Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Options”

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 NTRS2017

Efficient Trajectory Options Allocation for the Collaborative Trajectory Options Program

The Collaborative Trajectory Options Program (CTOP) is a Traffic Management Initiative (TMI) intended to control the air traffic flow rates at multiple specified Flow Constrained Areas (FCAs), where demand exceeds capacity. CTOP allows flight operators to submit the desired Trajectory Options Set (TOS) for each affected flight with associated Relative Trajectory Cost (RTC) for each option. CTOP then creates a feasible schedule that complies with capacity constraints by assigning affected flights with routes and departure delays in such a way as to minimize the total cost while maintaining equity across flight operators. The current version of CTOP implements a Ration-by-Schedule (RBS) scheme, which assigns the best available options to flights based on a First-Scheduled-First-Served heuristic. In the present study, an alternative flight scheduling approach is developed based on linear optimization. Results suggest that such an approach can significantly reduce flight delays, in the deterministic case, while maintaining equity as defined using a Max-Min fairness scheme.

Traffic Management Initiative (TMI)↗
NASA NTRS1985

Space station data system analysis/architecture study. Task 2: Options development, DR-5. Volume 2: Design options

The primary objective of Task 2 is the development of an information base that will support the conduct of trade studies and provide sufficient data to make key design/programmatic decisions. This includes: (1) the establishment of option categories that are most likely to influence Space Station Data System (SSDS) definition; (2) the identification of preferred options in each category; and (3) the characterization of these options with respect to performance attributes, constraints, cost and risk. This volume contains the options development for the design category. This category comprises alternative structures, configurations and techniques that can be used to develop designs that are responsive to the SSDS requirements. The specific areas discussed are software, including data base management and distributed operating systems; system architecture, including fault tolerance and system growth/automation/autonomy and system interfaces; time management; and system security/privacy. Also discussed are space communications and local area networking.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2017

Efficient Trajectory Options Allocation for the Collaborative Trajectory Options Program

The Collaborative Trajectory Options Program (CTOP) is a Traffic Management Initiative (TMI) intended to control the air traffic flow rates at multiple specified Flow Constrained Areas (FCAs), where demand exceeds capacity. CTOP allows flight operators to submit the desired Trajectory Options Set (TOS) for each affected flight with associated Relative Trajectory Cost (RTC) for each option. CTOP then creates a feasible schedule that complies with capacity constraints by assigning affected flights with routes and departure delays in such a way as to minimize the total cost while maintaining equity across flight operators. The current version of CTOP implements a Ration-by-Schedule (RBS) scheme, which assigns the best available options to flights based on a First-Scheduled-First-Served heuristic. In the present study, an alternative flight scheduling approach is developed based on linear optimization. Results suggest that such an approach can significantly reduce flight delays, in the deterministic case, while maintaining equity as defined using a Max-Min fairness scheme.

Rodionova, O.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Impact of Different Trajectory Option Set Participation Levels within an Air Traffic Management Collaborative Trajectory Option Program

This paper presents the methodology and results of a Human-In-The-Loop (HITL) simulation study conducted in the Airspace Operations Laboratory at NASA Ames Research Center. This study is a part of NASA's ongoing research into developing an Integrated Demand Management (IDM) concept, whose aim is to improve traffic flow management (TFM) by coordinating the FAA's strategic Traffic Flow Management System (TFMS) with its more tactical Time-Based Flow Management (TBFM) system. The purpose of TFM is to regulate air traffic demand so that it is delivered efficiently through constrained airspace resources without exceeding their capacity limits. The IDM concept leverages a new TFMS capability called the Collaborative Trajectory Options Program (CTOP) to strategically pre-condition traffic demand flowing into a TBFM-managed arrival environment, where TBFM is responsible for managing traffic tactically by generating precise arrival schedules. Unlike other TFM tools, CTOP gives flight operators the option of submitting a set of user-preferred alternative trajectories for each flight. CTOP can then use these trajectory option sets (or TOSs) to find user-preferred alternative routes to reduce demand on an overloaded resource. CTOP's effectiveness in redistributing demand is limited, however, by the availability of flights with alternative routes. The research presented in this paper focuses on evaluating the impact on TFM operations by varying the percentage of flights that submit a multiple-option TOS ('TOS participation levels'). Results show the impact on overall system performance and on the rerouted flights themselves. The simulation used a Newark (EWR) airport arrival scenario, with en route weather affecting traffic inbound from the west. Participants were asked to control each of the three arrival flows (north, west, and south) to meet their individual capacity constraints while simultaneously ensuring efficient utilization of the capacity at the destination airport. A large, permeable convective weather cell located southeast of Chicago severely reduced the capacity of the west flow. The study evaluated the impact of five different TOS participation levels on CTOP's ability to re-allocate traffic from the west and improve TFM performance in terms of delay assignment and traffic delivery rate to the airport. Overall, the results showed that increasing TOS submissions allowed the overall system delays to be reduced and fairly distributed among the three arrival flows, at the same time achieving the airport throughput rate. Moreover, it was found that aircraft who submitted a TOS saw a greater reduction in delay, even when they were assigned longer routes. This was particularly true when fewer aircraft submitted a TOS. The results confirm that the CTOP operations with higher TOS participation levels helped utilize the overall National Airspace System (NAS) resources as well as benefited the users who participated.

Yoo, Hyo-Sang↗
NASA NTRS1983

Space station needs, attributes and architectural options: Architectural options and selection

The approach, study results, and recommendations for defining and selecting space station architectural options are described. Space station system architecture is defined as the arrangement of elements (manned and unmanned on-orbit facilities, shuttle vehicles, orbital transfer vehicles, etc.), the number of these elements, their location (orbital inclination and altitude, and their functional performance capability, power, volume, crew, etc.). Architectural options are evaluated based on the degree of mission capture versus cost and required funding rate. Mission capture refers to the number of missions accommodated by the particular architecture.

Nelson, W. G.↗
NASA NTRS1985

Space station data system analysis/architecture study. Task 2: Options development DR-5. Volume 1: Technology options

The second task in the Space Station Data System (SSDS) Analysis/Architecture Study is the development of an information base that will support the conduct of trade studies and provide sufficient data to make key design/programmatic decisions. This volume identifies the preferred options in the technology category and characterizes these options with respect to performance attributes, constraints, cost, and risk. The technology category includes advanced materials, processes, and techniques that can be used to enhance the implementation of SSDS design structures. The specific areas discussed are mass storage, including space and round on-line storage and off-line storage; man/machine interface; data processing hardware, including flight computers and advanced/fault tolerant computer architectures; and software, including data compression algorithms, on-board high level languages, and software tools. Also discussed are artificial intelligence applications and hard-wire communications.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1985

Space station data system analysis/architecture study. Task 2: Options development, DR-5. Volume 3: Programmatic options

Task 2 in the Space Station Data System (SSDS) Analysis/Architecture Study is the development of an information base that will support the conduct of trade studies and provide sufficient data to make design/programmatic decisions. This volume identifies the preferred options in the programmatic category and characterizes these options with respect to performance attributes, constraints, costs, and risks. The programmatic category includes methods used to administrate/manage the development, operation and maintenance of the SSDS. The specific areas discussed include standardization/commonality; systems management; and systems development, including hardware procurement, software development and system integration, test and verification.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1983

Space station needs, attributes and architectural options study. Volume 4: Architectural options, subsystems, technology and programmatics

Space station architectural options, habitability considerations and subsystem analyses, technology, and programmatics are reviewed. The methodology employed for conceiving and defining space station concepts is presented. As a result of this approach, architectures were conceived and along with their supporting rationale are described within this portion of the report. Habitability consideration and subsystem analyses describe the human factors associated with space station operations and includes subsections covering (1) data management, (2) communications and tracking, (3) environmental control and life support, (4) manipulator systems, (5) resupply, (6) pointing, (7) thermal management and (8) interface standardization. A consolidated matrix of subsystems technology issues as related to meeting the mission needs for a 1990's era space station is presented. Within the programmatics portion, a brief description of costing and program strategies is outlined.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1983

Space station needs, attributes, and architectural options study. Volume 2: Program options, architecture, and technology

Mission scenarios and space station architectures are discussed. Electrical power subsystems (EPS), environmental control and life support, subsystems (ECLSS), and reaction control subsystem (RCS) architectures are addressed. Thermal control subsystems, (TCS), guidance/navigation and control (GN and C), information management systems IMS), communications and tracking (C and T), and propellant transfer and storage systems architectures are discussed.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2014

NASA's Asteroid Redirect Mission: A Robotic Boulder Capture Option for Science, Human Exploration, Resource Utilization, and Planetary Defense

NASA is examining two options for the Asteroid Redirect Mission (ARM), which will return asteroid material to a Lunar Distant Retrograde Orbit (LDRO) using a robotic solar electric propulsion spacecraft, called the Asteroid Redirect Vehicle (ARV). Once the ARV places the asteroid material into the LDRO, a piloted mission will rendezvous and dock with the ARV. After docking, astronauts will conduct two extravehicular activities (EVAs) to inspect and sample the asteroid material before returning to Earth. One option involves capturing an entire small (~4 - 10 m diameter) near-Earth asteroid (NEA) inside a large inflatable bag. However, NASA is also examining another option that entails retrieving a boulder (~1 - 5 m) via robotic manipulators from the surface of a larger (~100+ m) pre-characterized NEA. The Robotic Boulder Capture (RBC) option can leverage robotic mission data to help ensure success by targeting previously (or soon to be) well- characterized NEAs. For example, the data from the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency's (JAXA) Hayabusa mission has been utilized to develop detailed mission designs that assess options and risks associated with proximity and surface operations. Hayabusa's target NEA, Itokawa, has been identified as a valid target and is known to possess hundreds of appropriately sized boulders on its surface. Further robotic characterization of additional NEAs (e.g., Bennu and 1999 JU3) by NASA's OSIRIS REx and JAXA's Hayabusa 2 missions is planned to begin in 2018. This ARM option reduces mission risk and provides increased benefits for science, human exploration, resource utilization, and planetary defense. Science: The RBC option is an extremely large sample-return mission with the prospect of bringing back many tons of well-characterized asteroid material to the Earth-Moon system. The candidate boulder from the target NEA can be selected based on inputs from the world-wide science community, ensuring that the most scientifically interesting boulder be returned for subsequent sampling. In addition, the material surrounding the boulder can be collected from the surface, thus providing geological contextual information and additional samples of NEA regolith. The robotic manipulators used for capturing the boulder will ensure some of the surface remains undisturbed and that the boulder will retain its structural integrity, which will preserve the context of any samples collected by the astronauts and ensure a high level of science return. Human Exploration: Due to the coherent nature of the boulder that will be collected, entire encapsulation of the asteroid material is not required. This facilitates exploration and sample collection of the boulder by astronauts in a variety of ways. The total time for EVA during the crew portion of the mission is very limited. Current estimates are that each of the two EVAs will only last four hours. The RBC option will allow crew members to have good situational awareness of the work site and quickly identify sample sites of interest. In addition, the samples to be collected can be readily accessed without having to deal with removal of an encapsulation system, which adds extra complexity and risk for the astronauts during EVA. Resource Utilization: One of the most crucial aspects for resource utilization is the identification and collection of appropriate materials (e.g., volatiles, organics, metals, etc.) that contain components of interest. Prior characterization of NEAs is required in order to increase the likelihood that appropriate materials will be returned. Ground-based observations of small (<10 m) NEAs are challenging, but characterization efforts of larger targets have demonstrated that NEAs with volatiles and organics have been identified. Two potential targets for the RBC option (Bennu and 1999 JU3) have been previously identified as potentially rich in resources, and both are already targets of currently planned robotic missions that will characterize their physical properties in great detail. Planetary Defense: The RBC option involves interaction with a well- characterized potentially hazardoussized NEA that would enable NASA to conduct one or more planetary defense demonstrations. The primary method would use the collected boulder to augment the mass of the ARV and perform an Enhanced Gravity Tractor (EGT) demonstration on the NEA. Additionally, other approaches could be demonstrated during the mission, such as Ion Beam Deflection (IBD) and/or observation of a Kinetic Impactor (KI). The relative effectiveness of a slow push-pull method such as the EGT or IBD could be directly compared and contrasted with the results of the more energetic KI method on the target NEA. Conclusions: This boulder option for NASA's ARM can leverage knowledge of previously characterized NEAs from prior robotic missions, which provides more certainty of the target NEA's physical characteristics and reduces mission risk. This increases the return on investment for NASA's future activities with respect to human exploration, resource utilization, and planetary defense.

Abell, P.↗
NASA NTRS2000

Power System Options Evaluated for the Radiation and Technology Demonstration Mission

The Radiation and Technology Demonstration (RTD) Mission is under joint study by three NASA Centers: the NASA Johnson Space Center, the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, and the NASA Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field. This Earth-orbiting mission, which may launch on a space shuttle in the first half of the next decade, has the primary objective of demonstrating high-power electric thruster technologies. Secondary objectives include better characterization of Earth's Van Allen trapped-radiation belts, measurement of the effectiveness of the radiation shielding for human protection, measurement of radiation effects on advanced solar cells, and demonstration of radiation-tolerant microelectronics. During the mission, which may continue up to 1 year, the 2000-kg RTD spacecraft will first spiral outward from the shuttle-deployed, medium-inclination, low Earth orbit. By the phased operation of a 10-kW Hall thruster and a 10-kW Variable Specific Impulse Magneto-Plasma Rocket, the RTD spacecraft will reach a low-inclination Earth orbit with a radius greater than five Earth radii. This will be followed by an inward spiraling orbit phase when the spacecraft deploys 8 to 12 microsatellites to map the Van Allen belts. The mission will conclude in low Earth orbit with the possible retrieval of the spacecraft by the space shuttle. A conceptual RTD spacecraft design showing two photovoltaic (PV) array wings, the Hall thruster with propellant tanks, and stowed microsatellites is presented. Early power system studies assessed five different PV array design options coupled with a 120-Vdc power management and distribution system (PMAD) and secondary lithium battery energy storage. Array options include (1) state-of-the-art 10-percent efficient three-junction amorphous SiGe thin-film cells on thin polymer panels deployed with an inflatable (or articulated) truss, (2) SCARLET array panels, (3) commercial state-of-the-art, planar PV array rigid panels with 25-percent efficient, three-junction GaInP2/GaAs/Ge solar cells, (4) rigid panels with 25-percent efficient, three-junction GaInP2/GaAs/Ge solar cells, in a 2 -concentrator trough configuration, and (5) thin polymer panels with 25-percent efficient, three-junction GaInP2/GaAs/Ge solar cells deployed with an inflatable (or articulated) truss. To assess the relative merits of these PV array design options, the study group developed a dedicated Fortran code to predict power system performance and estimate system mass. This code also modeled Earth orbital environments important for accurately predicting PV array performance. The most important environmental effect, solar cell radiation degradation, was calculated from electron-proton fluence input from the industry standard AE8/AP8 trapped radiation models and the concept of damage equivalence. Power systems were sized to provide 10 kW of thruster power and approximately 1 kW of spacecraft power at end of life. Of the five PV array design options, the option 1 (thin-film cells) power system was the most massive 590 kg, whereas the option 4 (trough concentrator) power system was the lightest 260 kg. Arguably, the lowest cost would come from the option 3 (commercial array panels) power system with an acceptable, albeit greater, system mass of 320 kg. Predicted power system performance during the spiral-out mission phase is shown the preceding graph for the option 5 (flexible-panel) array. From the results, the radiation-induced power loss over time is evident as the spacecraft slowly spirals outward through the trapped proton belt. The importance of the spiral trip time is also evident in the two curves representing 74-day and 182-day spiral-out periods. The longer spiral time introduces a beginning-of-life power oversizing penalty greater than 1 kW. Future studies will analyze power system performance and mass with a 50-Vdc power management and distribution architecture favorable to the VASIMR thruster and longer missions.

Kerslake, Thomas W.↗
NASA NTRS2014

NASA's Asteroid Redirect Mission: The Boulder Capture Option

NASA is examining two options for the Asteroid Redirect Mission (ARM), which will return asteroid material to a Lunar Distant Retrograde Orbit (LDRO) using a robotic solar-electric-propulsion spacecraft, called the Asteroid Redirect Vehicle (ARV). Once the ARV places the asteroid material into the LDRO, a piloted mission will rendezvous and dock with the ARV. After docking, astronauts will conduct two extravehicular activities (EVAs) to inspect and sample the asteroid material before returning to Earth. One option involves capturing an entire small (approximately 4-10 m diameter) near-Earth asteroid (NEA) inside a large inflatable bag. However, NASA is examining another option that entails retrieving a boulder (approximately 1-5 m) via robotic manipulators from the surface of a larger (approximately 100+ m) pre-characterized NEA. This option can leverage robotic mission data to help ensure success by targeting previously (or soon to be) well-characterized NEAs. For example, the data from the Hayabusa mission has been utilized to develop detailed mission designs that assess options and risks associated with proximity and surface operations. Hayabusa's target NEA, Itokawa, has been identified as a valid target and is known to possess hundreds of appropriately sized boulders on its surface. Further robotic characterization of additional NEAs (e.g., Bennu and 1999 JU3) by NASA's OSIRIS REx and JAXA's Hayabusa 2 missions is planned to begin in 2018. The boulder option is an extremely large sample‐return mission with the prospect of bringing back many tons of well‐characterized asteroid material to the Earth‐Moon system. The candidate boulder from the target NEA can be selected based on inputs from the world‐wide science community, ensuring that the most scientifically interesting boulder be returned for subsequent sampling. This boulder option for NASA's ARM can leverage knowledge of previously characterized NEAs from prior robotic missions, which provides more certainty of the target NEA's physical characteristics and reduces mission risk. This increases the return on investment for NASA's future activities with respect to science, human exploration, resource utilization, and planetary defense

Abell, Paul A.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Asteroid Redirect Robotic Mission: Robotic Boulder Capture Option Overview

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is currently studying an option for the Asteroid Redirect Robotic Mission (ARRM) that would capture a multi-ton boulder (typically 2-4 meters in size) from the surface of a large (is approximately 100+ meter) Near-Earth Asteroid (NEA) and return it to cislunar space for subsequent human and robotic exploration. This alternative mission approach, designated the Robotic Boulder Capture Option (Option B), has been investigated to determine the mission feasibility and identify potential differences from the initial ARRM concept of capturing an entire small NEA (4-10 meters in size), which has been designated the Small Asteroid Capture Option (Option A). Compared to the initial ARRM concept, Option B allows for centimeter-level characterization over an entire large NEA, the certainty of target NEA composition type, the ability to select the boulder that is captured, numerous opportunities for mission enhancements to support science objectives, additional experience operating at a low-gravity planetary body including extended surface contact, and the ability to demonstrate future planetary defense strategies on a hazardous-size NEA. Option B can leverage precursor missions and existing Agency capabilities to help ensure mission success by targeting wellcharacterized asteroids and can accommodate uncertain programmatic schedules by tailoring the return mass.

Mazanek, Daniel D.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Reusable In-Space Transportation Architecture Options for Human Mars Expeditions

NASA has been investigating the use of Solar Electric Propulsion, Chemical Propulsion, and Nuclear Thermal Propulsion systems to deliver crew and cargo to Mars orbit in support of expeditions to the Martian surface. In order to evaluate the effect of the selection of in-space transportation options on a series of human Mars missions across multiple opportunities, campaign level analysis must be performed and the transportation options must be evaluated using the same set of ground rules and assumptions to provide equal comparison. In this study, a comparison of three in-space transportation options was shown from a campaign level perspective. Campaign level metrics such as total launch mass, launch vehicle launch rate, and total launch vehicle required are presented to show how the different transportation systems perform to field a series of Mars missions across multiple mission opportunities. Each transportation option was utilized to perform three crew roundtrip missions to Mars, with supporting cargo missions starting in 2029, the first crewed mission to Mars in 2035. The transportation options each have strengths and weaknesses from a campaign and strategic investment point of view, as evident by the comparison between the total launch mass and the total number of launch vehicles required. While the analysis shown in this study provides an initial comparison between the transportation options, significant challenges still exists for each options in terms of the detailed mission operations and the feasibility of all of the assumptions.

Chai, Patrick R.↗
NASA NTRS1989

Propulsive options for a manned Mars transportation system

In this investigation, five potential manned Mars transportation systems are compared. These options include: (1) a single vehicle, chemically propelled (CHEM) option, (2) a single vehicle, nuclear thermal propulsion (NTP) option, (3) a single vehicle solar electric propulsion (SEP) option, (4) a single vehicle hybrid nuclear electric propulsion (NEP)/CHEM option, and (5) a dual vehicle option (NEP cargo spacecraft and CHEM manned vehicle). In addition to utilizing the initial vehicle weight in low-earth orbit as a measure of mission feasibility, this study addresses the major technological barriers each propulsive scenario must surpass. It is shown that instead of a single clearly superior propulsion system, each means of propulsion may be favored depending upon the specified program policy and the extent of the desired manned flight time. Furthermore, the effect which aerobraking and multiple transfer cycles have upon mission feasibility is considered.

Braun, Robert D.↗