Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “main engine guidance control system”

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 NTRS2011

Characterizing Observed Limit Cycles in the Cassini Main Engine Guidance Control System

The Cassini spacecraft dynamics-related telemetry during long Main Engine (ME) burns has indicated the presence of stable limit cycles between 0.03-0.04 Hz frequencies. These stable limit cycles cause the spacecraft to possess non-zero oscillating rates for extended periods of time. This indicates that the linear ME guidance control system does not model the complete dynamics of the spacecraft. In this study, we propose that the observed limit cycles in the spacecraft dynamics telemetry appear from a stable interaction between the unmodeled nonlinear elements in the ME guidance control system. Many nonlinearities in the control system emerge from translating the linear engine gimbal actuator (EGA) motion into a spacecraft rotation. One such nonlinearity comes from the gear backlash in the EGA system, which is the focus of this paper. The limit cycle characteristics and behavior can be predicted by modeling this gear backlash nonlinear element via a describing function and studying the interaction of this describing function with the overall dynamics of the spacecraft. The linear ME guidance controller and gear backlash nonlinearity are modeled analytically. The frequency, magnitude, and nature of the limit cycle are obtained from the frequency response of the ME guidance controller and nonlinear element. In addition, the ME guidance controller along with the nonlinearity is simulated. The simulation response contains a limit cycle with similar characterstics as predicted analytically: 0.03-0.04 Hz frequency and stable, sustained oscillations. The analytical and simulated limit cycle responses are compared to the flight telemetry for long burns such as the Saturn Orbit Insertion and Main Engine Orbit Trim Maneuvers. The analytical and simulated limit cycle characteristics compare well with the actual observed limit cycles in the flight telemetry. Both have frequencies between 0.03-0.04 Hz and stable oscillations. This work shows that the stable limit cycles occur due to the interaction between the unmodeled nonlinear elements and linear ME guidance controller.

stable limit cycle↗
NASA NTRS2016

Modeling in the State Flow Environment to Support Launch Vehicle Verification Testing for Mission and Fault Management Algorithms in the NASA Space Launch System

Analysis methods and testing processes are essential activities in the engineering development and verification of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) new Space Launch System (SLS). Central to mission success is reliable verification of the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms for the SLS launch vehicle (LV) flight software. This is particularly difficult because M&FM algorithms integrate and operate LV subsystems, which consist of diverse forms of hardware and software themselves, with equally diverse integration from the engineering disciplines of LV subsystems. M&FM operation of SLS requires a changing mix of LV automation. During pre-launch the LV is primarily operated by the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) organization with some LV automation of time-critical functions, and much more autonomous LV operations during ascent that have crucial interactions with the Orion crew capsule, its astronauts, and with mission controllers at the Johnson Space Center. M&FM algorithms must perform all nominal mission commanding via the flight computer to control LV states from pre-launch through disposal and also address failure conditions by initiating autonomous or commanded aborts (crew capsule escape from the failing LV), redundancy management of failing subsystems and components, and safing actions to reduce or prevent threats to ground systems and crew. To address the criticality of the verification testing of these algorithms, the NASA M&FM team has utilized the State Flow environment6 (SFE) with its existing Vehicle Management End-to-End Testbed (VMET) platform which also hosts vendor-supplied physics-based LV subsystem models. The human-derived M&FM algorithms are designed and vetted in Integrated Development Teams composed of design and development disciplines such as Systems Engineering, Flight Software (FSW), Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) and major subsystems and vehicle elements such as Main Propulsion Systems (MPS), boosters, avionics, Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C), Thrust Vector Control (TVC), liquid engines, and the astronaut crew office. Since the algorithms are realized using model-based engineering (MBE) methods from a hybrid of the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Systems Modeling Language (SysML), SFE methods are a natural fit to provide an in depth analysis of the interactive behavior of these algorithms with the SLS LV subsystem models. For this, the M&FM algorithms and the SLS LV subsystem models are modeled using constructs provided by Matlab which also enables modeling of the accompanying interfaces providing greater flexibility for integrated testing and analysis, which helps forecast expected behavior in forward VMET integrated testing activities. In VMET, the M&FM algorithms are prototyped and implemented using the same C++ programming language and similar state machine architectural concepts used by the FSW group. Due to the interactive complexity of the algorithms, VMET testing thus far has verified all the individual M&FM subsystem algorithms with select subsystem vendor models but is steadily progressing to assessing the interactive behavior of these algorithms with LV subsystems, as represented by subsystem models. The novel SFE applications has proven to be useful for quick look analysis into early integrated system behavior and assessment of the M&FM algorithms with the modeled LV subsystems. This early MBE analysis generates vital insight into the integrated system behaviors, algorithm sensitivities, design issues, and has aided in the debugging of the M&FM algorithms well before full testing can begin in more expensive, higher fidelity but more arduous environments such as VMET, FSW testing, and the Systems Integration Lab7 (SIL). SFE has exhibited both expected and unexpected behaviors in nominal and off nominal test cases prior to full VMET testing. In many findings, these behavioral characteristics were used to correct the M&FM algorithms, enable better test coverage, and develop more effective test cases for each of the LV subsystems. This has improved the fidelity of testing and planning for the next generation of M&FM algorithms as the SLS program evolves from non-crewed to crewed flight, impacting subsystem configurations and the M&FM algorithms that control them. SFE analysis has improved robustness and reliability of the M&FM algorithms by revealing implementation errors and documentation inconsistencies. It is also improving planning efficiency for future VMET testing of the M&FM algorithms hosted in the LV flight computers, further reducing risk for the SLS launch infrastructure, the SLS LV, and most importantly the crew.

Trevino, Luis↗
NASA NTRS2015

A Vehicle Management End-to-End Testing and Analysis Platform for Validation of Mission and Fault Management Algorithms to Reduce Risk for NASAs Space Launch System

The engineering development of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) new Space Launch System (SLS) requires cross discipline teams with extensive knowledge of launch vehicle subsystems, information theory, and autonomous algorithms dealing with all operations from pre-launch through on orbit operations. The nominal and off-nominal characteristics of SLS's elements and subsystems must be understood and matched with the autonomous algorithm monitoring and mitigation capabilities for accurate control and response to abnormal conditions throughout all vehicle mission flight phases, including precipitating safing actions and crew aborts. This presents a large and complex systems engineering challenge, which is being addressed in part by focusing on the specific subsystems involved in the handling of off-nominal mission and fault tolerance with response management. Using traditional model-based system and software engineering design principles from the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Systems Modeling Language (SysML), the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms for the vehicle are crafted and vetted in Integrated Development Teams (IDTs) composed of multiple development disciplines such as Systems Engineering (SE), Flight Software (FSW), Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) and the major subsystems and vehicle elements such as Main Propulsion Systems (MPS), boosters, avionics, Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC), Thrust Vector Control (TVC), and liquid engines. These model-based algorithms and their development lifecycle from inception through FSW certification are an important focus of SLS's development effort to further ensure reliable detection and response to off-nominal vehicle states during all phases of vehicle operation from pre-launch through end of flight. To test and validate these M&FM algorithms a dedicated test-bed was developed for full Vehicle Management End-to-End Testing (VMET). For addressing fault management (FM) early in the development lifecycle for the SLS program, NASA formed the M&FM team as part of the Integrated Systems Health Management and Automation Branch under the Spacecraft Vehicle Systems Department at the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). To support the development of the FM algorithms, the VMET developed by the M&FM team provides the ability to integrate the algorithms, perform test cases, and integrate vendor-supplied physics-based launch vehicle (LV) subsystem models. Additionally, the team has developed processes for implementing and validating the M&FM algorithms for concept validation and risk reduction. The flexibility of the VMET capabilities enables thorough testing of the M&FM algorithms by providing configurable suites of both nominal and off-nominal test cases to validate the developed algorithms utilizing actual subsystem models such as MPS, GNC, and others. One of the principal functions of VMET is to validate the M&FM algorithms and substantiate them with performance baselines for each of the target vehicle subsystems in an independent platform exterior to the flight software test and validation processes. In any software development process there is inherent risk in the interpretation and implementation of concepts from requirements and test cases into flight software compounded with potential human errors throughout the development and regression testing lifecycle. Risk reduction is addressed by the M&FM group but in particular by the Analysis Team working with other organizations such as S&MA, Structures and Environments, GNC, Orion, Crew Office, Flight Operations, and Ground Operations by assessing performance of the M&FM algorithms in terms of their ability to reduce Loss of Mission (LOM) and Loss of Crew (LOC) probabilities. In addition, through state machine and diagnostic modeling, analysis efforts investigate a broader suite of failure effects and associated detection and responses to be tested in VMET to ensure reliable failure detection, and confirm responses do not create additional risks or cause undesired states through interactive dynamic effects with other algorithms and systems. VMET further contributes to risk reduction by prototyping and exercising the M&FM algorithms early in their implementation and without any inherent hindrances such as meeting FSW processor scheduling constraints due to their target platform - the ARINC 6535-partitioned Operating System, resource limitations, and other factors related to integration with other subsystems not directly involved with M&FM such as telemetry packing and processing. The baseline plan for use of VMET encompasses testing the original M&FM algorithms coded in the same C++ language and state machine architectural concepts as that used by FSW. This enables the development of performance standards and test cases to characterize the M&FM algorithms and sets a benchmark from which to measure their effectiveness and performance in the exterior FSW development and test processes. This paper is outlined in a systematic fashion analogous to a lifecycle process flow for engineering development of algorithms into software and testing. Section I describes the NASA SLS M&FM context, presenting the current infrastructure, leading principles, methods, and participants. Section II defines the testing philosophy of the M&FM algorithms as related to VMET followed by section III, which presents the modeling methods of the algorithms to be tested and validated in VMET. Its details are then further presented in section IV followed by Section V presenting integration, test status, and state analysis. Finally, section VI addresses the summary and forward directions followed by the appendices presenting relevant information on terminology and documentation.

Trevino, Luis↗
NASA NTRS2015

A Vehicle Management End-to-End Testing and Analysis Platform for Validation of Mission and Fault Management Algorithms to Reduce Risk for NASA's Space Launch System

The engineering development of the new Space Launch System (SLS) launch vehicle requires cross discipline teams with extensive knowledge of launch vehicle subsystems, information theory, and autonomous algorithms dealing with all operations from pre-launch through on orbit operations. The characteristics of these spacecraft systems must be matched with the autonomous algorithm monitoring and mitigation capabilities for accurate control and response to abnormal conditions throughout all vehicle mission flight phases, including precipitating safing actions and crew aborts. This presents a large and complex system engineering challenge, which is being addressed in part by focusing on the specific subsystems involved in the handling of off-nominal mission and fault tolerance with response management. Using traditional model based system and software engineering design principles from the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Systems Modeling Language (SysML), the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms for the vehicle are crafted and vetted in specialized Integrated Development Teams (IDTs) composed of multiple development disciplines such as Systems Engineering (SE), Flight Software (FSW), Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) and the major subsystems and vehicle elements such as Main Propulsion Systems (MPS), boosters, avionics, Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC), Thrust Vector Control (TVC), and liquid engines. These model based algorithms and their development lifecycle from inception through Flight Software certification are an important focus of this development effort to further insure reliable detection and response to off-nominal vehicle states during all phases of vehicle operation from pre-launch through end of flight. NASA formed a dedicated M&FM team for addressing fault management early in the development lifecycle for the SLS initiative. As part of the development of the M&FM capabilities, this team has developed a dedicated testbed that integrates specific M&FM algorithms, specialized nominal and off-nominal test cases, and vendor-supplied physics-based launch vehicle subsystem models. Additionally, the team has developed processes for implementing and validating these algorithms for concept validation and risk reduction for the SLS program. The flexibility of the Vehicle Management End-to-end Testbed (VMET) enables thorough testing of the M&FM algorithms by providing configurable suites of both nominal and off-nominal test cases to validate the developed algorithms utilizing actual subsystem models such as MPS. The intent of VMET is to validate the M&FM algorithms and substantiate them with performance baselines for each of the target vehicle subsystems in an independent platform exterior to the flight software development infrastructure and its related testing entities. In any software development process there is inherent risk in the interpretation and implementation of concepts into software through requirements and test cases into flight software compounded with potential human errors throughout the development lifecycle. Risk reduction is addressed by the M&FM analysis group working with other organizations such as S&MA, Structures and Environments, GNC, Orion, the Crew Office, Flight Operations, and Ground Operations by assessing performance of the M&FM algorithms in terms of their ability to reduce Loss of Mission and Loss of Crew probabilities. In addition, through state machine and diagnostic modeling, analysis efforts investigate a broader suite of failure effects and associated detection and responses that can be tested in VMET to ensure that failures can be detected, and confirm that responses do not create additional risks or cause undesired states through interactive dynamic effects with other algorithms and systems. VMET further contributes to risk reduction by prototyping and exercising the M&FM algorithms early in their implementation and without any inherent hindrances such as meeting FSW processor scheduling constraints due to their target platform - ARINC 653 partitioned OS, resource limitations, and other factors related to integration with other subsystems not directly involved with M&FM such as telemetry packing and processing. The baseline plan for use of VMET encompasses testing the original M&FM algorithms coded in the same C++ language and state machine architectural concepts as that used by Flight Software. This enables the development of performance standards and test cases to characterize the M&FM algorithms and sets a benchmark from which to measure the effectiveness of M&FM algorithms performance in the FSW development and test processes.

Trevino, Luis↗
NASA NTRS2009

Orion Guidance and Control Ascent Abort Algorithm Design and Performance Results

During the ascent flight phase of NASA s Constellation Program, the Ares launch vehicle propels the Orion crew vehicle to an agreed to insertion target. If a failure occurs at any point in time during ascent then a system must be in place to abort the mission and return the crew to a safe landing with a high probability of success. To achieve continuous abort coverage one of two sets of effectors is used. Either the Launch Abort System (LAS), consisting of the Attitude Control Motor (ACM) and the Abort Motor (AM), or the Service Module (SM), consisting of SM Orion Main Engine (OME), Auxiliary (Aux) Jets, and Reaction Control System (RCS) jets, is used. The LAS effectors are used for aborts from liftoff through the first 30 seconds of second stage flight. The SM effectors are used from that point through Main Engine Cutoff (MECO). There are two distinct sets of Guidance and Control (G&C) algorithms that are designed to maximize the performance of these abort effectors. This paper will outline the necessary inputs to the G&C subsystem, the preliminary design of the G&C algorithms, the ability of the algorithms to predict what abort modes are achievable, and the resulting success of the abort system. Abort success will be measured against the Preliminary Design Review (PDR) abort performance metrics and overall performance will be reported. Finally, potential improvements to the G&C design will be discussed.

Proud, Ryan W.↗
NASA NTRS1969

Surveyor Project Final Report: Part 1 - Project Description and Performance, Volume 1

The Surveyor Project planned and conducted seven unmanned lunar missions for which spacecraft were launched between May 1966 and January 1968. Each of the spacecraft was successfully launched with the then newly developed Atlas/Centaur vehicle which utilized for the first time a high-specific-impulse, liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen fueled stage. Five of the spacecraft successfully soft-landed and returned a great quantity of engineering and scientific data on extensive postlanding operations, accomplishing all mission and project objectives. Four of the spacecraft soft-landed at selected mare sites to provide data which were required to support the Apollo Program. The final spacecraft was then successfully used for scientific investigation of a contrasting site in the rugged lunar highlands. Surveyor was a fully attitude-stabilized spacecraft designed to receive and execute a wide variety of earth commands, as well as to perform certain automatic functions including the critical terminal-descent and soft-landing sequences. Significant new and advanced subsystems that were developed and/or used in combination to enable Surveyor to execute the complex terminal phase of flight were: (1) a solid-propellant main retro motor, (2) throttlable liquid-propellant vernier engines (also used for midcourse velocity correction), (3) highly sensitive velocity- and altitude-sensing radars, and (4) an automatic closed-loop guidance and control system. The first Surveyor spacecraft carried a survey television camera which, together with other engineering instrumentation, obtained in-flight and postlanding data. The complement of instruments carried on later missions included various combinations of the following additional devices: (1) a soil mechanics/surface sampler instrument for picking, digging, and handling lunar surface material; (2) an alpha scattering instrument for performing a chemical analysis of the lunar surface material; and (3) magnets attached to the spacecraft for determining magnetic properties of the soil.

Jet Propulsion Laboratory↗
NASA NTRS1969

Surveyor Project Final Report: Part 1 - Project Description and Performance, Volume 2

The Surveyor Project planned and conducted seven unmanned lunar missions for which spacecraft were launched between May 1966 and January 1968. Each of the spacecraft was successfully launched with the then newly developed Atlas/Centaur vehicle which utilized for the first time a high-specific-impulse, liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen fueled stage. Five of the spacecraft successfully soft-landed and returned a great quantity of engineering and scientific data on extensive postlanding operations, accomplishing all mission and project objectives. Four of the spacecraft soft-landed at selected mare sites to provide data which were required to support the Apollo Program. The final spacecraft was then successfully used for scientific investigation of a contrasting site in the rugged lunar highlands. Surveyor was a fully attitude-stabilized spacecraft designed to receive and execute a wide variety of earth commands, as well as to perform certain automatic functions including the critical terminal-descent and soft-landing sequences. Significant new and advanced subsystems that were developed and/or used in combination to enable Surveyor to execute the complex terminal phase of flight were: (1) a solid-propellant main retro motor, (2) throttlable liquid-propellant vernier engines (also used for midcourse velocity correction), (3) highly sensitive velocity- and altitude-sensing radars, and (4) an automatic closed-loop guidance and control system. The first Surveyor spacecraft carried a survey television camera which, together with other engineering instrumentation, obtained in-flight and postlanding data. The complement of instruments carried on later missions included various combinations of the following additional devices: (1) a soil mechanics/surface sampler instrument for picking, digging, and handling lunar surface material; (2) an alpha scattering instrument for performing a chemical analysis of the lunar surface material; and (3) magnets attached to the spacecraft for determining magnetic properties of the soil.

Jet Propulsion Laboratory↗
NASA NTRS1985

Space shuttle flight readiness firing dress rehearsal for STS-1

The static firing of the Space Shuttle Main Engine in preparation for the launch of the Enterprise Orbiter is discussed. The following were also tested: structures and mechanics; thermal design integration; propulsion and power; avionics and software; guidance, navigation, and control; mechanical systems; communications and tracking; and integrated ground systems.

Riles, W. L.↗
NASA NTRS2016

GN and C Subsystem Concept for Safe Precision Landing of the Proposed Lunar MARE Robotic Science Mission

The Lunar MARE (Moon Age and Regolith Explorer) Discovery Mission concept targets delivery of a science payload to the lunar surface for sample collection and dating. The mission science is within a 100-meter radius region of smooth lunar maria terrain near Aristarchus crater. The location has several small, sharp craters and rocks that present landing hazards to the spacecraft. For successful delivery of the science payload to the surface, the vehicle Guidance, Navigation and Control (GN&C) subsystem requires safe and precise landing capability, so design infuses the NASA Autonomous precision Landing and Hazard Avoidance Technology (ALHAT) and a gimbaled, throttleable LOX/LCH4 main engine. The ALHAT system implemented for Lunar MARE is a specialization of prototype technologies in work within NASA for the past two decades, including a passive optical Terrain Relative Navigation (TRN) sensor, a Navigation Doppler Lidar (NDL) velocity and range sensor, and a Lidar-based Hazard Detection (HD) sensor. The landing descent profile is from a retrograde orbit over lighted terrain with landing near lunar dawn. The GN&C subsystem with ALHAT capabilities will deliver the science payload to the lunar surface within a 20-meter landing ellipse of the target location and at a site having greater than 99% safety probability, which minimizes risk to safe landing and delivery of the MARE science payload to the intended terrain region.

MARE (Moon Age and Regolith Explorer)↗
NASA NTRS1999

X-33 Attitude Control Using the XRS-2200 Linear Aerospike Engine

The Vehicle Control Systems Team at Marshall Space Flight Center, Structures and Dynamics Laboratory, Guidance and Control Systems Division is designing, under a cooperative agreement with Lockheed Martin Skunkworks, the Ascent, Transition, and Entry flight attitude control systems for the X-33 experimental vehicle. Test flights, while suborbital, will achieve sufficient altitudes and Mach numbers to test Single Stage To Orbit, Reusable Launch Vehicle technologies. Ascent flight control phase, the focus of this paper, begins at liftoff and ends at linear aerospike main engine cutoff (MECO). The X-33 attitude control system design is confronted by a myriad of design challenges: a short design cycle, the X-33 incremental test philosophy, the concurrent design philosophy chosen for the X-33 program, and the fact that the attitude control system design is, as usual, closely linked to many other subsystems and must deal with constraints and requirements from these subsystems. Additionally, however, and of special interest, the use of the linear aerospike engine is a departure from the gimbaled engines traditionally used for thrust vector control (TVC) in launch vehicles and poses certain design challenges. This paper discusses the unique problem of designing the X-33 attitude control system with the linear aerospike engine, requirements development, modeling and analyses that verify the design.

Hall, Charles E.↗
NASA NTRS1976

SMS engineering design report

The engineering design for the Shuttle Missions Simulator is presented in sections, with each section representing a subsystem development activity. Subsystems covered include: electrical power system; mechanical power system; main propellant and external tank; solid rocket booster; reaction control system; orbital maneuvering system; guidance, navigation, and control; data processing system; mission control center interface; and image display system.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1998

X-33 Attitude Control System Design for Ascent, Transition, and Entry Flight Regimes

The Vehicle Control Systems Team at Marshall Space Flight Center, Systems Dynamics Laboratory, Guidance and Control Systems Division is designing under a cooperative agreement with Lockheed Martin Skunkworks, the Ascent, Transition, and Entry flight attitude control system for the X-33 experimental vehicle. Ascent flight control begins at liftoff and ends at linear aerospike main engine cutoff (NECO) while Transition and Entry flight control begins at MECO and concludes at the terminal area energy management (TAEM) interface. TAEM occurs at approximately Mach 3.0. This task includes not only the design of the vehicle attitude control systems but also the development of requirements for attitude control system components and subsystems. The X-33 attitude control system design is challenged by a short design cycle, the design environment (Mach 0 to about Mach 15), and the X-33 incremental test philosophy. The X-33 design-to-launch cycle of less than 3 years requires a concurrent design approach while the test philosophy requires design adaptation to vehicle variations that are a function of Mach number and mission profile. The flight attitude control system must deal with the mixing of aerosurfaces, reaction control thrusters, and linear aerospike engine control effectors and handle parasitic effects such as vehicle flexibility and propellant sloshing from the uniquely shaped propellant tanks. The attitude control system design is, as usual, closely linked to many other subsystems and must deal with constraints and requirements from these subsystems.

Hall, Charles E.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Solar Dynamics Observatory Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Overview

The Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) was designed and built at the Goddard Space Flight Center, launched from Cape Canaveral on February 11, 2010, and reached its final geosynchronous science orbit on March 16, 2010. The purpose of SDO is to observe the Sun and continuously relay data to a dedicated ground station. SDO remains Sun-pointing throughout most of its mission for the instruments to take measurements of the Sun. The SDO attitude control system (ACS) is a single-fault tolerant design. Its fully redundant attitude sensor complement includes sixteen coarse Sun sensors (CSSs), a digital Sun sensor (DSS), three two-axis inertial reference units (IRUs), and two star trackers (STs). The ACS also makes use of the four guide telescopes included as a part of one of the science instruments. Attitude actuation is performed using four reaction wheels assemblies (RWAs) and eight thrusters, with a single main engine used to provide velocity-change thrust for orbit raising. The attitude control software has five nominal control modes, three wheel-based modes and two thruster-based modes. A wheel-based Safehold running in the attitude control electronics box improves the robustness of the system as a whole. All six modes are designed on the same basic proportional-integral-derivative attitude error structure, with more robust modes setting their integral gains to zero. This paper details the final overall design of the SDO guidance, navigation, and control (GN&C) system and how it was used in practice during SDO launch, commissioning, and nominal operations. This overview will include the ACS control modes, attitude determination and sensor calibration, the high gain antenna (HGA) calibration, and jitter mitigation operation. The Solar Dynamics Observatory mission is part of the NASA Living With a Star program, which seeks to understand the changing Sun and its effects on the Solar System, life, and society. To this end, the SDO spacecraft carries three Sun-observing instruments: Helioseismic and Magnetic Imager (HMI), led by Stanford University; Atmospheric Imaging Assembly (AIA), led by Lockheed Martin Space and Astrophysics Laboratory; and Extreme Ultraviolet Variability Experiment (EVE), led by the University of Colorado. The basic mission is to observe the Sun for a very high percentage of the 5-year mission (10-year goal) with long stretches of uninterrupted observations and with constant, high-data-rate transmission to a dedicated ground station to be located in White Sands, New Mexico. These goals guided the design of the spacecraft bus that will carry and service the three-instrument payload. Overarching design goals for the bus are geosynchronous orbit, near-constant Sun observations with the ability to fly through eclipses, and constant HGA contact with the dedicated ground station. A three-axis stabilized ACS is needed both to point at the Sun accurately and to keep the roll about the Sun vector correctly positioned with respect to the solar north pole. This roll control is especially important for the magnetic field imaging of HM I. The mission requirements have several general impacts on the ACS design. Both the AIA and HMI instruments are very sensitive to the blurring caused by jitter. Each has an image stabilization system (ISS) with some ability to filter out high frequency motion, but below the bandwidth of the ISS the control system must compensate for disturbances within the ACS bandwidth or avoid exciting jitter at higher frequencies. Within the ACS bandwidth, the control requirement imposed by AIA is to place the center of the solar disk no more than 2 arc sec, 3 , from a body-defined target based on one of the GTs that accompany the instrument. This body-defined target, called the science reference boresight (SRB), was determined from the postlaunch orientation of the GTs by averaging the bounding telescope boresights for pitch to get a pitch SRB coordinate, and by averaging the bounding boresights for yaw toet the yaw SRB coordinate. The location of this SRB in the 0.5-deg field-of-view for each GT then becomes the central target for each telescope; one GT is selected for use as the ACS controlling guide telescope (CGT) at any given time. Fine Sun-pointing is effected based on this SRB for all three instruments when the Sun is within the linear range of the CGT. In addition to limiting jitter, HMI science requires averaging several observations, making the instrument sensitive to low frequency motion that induces differential motion between each observation. This requires the spacecraft attitude to be stable about the roll axis to approximately 10 arcsec over a ten-minute period. Instrument calibrations require that the spacecraft point the SRB up to 2.5 degrees in pitch and yaw away from the center of the Sun, placing the Sun outside the field-of-view of the guide telescopes. In such instances, when the GTs cannot provide the definitive target for the ACS, on-board attitude determination combined with ephemeris prediction of the Sun direction must provide the definitive target. EVE is capable of observing the Sun with less dependence on attitude control. However, the ground data processing needs for calibrations result in the most strict attitude knowledge requirements for the mission: [35,70,70] arcsec, 3 , of knowledge with respect to the center of the solar disk. In addition to driving the ACS sensor selection, the knowledge requirements, which have their effect primarily during Inertial mode calibrations, drive the accuracy requirements for the solar ephemeris. The need to achieve and maintain geosynchronous orbit (GEO) drove the need for high-efficiency propulsive systems and appropriate attitude control. The main engine provided high specific impulse for the maneuvers to attain GEO, while the smaller ACS thrusters managed the disturbance torques of the larger engine and provided the capability for much smaller adjustment burns on orbit. SDO s large solar profile means that solar radiation pressure is a large torque disturbance, and the momentum buildup from this disturbance and the GEO altitude drives the ACS to use thrusters to manage vehicle momentum. The demanding data capture budget for the mission, however, requires SDO to avoid frequent thruster maneuvers, while concerns about on-orbit jitter restrict the maximum desired wheel speeds desired from the RWAs. The plan for on-orbit wheel speed and momentum management will be discussed as well as what is now being done in operation after the jitter environment was characterized. The SDO ACS hardware complement is single-fault tolerant. Two main processors carry virtually identical copies of the command and data handling and ACS software, and two identical attitude control electronics (ACE) boxes carry Coldfire processors with contingency ACS software and other hardware interface cards; the ACE structure allows reaction wheels to be commanded by the Sun-pointing Safehold independent of the Mil Std 1553 data bus. The sixteen Adcole CSSs are grouped into primary and backup sets of eight sensors, each set providing the ability to calculate a sun vector. Each set of eight eyes provides full 4 -steradian coverage. The Adcole DSS comprises an optics head and a separate electronics box providing a 1553 data interface. The electronics box is mounted inside the Faraday cage created by the spacecraft bus module. The DSS head with its 32- deg square FOV is mounted on the instrument module with its boresight along the spacecraft X axis, nearly aligned with the Sun during observations. Adcole has designed the DSS calibration parameters so that the accuracy is 0.24 arcminutes within 10 deg of the boresight, and diminishes to 3 arcminutes as the Sun moves towards the edges of its FOV . This DSS calibration scheme provides higher accuracy attitude determination over the range of the instrument calibration maneuvers.

Morgenstern, Wendy M.↗
NASA NTRS1987

Space Shuttle guidance for multiple main engine failures during first stage

This paper presents contingency abort guidance schemes recently developed for multiple Space Shuttle main engine failures during the first two minutes of flight (first stage). The ascent and entry guidance schemes greatly improve the possibility of the crew and/or the Orbiter surviving a first stage contingency abort. Both guidance schemes were required to meet certain structural and controllability constraints. In addition, the systems were designed with the flexibility to allow for seasonal variations in the atmosphere and wind. The ascent scheme guides the vehicle to a desirable, lofted state at solid rocket booster burnout while reducing the structural loads on the vehicle. After Orbiter separation from the solid rockets and the external tank, the entry scheme guides the Orbiter through one of two possible entries. If the proper altitude/range/velocity conditions have been met, a return-to-launch-site 'Split-S' maneuver may be attempted. Otherwise, a down-range abort to an equilibrium glide and subsequent crew bailout is performed.

Sponaugle, Steven J.↗
NASA NTRS1971

Telemetry and the integrated avionics approach.

The unique problems encountered in the integrated approach to aircraft and spacecraft avionics system designs are discussed with the emphasis on recent advances in telemetry as a factor facilitating the integration. A listing of subsystems planned for integration on the Space Shuttle vehicle is given, covering auxiliary pumping and propellant, crew controls and displays, computation, communications and radar, electric power, guidance, navigation and control, air-bearing engines, main engines, reaction control, and structural/mechanical elements. Considerations are given for the multiplexed data bus design applicable to integrated avionics.

Frost, W. O.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Preliminary Characterization of the Altair Lunar Lander Slosh Dynamics and Some Implications for the Thrust Vector Control Design

This paper describes a conceptual design of the Thrust Vector Control (TVC) system and preliminary modeling of propellant slosh, for the Altair Lunar Lander. Altair is a vehicle element of the NASA Constellation Program aimed at returning humans to the moon. Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C) is the measurement and control of spacecraft position, velocity, and attitude in support of mission objectives. One key GN&C function is the commanding of effectors that control attitude and impart delta V on the vehicle, utilizing both reaction control system (RCS) thrusters and throttling and TVC gimbaling of the vehicle main engine. Both the Altair descent and ascent modules carry fuel tanks. During thrusting maneuvers, the sloshing of liquid fuels in partially filled tanks can interact with the controlled system in such a way as to cause the overall system to be unstable. These fuel tanks must be properly placed, relative to the spacecraft's c.m., to avoid any unstable interactions. Following this will be a discussion of propellant slosh modeling work performed for the present vehicle configuration, including slosh frequency and participatory fluid mass predictions. Knowing the range of slosh mode frequencies over mission phases, the TVC bandwidth must be carefully selected so as not to excite the slosh modes at those frequencies. The likely need to increase the damping factor of slosh modes via baffles will also be discussed. To conclude, a discussion of operations procedures aimed at minimizing TVC-slosh interactions will be given.

Lee, Allan Y.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Impact of NASA’s Entry Systems Modeling Project on Planetary Mission Design

Planetary missions continue to grow larger and more complex. Furthermore, the current focus on human exploration of the Moon and Mars, as well as Mars Sample Return(MSR), place increas-ingly stringent requirements on the reliability of the entry, descent, and landing (EDL) system that ensures the safe delivery of payload or crew to their destination. Planetary EDL is an area in which mission designers are critically reliant on modeling and simulation to demonstrate the reliability of the system, as there are no ground facilities that are able to fully test these systems in a flight-relevant environment. NASA’s state-of-the-art modeling and simulation capability must continually evolve to meet the needs of the next generation of planetary EDL. To accomplish this aim, NASA’s Entry Systems Modeling (ESM) Project was formed in 2013and is funded bythe Space Technology Mission Directorate(STMD) and Science Mission Directorate (SMD). ESM is the Agency’s only cross-cutting effort for advancing entry systems modeling and simulation capabilities across a range of technical disciplines and Solar System destinations. ESM is a portfolio project covering a variety of mid-TRL research efforts within four core EDL-related areas of investment: (1) Thermal protection material modeling, (2) Shock layer kinetics and radiation, (3) Aerosciences, and (4) Guidance, navigation, and con-trol. The material modeling group creates detailed material response modelsof thermal protection systems (TPS)from the micro to macro scale, and at the fun-damental and engineering levels. Shock layer kinetics and radiation focuses on radiative heating of space-craft, quantum chemistry and benchmark experiments for validation.Aerosciences is a broad research area that impacts many aspects of entry systems, including parachutes, aerodynamics, and turbulent heating augmentation due to TPS roughness.The guidance, navigation,and control effort under ESM is expanding the capabilities of NASA’s main flight mechanics tool, POST2, for use on high-performance computing architectures and to generalize interoperability with external applications for more detailed end-to-end simula-tion.In addition, several focusedresearch topics have been approvedto augment ESM’s core portfolio. These include efforts for deep post-flight analysis of Mars 2020/MEDLI2 flight data; development ofTPS failure models; improvement of hypersonic wakeflow models; and a recently concluded effort to provide material response models for NuSil-coated PICA heat-shield material. This presentation will discuss each of these investment areas and demonstrate via real mission examples how advances to the state-of-the-art enabled by ESM are directly impacting the missions of today and tomorrow, including InSight, Mars 2020, Mars Sample Return, Orion, and Dragonfly.

Entry Systems Modeling↗
NASA NTRS2011

High-Payoff Space Transportation Design Approach with a Technology Integration Strategy

A general architectural design sequence is described to create a highly efficient, operable, and supportable design that achieves an affordable, repeatable, and sustainable transportation function. The paper covers the following aspects of this approach in more detail: (1) vehicle architectural concept considerations (including important strategies for greater reusability); (2) vehicle element propulsion system packaging considerations; (3) vehicle element functional definition; (4) external ground servicing and access considerations; and, (5) simplified guidance, navigation, flight control and avionics communications considerations. Additionally, a technology integration strategy is forwarded that includes: (a) ground and flight test prior to production commitments; (b) parallel stage propellant storage, such as concentric-nested tanks; (c) high thrust, LOX-rich, LOX-cooled first stage earth-to-orbit main engine; (d) non-toxic, day-of-launch-loaded propellants for upper stages and in-space propulsion; (e) electric propulsion and aero stage control.

McCleskey, C. M.↗