Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Risk remediation thresholds”

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.

Determining Appropriate Risk Remediation Thresholds from Empirical Conjunction Data Using Survival Probability Methods

Satellites sometimes maneuver before conjunctions to remediate the risk of an on-orbit collision. Many missions use probability of collision (P(sub c)) thresholds to decide when such maneuvers should be performed. These thresholds tend to be conservative because of policies that require satellites survive their lifetimes without collision with high confidence (e.g., 99.9%). This study presents a semi-empirical method to estimate remediation P(sub c) thresholds that satisfy such lifetime risk requirements. The formulation combines survival probability analysis with empirical conjunction histories to estimate remediation thresholds as a function of satellite size, remaining on-orbit duration, lifetime collision probability limit, collision consequence, and other parameters.

Risk remediation thresholds↗

Determining Appropriate Risk Remediation Thresholds from Empirical Conjunction Data Using Survival Probability Methods

Satellites sometimes maneuver before conjunctions to remediate the risk of an on-orbit collision. Many missions use probability of collision (P_c) thresholds to decide when such maneuvers should be performed. These thresholds tend to be conservative because of policies that require satellites survive their lifetimes without collision with high confidence (e.g., 99.9%). This study presents a semi-empirical method to estimate remediation P_c thresholds that satisfy such lifetime risk requirements. The formulation combines survival probability analysis with empirical conjunction histories to estimate remediation thresholds as a function of satellite size, remaining on-orbit duration, lifetime collision probability limit, collision consequence, and other parameters.

Risk Remediation↗

CARA Risk Assessment Thresholds

Warning remediation threshold (Red threshold): Pc level at which warnings are issued, and active remediation considered and usually executed. Analysis threshold (Green to Yellow threshold): Pc level at which analysis of event is indicated, including seeking additional information if warranted. Post-remediation threshold: Pc level to which remediation maneuvers are sized in order to achieve event remediation and obviate any need for immediate follow-up maneuvers. Maneuver screening threshold: Pc compliance level for routine maneuver screenings (more demanding than regular Red threshold due to additional maneuver uncertainty).

conjunction↗

Current and Future Impact Risks from Small Debris to Operational Satellites

The collision between Iridium 33 and Cosmos 2251 in 2009 signaled the potential onset of the collision cascade effect, commonly known as the "Kessler Syndrome", in the low Earth orbit (LEO) region. Recent numerical simulations have shown that the 10 cm and larger debris population in LEO will continue to increase even with a good implementation of the commonly-adopted mitigation measures. This increase is driven by collisions involving large and massive intacts, i.e., rocket bodies and spacecraft. Therefore, active debris removal (ADR) of large and massive intacts with high collision probabilities has been argued as a direct and effective means to remediate the environment in LEO. The major risk for operational satellites in the environment, however, comes from impacts with debris just above the threshold of the protection shields. In general, these are debris in the millimeter to centimeter size regime. Although impacts by these objects are insufficient to lead to catastrophic breakup of the entire vehicle, the damage is certainly severe enough to cause critical failure of the key instruments or the entire payload. The focus of this paper is to estimate the impact risks from 5 mm and 1 cm debris to active payloads in LEO (1) in the current environment and (2) in the future environment based on different projection scenarios, including ADR. The goal of the study is to quantify the benefits of ADR in reducing debris impact risks to operational satellites.

Liou, Jer-Chyi↗

The Orbital Debris Problem and the Challenges for Environment Remediation

LEO debris population will continue to increase even with a good implementation of the commonly-adopted mitigation measures. The root-cause of the increase is catastrophic collisions involving large/massive intact objects (rocket bodies or spacecraft). The major mission-ending risks for most operational spacecraft, however, come from impacts with debris just above the threshold of the protection shields (~5-mm to 1-cm). A solution-driven approach is to seek: Concepts for removal of massive intacts with high P(collision); Concepts capable of preventing collisions involving intacts; Concepts for removal of 5-mm to 1-cm debris; Enhanced impact protection shields for valuable space assets. Key questions for remediation consideration of orbital debris: What is the acceptable threat level? What are the mission objectives? What is the appropriate roadmap/timeframe for remediation? Support advanced technology development when an economically viable approach is identified. Address non-technical issues, such as policy, coordination, ownership, legal, and liability at the national and international levels.

Liou, J.-C.↗

Decision Aid for Conjunction Risk Mitigation by Differential Drag

In the previous five years, the rate of conjunctions that the NASA Conjunction Assessment Risk Analysis (CARA) team processed and analyzed has more than tripled. (NASA CARA, 2024) New missions in the early development phases are now required to plan for dealing with conjunctions under the present space environment, and also projecting forward into a future likely with even further increased utilization of the space environment. Some missions are investigating the possibility of using differential drag to remediate conjunctions without expending limited fuel or for missions without propulsive capabilities. The NASA CARA team studied the historical record of conjunctions to evaluate the circumstances under which differential drag may be successfully applied and have developed a series of tables to use as a decision aid for missions considering differential drag. Currently, if a CARA-protected mission with maneuvering capabilities is predicted to have a conjunction with probability of collision (Pc) greater than 7E-5 (the default value of the ‘yellow threshold’, which may have some other value agreed by CARA and the mission during the Orbital Collison Avoidance Planning (OCAP) process), CARA will use its Maneuver Trade Space (MTS) tool to evaluate and recommend options for the timing and magnitude of a risk mitigation maneuver (RMM), based on the mission’s capabilities. If the conjunction’s Pc is greater than 1E-4, the ‘red threshold’, then an RMM must be executed per NASA Procedural Requirements (NPR) 8079.1 (NASA, 2023), although missions may execute an RMM even if the Pc is lower. The magnitude of the maneuver is typically a few cm/s, and CARA estimates how many will be required for the mission’s nominal lifetime – typically a few per year – during the OCAP process, to inform the mission’s delta-V requirement. For traditional satellites, this is usually smaller than other requirements for orbit insertion, maintenance, and disposal, but for CubeSats or other small satellite missions, a propulsion system may not provide much more than a few cm/s of delta-V or may not fit at all within the available budget of money, time, size, weight, and/or power (SWaP). Conversely, CubeSats often have deployable solar panels, which offer the capacity to have much higher areas facing some directions than others. Such a mission can instead use ‘differential drag’ to remediate a conjunction -- in other words, change its drag area (usually increasing) to deviate from the predicted collision course. This is how Planet’s Dove spacecraft maintain their formations and remediate conjunction risks without having on-board propulsion (Foster, et al., 2017) (Griffith, et al., 2021). CARA has been developing improvements to MTS to support differential-drag for NASA's missions -- where it is effective. CARA records all conjunctions of their protected payloads, with historical records starting in 2005 (with significant conjunction events starting to occur on or after 2013). From this record, approximately 7,300 had a Pc greater than 1E-4 at 3 days prior to the time of closest approach, the time analyzed for differential drag efficacy. Of those, approximately 4,300 had fully-defined covariance matrices stored for both the primary and secondary objects; this set of conjunctions is the basis for the analysis of this work. CARA’s MTS tool was used to propagate the primary satellite forward from that decision point with varying degrees of increase to ballistic coefficient (BC). Because these conjunctions came from multiple missions, the nondimensional ‘delta-BC’ factor was used to quantify and normalize the increase in ballistic coefficient, defined as follows: Delta-BC = BC_new / BC_old - 1 Positive delta-BC factors represent an increase in drag compared to the nominal attitude, while negative delta-BC factors (to a minimum of -1) represent a decrease in drag. At the conclusion of the differential-drag ‘maneuver’, the Pc was recalculated to evaluate whether or not the conjunction was mitigated (Pc < 3E-6). These results were then binned and sorted along several axes, including altitude, amount of delta-BC, and (pre-maneuver) rate of energy dissipation (EDR), to identify underlying patterns. The altitude plot is shown in Figure 1. To validate this analysis, we consulted the record of a NASA mission which uses differential drag to maintain its orbit and remediate conjunction risk. CARA’s empirical record of the mission’s orbit history suggests it achieves a delta-BC of 2.2. Of the twenty-one RMM plans that were submitted by this mission, eighteen were matched with conjunctions in the historical record; of those, twelve were successfully remediated (final measured Pc < 3E-6), and six were not. This is consistent with the expected efficacy for missions orbiting at that altitude. We are presently simulating this mission’s RMMs with MTS; this work is ongoing, but so far, the MTS results are qualitatively in agreement with the empirical results -- correctly predicting that a maneuver would or would not remediate a conjunction, if not exactly matching the final post-remediation Pc value. We found that differential drag was most successful for satellites with perigees below 560 km, and which could adopt an average delta-BC of 2 or greater (that is, increasing their ballistic coefficient by a factor of 3). However, this is a difficult threshold for a mission to clear; very few spacecraft are capable of adopting a high-drag configuration for 72 hours continuously. Planet’s Dove spacecraft use differential drag to remediate conjunctions (Griffith, et al., 2021), and they have a maximum delta-BC factor of 9, but in practice (with mission and charging constraints) they achieve a time-averaged delta-BC that is closer to 2 (Foster, et al., 2017). A mission’s differential drag utility strongly depends on the operational constraints that has the capacity to limit the time-averaged delta-BC. A mission with a high maximum delta-BC of 5 or more can have an effective delta-BC of less than 1 due to operational constraints such as instrument and solar panel pointing, especially if this constraint results in holding an intermediate drag value for most of its orbit. CARA has developed tables that can be used as decision aids to advise missions-in-development about the best way to utilize their differential drag capabilities. For missions below 560 km with the operational flexibility to devote multiple days to holding a high-drag configuration (or a sufficiently high drag ratio to compensate for limitations on that time), they are -- more likely than not -- able to successfully remediate high-risk conjunctions. Conversely, missions that do not meet these exacting criteria -- most missions -- can instead be advised to use on-board propulsion systems to perform RMMs, or to turn their minimum-area face towards the approach vector, thereby reducing Pc at the moment of conjunction due to the decreased Hard-Body Radius (HBR), that is a strongly correlated variable in the Pc calculations. (NASA, 2023)

conjunction assessment↗

Manual Crew Override of Vehicle Landings Following G-Transitions

BACKGROUND Manual control during exploration spaceflight consists of both planned automated supervisory control and unplanned crew override. This crew override capability is critical to enable overall mission success during landing contingencies. However, the introduction of manual override capabilities must be implemented to enable crews to mitigate risks introduced by human error. Adaptive changes in the sensorimotor system can manifest during g-transitions as spatial disorientation. While training and landing aids enable successful landing through disorientation, these adaptive changes may increase cognitive demand that needs to be accounted for in the manual control strategy. It is important to characterize these effects as soon as possible following the G-transition to develop appropriate countermeasures. METHODS The following study seeks to inform the risk associated with altered sensorimotor and vestibular function impacting critical mission tasks. We aim to characterize the effects of short and long-duration weightlessness on manual control following G-transitions using simulated lunar landing on a six-degree-of-freedom (6DOF) motion base, a fixed base simulation, and a supervisory control tablet task. The primary goal is to understand the impact of spaceflight on crew ability to perform manual crew override and supervisory control. This aim will be assessed by comparing pre- versus postflight simulation performance in crewmembers assigned to either short duration (< 30 day) or long duration (~6- month) missions to the International Space Station (ISS). We hypothesize there will be postflight increases in the percent time that pilots are outside of the acceptable range for recommended vehicle state parameters and the reaction time for secondary cognitive tasks. Ground-based control subjects, who are demographically matched to the crew considering age (± 5 years) and gender, will undergo the same testing schedule as the crew to examine the effects of flight phase independent of microgravity exposure. The second aim is to examine how adaptive changes in vestibular and cognitive function relate to changes in manual crew override proficiency. Crew performance for a sensorimotor perceptual test battery will evaluate motion perception tracking, roll nulling, and/or vection sensitivity using the 6DOF motion base. We hypothesize that a higher severity of vestibular alterations will be associated with increased percent time outside of guidance limits. Motion sickness severity and sleepiness will also be evaluated. To determine the impact of “just-in-time” training, the third aim seeks to compare performance during on-board lunar landing tasks conducted late in-flight to early postflight. We hypothesize that proficiency on the “just-in-time” laptop trainer late in mission will be positively correlated with early postflight proficiency on the same task. The final aim will establish assessments of performance, training protocols, and the learning progression in a ground-control cohort of first-time users. RESULTS The assessment of the learning progression associated with the piloting task on the motion base system with thirty ground subjects will be reported. Learning curves will be established across four distinct sessions and within session considering trial difficulty. The difficulty of the landing task can be modulated with the landing divert distance and cross or downrange difficulty. Results may include changes in performance across multiple trials of a multi-attribute lunar tablet supervisory control task. Preliminary investigations of eighteen subjects who completed vestibular threshold and motion perception tasks offer expected performance ranges for upcoming preflight crew evaluations. The results yielded an average roll threshold of 0.46 ± 0.30 deg/s and an average roll nulling root mean square error performance of 2.52 ± 0.52 deg/s. RELEVANCE This project will deliver an operational demonstration of crew monitoring capability following spaceflight and identify potential deficits that may require remediation. Comparison of individual vestibular and cognitive changes with crew performance will help better characterize the manual control risks associated with sensorimotor alterations. Ground testing will evaluate learning progression, refine training protocols, and serve as a control cohort for comparisons to crew performance. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: The authors acknowledge contributions from Draper, the Dynamic Skills Trainer (DST) Lab, and the Software, Robotics, and Simulation Division toward the development of the lunar landing simulation platforms. This project is funded by the Human Health Countermeasures Element.

Hannah M. Weiss↗

Decision Aid for Conjunction Risk Mitigation by Differential Drag

In the previous five years, the rate of conjunctions that the NASA Conjunction Assessment Risk Analysis (CARA) team processed and analyzed has more than tripled. (NASA CARA, 2024) New missions in the early development phases are now required to plan for dealing with conjunctions under the present space environment, and also projecting forward into a future likely with even further increased utilization of the space environment. Some missions are investigating the possibility of using differential drag to remediate conjunctions without expending limited fuel or for missions without propulsive capabilities. The NASA CARA team studied the historical record of conjunctions to evaluate the circumstances under which differential drag may be successfully applied and have developed a series of tables to use as a decision aid for missions considering differential drag. CARA records all conjunctions of their protected payloads, with historical records starting in 2005 (with significant conjunction events starting to occur on or after 2013). From this record, approximately 7,300 had a probability of collision (Pc) greater than 1 in 10,000, the nominal requirement for a risk mitigation maneuver (RMM) to be made per NASA Procedural Requirements (NPR) 8079.1 (NASA, 2023), at 3 days prior to the time of closest approach, the time analyzed for differential drag efficacy. CARA’s maneuver trade space tool (MTS) was used to prop-agate the primary satellite forward from that decision point with varying degrees of increase to ballistic coefficient (BC), and then recalculate the Pc to evaluate whether or not the conjunction was mitigated (Pc < 3E-6). These results were then binned and sorted along several axes, including altitude, amount of delta-BC, and (pre-maneuver) rate of energy dissipation, to identify underlying patterns. The altitude plot is shown in Figure 1. We found that differential drag was most successful for satellites with perigees below 560 km, and which could adopt an average delta-BC of 2 or greater (that is, increasing their ballistic coefficient by a factor of 3). However, this is a difficult threshold for a mission to clear; very few spacecraft are capable of adopting a high-drag configuration for 72 hours continuously. Planet’s Dove spacecraft use differential drag to remediate conjunctions (Griffith, et al., 2021), and they have a maximum delta-BC factor of 9, but in practice (with mission and charging constraints) they achieve a time-averaged delta-BC that is closer to 2 (Foster, et al., 2017). In contrast, a NASA mission in development reached out to CARA to evaluate the utility of differential drag to remediate potential conjunctions for a spacecraft which is capable of a similar high delta-BC, but with operational constraints that limit their time-averaged delta-BC to less than 1. CARA has developed tables that can be used as decision aids to advise missions-in-development about the best way to utilize their differential drag capabilities. For missions below 560 km with the operational flexibility to devote multiple days to holding a high-drag configuration (or a sufficiently high drag ratio to compensate for limitations on that time), they are able to successfully remediate high-risk conjunctions. Conversely, missions that do not meet these ex-acting criteria – most missions – can instead be advised to use on-board propulsion systems to perform RMMs or to turn their minimum-area face towards the approach vector, thereby reducing Pc at the moment of conjunction. (NASA, 2023)

risk mitigation↗