evolving mission objectives, technology advancements, and the increasing body of knowledge regarding human factors and the various environments of space. Historical Mars architecture studies represent an enormous body of work, but apart from a couple of high-level reviews [2], tapping into the findings and philosophies of these varied works entails a tedious and time-consuming individual effort. The unfortunate result of the widely scattered corpus of Mars architectures is that knowledge and understanding acquired in previous studies is not consistently and effectively brought to bear in the studies of today. The primary vehicle for bringing forward past learning is human recall, which both is imperfect and experiences significant attrition. An effort is underway in the Advanced Concepts Office (ACO) at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center to recapture and re-baseline previous architecture studies in order to establish a broad basis of comparison for future Mars architecture studies. Recapturing involves gathering and organizing data and documentation from previous efforts; re-baselining entails developing models capable of reproducing the original results, and then utilizing these models to implement a common set of ground rules and assumptions across the resulting trade space of Mars architecture options. This paper will present the methodology ACO is employing in performing this architecture meta-study, including a discussion on the challenges involved in re-baselining without losing the intent behind previous concepts. As part of this discussion some initial results will be presented, along with a list of studies targeted for inclusion. It is expected that the completed basis of comparison results will be presented as a follow-on paper in the following year.

Stephen James Edwards↗

Cislunar Trajectory Design and Maneuver Autonomy for NASA's Moon to Mars Architecture

NASA’s Moon to Mars architecture is an ambitious roadmap of manned cislunar and deep space exploration. The extensive amount of orbital assets required will place a significant burden on ground-based resources, such as communication networks and operations facilities. Spacecraft autonomy is essential for maintaining a vast number of complex missions beyond Earth orbit. To achieve full autonomy, spacecraft must be able to employ methods of robust maneuver design without an explicit dependence on commands sent from the ground. This level of autonomy is needed not only for stationkeeping, but also for outbound transfers. To address the need of spacecraft maneuver design autonomy, this work investigates the use of neural networks (NNs) in a supervised learning environment. A supervised learning approach for NNs allows for a curated training data set, consisting exclusively of perturbations applied to a desired mission concept of operations (ConOps). The proposed approach allows humans on the ground to design a specific mission ConOps before flight, then employ NNs to fly the mission robustly and autonomously. This investigation numerically tests maneuver autonomy in four highly sensitive regions of flight: orbit raising, translunar injection burns, powered lunar flybys, and invariant manifold insertion burns. These straining cases are contextualized by testing them in a demonstration mission, targeting an Earth-Moon L3 orbit. The study first establishes feasibility by automating impulsive burn maneuvers. However, some guidance algorithms will need more intensive commands, such as inertial pointing and angular rates. To validate this method, NN maneuver autonomy is applied to a finite burn model of the demonstration mission. The use of sequential, mission specific maneuvers provide an appropriate testbed to demonstrate the robustness of a NN trained on feasible perturbed states. Moreover, these scenarios provide preliminary proof-of-concept for fully autonomous missions that execute maneuvers without dependence upon explicit command uplinks. As a result, the technological advancement proposed in this work may significantly ease the strain on ground-based mission operations. This would enable complex and autonomous mission execution in cislunar and deep space regimes, filling a technology gap required to support future manned missions.

NASA↗

NASA’s Strategic Analysis Cycle 2021 (SAC21) Human Mars Architecture

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Mars Architecture Team (MAT) was challenged to develop a mission architecture capable of transporting humans to the surface of Mars and back as fast—and as soon—as practical. This challenge represented a significant departure from previous approaches that minimized Earth-launched mass and maximized in-space transportation efficiency, often resulting in roundtrip missions of three years or more in duration. In the interest of crew health, MAT’s cross-Agency team of subject matter experts was challenged to develop an architecture capable of shortening crew time away from Earth to about two years. MAT was given specific mission constraints, such as number of crew, as well as mandates to minimize surface infrastructure as much as possible and to incorporate nuclear transportation options. The resulting MAT-developed concept, referred to here as the Strategic Analysis Cycle 2021 (SAC21) architecture, leverages Artemis elements and emerging commercial capabilities for cargo and logistics launches, and features a hybrid Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP)/Chemical transportation system able to complete the 1.8 billion kilometer round-trip journey to Mars and back in 760 to 850 days transit time for the 2039 Earth departure opportunity. Three Mars Descent Systems (MDS), each capable of landing about 25 metric tons of useful cargo on the surface of Mars, would be pre-deployed in advance of crew departure from Earth; two of these MDS’s would deliver a partially fueled Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV), a fission power system, surface mobility, and additional MAV propellant. To minimize surface infrastructure, only two of the four Mars crew would descend and live in an MDS-landed pressurized rover, exploring the martian surface for 30 martian days, or sols, before returning to Mars orbit aboard their MAV and rejoining the other two crew on the Deep Space Transport for the Earth return voyage. Specifics of many of these architecture elements are detailed in separate technical publications; this paper outlines the end-to-end integrated architecture performance and concept of operations, including synergies with Artemis lunar architecture elements. It is important to note that NASA does not have a formal human Mars program and no decisions have been made; the architecture described here is intended to fill in an often-overlooked corner of the trade space, helping to complete the menu of options available to decision-makers as they chart the course for humans to Mars.

exploration↗

Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate: Moon to Mars Architecture Definition Document

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) explores the unknown in air and space, innovates for the benefit of humanity, and inspires the world through discovery. Extending the reach of humanity through the human exploration of the Moon, Mars, and beyond is key to that mission. NASA’s Moon to Mars Strategy and Objectives document establishes long-term goals and objectives for crewed deep space exploration; however, satisfying NASA’s Moon to Mars Objectives requires an innovative approach to the definition, management, and execution of NASA’s Moon to Mars Architecture. An architecture offers a high-level unifying structure and defines a system. It provides rules, guidelines, and constraints that define a cohesive and coherent framework that identifies constituent parts, relationships, and connections and establishes how those parts fit and work together. This Architecture Definition Document (ADD) establishes the process for the decomposition of objectives empowers the agency’s success in achieving human exploration of the cosmos. NASA updates this document annually to reflect the maturation of the architecture and the progress NASA and partners make toward achieving exploration objectives. The ADD is not a manifest or requirements document. Instead, it serves as a tool for the programs, projects, and engineers who will implement and execute NASA’s bold ambitions for crewed exploration of deep space. As established in the Moon to Mars Strategy and Objectives, “Why” we explore encompasses three pillars: Science, Inspiration, and National Posture. Ensuring success in all three areas requires an architectural approach that incorporates innovation, collaboration, and partnerships that can be sustained across a multi-decadal effort. This second revision (Rev-B) of the ADD, developed to support NASA’s 2024 Architecture Concept Review (ACR), incorporates several key updates to support the continued evolution of the architecture. Since the last revision of the ADD, NASA has significantly improved the clarity of the objective decomposition, which distills exploration objectives into the characteristics and needs and use cases and functions needed to achieve them. The updated decomposition incorporates findings from internal studies and diverse stakeholder feedback. A model-based systems engineering approach ensures coherence and consistency, removing inconsistency and repetition. Revision B also incorporates advancements to NASA’s Mars architecture, including insight into initial capabilities, systems, and operations necessary to support the Humans to Mars segment. Updates to objective decomposition for Mars add significant detail to the ADD and hint at areas of forward work and future study. An appendix adds greater depth in the future decisions needed for Mars that will drive lunar needs. They are not the only decisions to be made, but they will have huge effects on subsequent decisions. NASA continues to introduce new exploration systems into the architecture. Two new elements — initial surface habitat and lunar surface cargo lander—successfully passed mission concept review in 2024 as a result of extensive analysis, concept refinement, and studies. These elements and their respective reference missions appear in this revision. NASA also continues to apply architecture processes to cross-agency efforts and coordination with external stakeholders by including definitions of architecture technology gaps — essential areas for engagement across and beyond the agency. The technology gaps appendix identifies areas that need attention and innovation to enable future exploration. In publishing this information, NASA communicates the technologies and capabilities that may benefit from partnership with industry, academia, other U.S. government agencies, and international space agencies. Ultimately, NASA established the Moon to Mars Architecture approach to communicate and facilitate humanity’s journey into the universe according to the principles and recurring tenets of NASA’s Moon to Mars Strategy and Objectives. The NASA architecture team thanks their many stakeholders, participants, and partners for their efforts to review and provide feedback. Their support has been critical to the success of this approach.

Elements↗

NASA’s Strategic Analysis Cycle 2021 (SAC21) Human Mars Architecture

[Note: this is the presentation for a companion paper with the following abstract] The National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Mars Architecture Team (MAT) was challenged to develop a mission architecture capable of transporting humans to the surface of Mars and back as fast—and as soon—as practical. This challenge represented a significant departure from previous approaches that minimized Earth-launched mass and maximized in-space transportation efficiency, often resulting in roundtrip missions of three years or more in duration. In the interest of crew health, MAT’s cross-Agency team of subject matter experts was challenged to develop an architecture capable of shortening crew time away from Earth to about two years. MAT was given specific mission constraints, such as number of crew, as well as mandates to minimize surface infrastructure as much as possible and to incorporate nuclear transportation options. The resulting MAT-developed concept, referred to here as the Strategic Analysis Cycle 2021 (SAC21) architecture, leverages Artemis elements and emerging commercial capabilities for cargo and logistics launches, and features a hybrid Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP)/Chemical transportation system able to complete the 1.8 billion kilometer round-trip journey to Mars and back in 760 to 850 days transit time for the 2039 Earth departure opportunity. Three Mars Descent Systems (MDS), each capable of landing about 25 metric tons of useful cargo on the surface of Mars, would be pre-deployed in advance of crew departure from Earth; two of these MDS’s would deliver a partially fueled Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV), a fission power system, surface mobility, and additional MAV propellant. To minimize surface infrastructure, only two of the four Mars crew would descend and live in an MDS-landed pressurized rover, exploring the martian surface for 30 martian days, or sols, before returning to Mars orbit aboard their MAV and rejoining the other two crew on the Deep Space Transport for the Earth return voyage. Specifics of many of these architecture elements are detailed in separate technical publications; this paper outlines the end-to-end integrated architecture performance and concept of operations, including synergies with Artemis lunar architecture elements. It is important to note that NASA does not have a formal human Mars program and no decisions have been made; the architecture described here is intended to fill in an often-overlooked corner of the trade space, helping to complete the menu of options available to decision-makers as they chart the course for humans to Mars. Note: Slide 9 contains a ~2 min video, best viewed when downloaded. Once downloaded to begin video you may be requested to hit options and Trust this document.

Long-duration spaceflight↗

Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate (ESDMD) Moon-to-Mars Architecture Definition Document

There are many opportunities in executing the ambitious Moon-to-Mars efforts through an integrated architecture. NASA addresses this in its Moon-to-Mars Strategy and Objectives Development2 document (hereafter referred to as the M2M Strategy). Many of these opportunities involve establishing a system engineering framework that can support the breadth of necessary program and system contributions. By applying these needs to nearer-term lunar development, NASA will be instituting the process, procedures, and techniques needed to enable longer-term Mars goals and more. Some of the challenges being addressed in the M2M Strategy are associated with the architecture definition and include broad/changing goals, funding, and external pressures/influences. This document and the methodology outlined for architecture definition have been crafted to contend with these using an iterative and adaptable framework. The primary purpose of the Architecture Definition Document (ADD) is to capture the methodology, organization, and decomposition necessary to translate the broad objectives outlined in the M2M Strategy into functions and use cases that can be allocated to implementable programs and projects. Inherent in this process will be the need to communicate the long-term vision, maintain traceability to responsible parties, and iterate on the architectural implementation as innovations and solutions develop. This document will be updated and improved in conjunction with the Architecture Concept Review (ACR) which will be held annually to help unify the Agency and to get buy-in and input from across the Agency on the human exploration architecture. The annual nature of the process provides the opportunity to continually incorporate new developments in technologies and new partnerships, whether they be with industry, the U.S. Government, international entities, or academia.

Moon-to-Mars Strategy↗

Mars 2024/2026 Pathfinder Mission: Mars Architectures, Systems, and Technologies for Exploration and Resources Project

Integrate In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) sub-systems and examine advanced capabilities and technologies to verify Mars 2024 Forward architecture precursor pathfinder options: Integrated spacecraft/surface infrastructure fluid architecture: propulsion, power, life support center dot Power system feed and propellant scavenging from propulsion system center dot High quality oxygen for life support and EVA Fluid/cryogenic zero-loss transfer and long-term storage center dot Rapid depot-to-rover/spacecraft center dot Slow ISRU plant-to-ascent vehicle Integration of ISRU consumable production center dot Oxygen only from Mars atmosphere carbon dioxide center dot Oxygen, fuel, water, from extraterrestrial soil/regolith Test bed to evaluate long duration life, operations, maintenance on hardware, sensors, and autonomy

Technology Portfolio System↗