SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
SmallSat state of the art report advanced avionics section updates. Systematic CubeSat radiation hardening assurance using the SEAM platforms. Building ontologies for AI-integrated prognostic health management of spacecraft avionics.
The presentation provides guidance and recommendations for the implementation of quality practices for space system development projects that have constraints, such that the full suite of traditional or "best" standard practices cannot be applied.
The purpose of this lessons learned is to communicate the utility of shielding in small spacecraft planning for the support of mission assurance and reliability. Numerous SmallSats have been flying in polar low earth orbit for scientific, communications, technology demonstrations, and imaging with academic, commercial, and government interests. Shielding has been part of mission assurance and reliability from the advent of long duration spacecraft missions. The Shields-1 CubeSat has been operating in polar low earth orbit since 16 December 2018 with atomic number (Z)-grade radiation shielding and demonstrates shielding effectiveness. Shields-1 has collected a representative example of solar minimum data in 2019 with 8 Teledyne dosimeters over varying shielding effectiveness. It serves as current experimental data and has been compared with NOVICE Shielding estimates using the AP8 –AE8 trapped radiation model with the Shields-1 CAD and generic CubeSat 3 unit (U) models. Using NOVICE model radiation analysis coding, the shielding effectiveness's, based on a generic CubeSat 3U structure with 4 electronic boards, were estimated for aluminum wall thicknesses ranging from 0.204 cmto4.44 cm (0.550 g/cm2–12.0 g/cm2) thick aluminum. For modeled polar orbiting spacecraft, solar maximum total ionizing dose (TID)increases by nearly a magnitude for thin-walled aluminum 0.550g/cm2-0.686 g/cm2(0.204 cm –0.254 cm) typical CubeSat structures. The shielding effectiveness by NOVICE Sigma estimates, which is a shielding sphere approximation around a detector, showed a linear relationship with wall thickness, which increased over the wall thickness by a ratio of 1.43 determined by linear regression analysis. Using NOVICE Adjoint Monte-Carlo Modeling of solar minimum and solar maximum with the inclusion of a worst-case solar particle event over a one year mission without geomagnetic shielding, the TID for minimum and maximum conditions for a generic 3U with a wall thickness of 0.254 cm is 158 RAD and 1540 RAD, respectively. The modeled total solar maximum TID is over estimated, because at low orbital latitudes a spacecraft will have shielding from Earth's magnetic field. However, TID will still be significant at high latitudes over the poles, where a spacecraft is exposed in a solar particle event. In contrast, to a thin walled generic 3U CubeSat, Shields-1 electronics enclosure has a shielding effectiveness of 21.3 g/cm2from NOVICE Sigma modeling and is expected to show reduced total ionizing dose increases during the present active Solar Cycle 25 period. Because solar particle events during solar maximum increase TID on electronic parts with thin-walled shielding in short periods of time, it is a mission assurance and reliability consideration on the spacecraft’s mission value versus adding shielding for risk reduction of premature spacecraft or instrument payload loss. Since the volumes of many instruments and system electronics have reduced with small spacecraft, shielding material costs and weight penalties have diminished. A small spacecraft project budget and schedule may limit traditional radiation-hardened part use and radiation testing requirements, where shielding can contribute to mission assurance and reliability with reduced costs.
The purpose of this lessons learned paper is to communicate the utility of shielding in small spacecraft planning for the support of mission assurance and reliability. Numerous SmallSats have been flying in polar low Earth orbit for science, communications, technology demonstrations, and imaging with academic, commercial, and government interests. Shielding has been part of mission assurance and reliability from the advent of long duration spacecraft missions. The Shields-1 CubeSat has been operating in polar low Earth orbit since 16 December 2018 with atomic number (Z)-grade radiation shielding and demonstrates shielding effectiveness. Shields-1 has collected a representative example of solar minimum data in 2019 with eight Teledyne µDosimeters over varying shielding effectivenesses. It serves as current experimental data and has been compared with NOVICE Shielding estimates using the AP8 – AE8 trapped radiation model with the Shields-1 CAD and generic CubeSat three unit (3U) models. Using NOVICE model radiation analysis coding, the shielding effectivenesses, based on a generic CubeSat 3U structure with four electronic boards, were estimated for aluminum wall thicknesses ranging from 0.204 cm to 4.44 cm (0.550 g/cm 2 to 12.0 g/cm 2 ). For modeled polar orbiting spacecraft, solar maximum total ionizing dose (TID) increases by nearly a magnitude for thin-walled aluminum 0.550-g/cm 2 - 0.686-g/cm 2 (0.204-cm – 0.254-cm) typical CubeSat structures. The shielding effectiveness estimated by NOVICE Sigma, which is a shielding sphere approximation around a detector, showed a linear relationship with wall thickness, which increased over the wall thickness by a ratio of 1.43 determined by linear regression analysis. Using NOVICE Adjoint Monte-Carlo Modeling of solar minimum and solar maximum with the inclusion of a worst-case solar particle event over a one-year mission without geomagnetic shielding, the TID for minimum and maximum conditions for a generic 3U with a wall thickness of 0.254 cm is 158 RAD and 1540 RAD, respectively. The modeled total solar maximum TID is over estimated, because at low orbital latitudes a spacecraft will have shielding from the Earth’s magnetic field. However, TID will still be significant at high latitudes over the poles, where a spacecraft is exposed in a solar particle event. In contrast to a thin-walled generic 3U CubeSat, the Shields-1 electronics enclosure has a shielding effectiveness of 21.3 g/cm 2 from NOVICE Sigma modeling and is expected to show reduced total ionizing dose increases during the present active Solar Cycle 25 period. Because solar particle events during solar maximum increase TID on electronic parts with thin-walled shielding in short periods of time, it is a mission assurance and reliability consideration on the mission value of the spacecraft versus adding shielding for risk reduction of premature spacecraft or instrument payload loss. Since the volumes of many instruments and system electronics have reduced with small spacecraft, shielding material costs and weight penalties have diminished. A small spacecraft project budget and schedule may limit traditional radiation-hardened part use and radiation testing requirements, where shielding can contribute to mission assurance and reliability with reduced costs.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
From the outside looking in, the NEPP program supports NASA's traditional approach to providing electrical, electronic, and electromechanical (EEE) assurance for space missions. Standards (military and commercial) for EEE parts are based on risk averse methodologies, drive higher costs and schedules, and, in general, provide devices that significantly lag behind commercial devices in performance aspects (speed, power efficiency, etc...). This is NOT the model most small missions realistically can use. However, when you look behind the curtain, NEPP has been considering the risk trade space for small missions for over five years and has consistently provided resources that the small mission regime would find useful. In this paper, we provide a brief overview of these resources as well as NEPP's current research/development efforts that are relevant. While we'll primarily discuss radiation assurance related issues such as data availability and usage, assurances processes for not only the radiation effects side, but also the EEE parts reliability will be touched upon.
From the outside looking in, the NEPP program supports NASA's traditional approach to providing electrical, electronic, and electromechanical (EEE) assurance for space missions. Standards (military and commercial) for EEE parts are based on risk averse methodologies, drive higher costs and schedules, and, in general, provide devices that significantly lag behind commercial devices in performance aspects (speed, power efficiency, etc...). This is NOT the model most small missions realistically can use. However, when you look behind the curtain, NEPP has been considering the risk trade space for small missions for over five years and has consistently provided resources that the small mission regime would find useful. In this paper, we provide a brief overview of these resources as well as NEPP's current research/development efforts that are relevant. While we'll primarily discuss radiation assurance related issues such as data availability and usage, assurances processes for not only the radiation effects side, but also the EEE parts reliability will be touched upon.
Mission success criteria at the device level and required device operation/availability can determine the risk posed by the radiation effects for a given device in a given environment, but rarely are the same from one mission to another. A large portion of New Space / SmallSat missions to date have benefitted from relatively short mission durations and chosen orbits that have less severe particle populations than their larger counterparts. As mission objectives grow and become reliant on their chosen devices operating for longer lives and in more harsh environments, requirements need to reflect the changing scope but not hinder design adoptions from previously successful missions that provide new capabilities. This presentation describes notable differences in radiation environments, the requirement changes that come with choice of orbit, and prioritizations for mission success criteria to be determined by the designers of the system and subsystems. Test methodologies based on radiation effect categories are explained briefly; when they are needed. Similarity data (and its limitations) are discussed so that caveats and short-comings are understood. Reliability and assurance quantification may not always be possible, but determining where risks are taken and how to classify them is the essential topic for the intended practice: to establish radiation requirements with the goal of getting to mission success.
Over the past decade or so, the emergence of Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) has demonstrated its desirability and value in terms of 1) being a single source of truth, 2) unambiguous definitions and relationships, and 3) after representation, the ability to explore/extract any sets of data on demand. While much work has been done in showing the value to the system engineering discipline in these areas, how does that value translate to the Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) world? This paper provides a vision of a very desirable future of NASA S&MA after it is fully integrated into the MBSE framework. We explore the impact and consequences of the MBSE Value items discussed above and how they impact the disciplines of quality assurance, reliability and maintainability, system safety, and software assurance. We provide insight into how the MBSE modeling tools can be used to define S&MA processes (ideally as a result of Use Case [1] elaboration of processes represented in MagicDraw®), produce S&MA products (ViewEditor output of various items), and represent S&MA disciplines (S&MA inside of MagicDraw). We also provide insight into the degree to which some elements can be directly integrated into a SysML® model and when, as often happens, an interface to some external source must be provided. The desirability of this future is part of the reason for the NASA Office of Safety and Mission Assurance’s (OSMA) recent creation of a Model Based Mission Assurance (MBMA) Program [2] and the MBMA annual workshops. We briefly summarize the efforts to date to generate S&MA Use Cases for eventual deployment into pilot and project efforts. Even simple use of the SysML modeling tools can be used to capture quality assurance tasks and integrate them with the systems engineering and produce products that are easy to use by quality practitioners that are unfamiliar with these methods. We anticipate finding opportunities to pilot and implement various Quality Assurance (QA) Use Cases in FY20. The MBMA Program is focused on implementation; the NASA Office of the Chief Engineer's Community of Practice, as well as the SmallSat communities, are very interested in the integration of S&MA. Finally, as projects move forward utilizing whatever efficiency increases they can find in a cost-constrained environment, the S&MA community cannot be caught unawares and needs to continue preparing for the ever-growing implementation of MBSE across NASA and our government and commercial partners.