Search NASASearch

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “remote control communications delay automation”

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.

Toward Integrated Operator Interface for Advanced Teleoperation under Time-Delay

This paper briefly describes an Advanced Teleoperator (ATOP) system and its control station where a variety of computer-based operator interface devices and techniques are integrated into a functional setting, accommodating a primary operator and secondary operators. Computer graphics is a key operator interface component in the control station where new types of manual interface devices also are employed. The results of some generic and applications task experiments are summarized, including the performance of a simulated remote satellite servicing task, carried out under four to eight seconds communications time delay, using satellite TV and Internet computer communication links. In conclusion, the paper highlights the lessons learned so far,.

remote control communications delay automation

Human Factors of Remotely Piloted Aircraft

The civilian use of remotely piloted, or unmanned aircraft is expected to increase rapidly in the years ahead. Despite being referred to as unmanned some of the major challenges confronting this emerging sector relate to human factors. As unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) are introduced into civil airspace, a failure to adequately consider human factors could result in preventable accidents that may not only result in loss of life, but may also undermine public confidence in remotely piloted operations. Key issues include pilot situational awareness, collision avoidance in the absence of an out-the-window view, the effects of time delays in communication and control systems, control handovers, the challenges of very long duration flights, and the design of the control station. Problems have included poor physical layout of controls, non-intuitive automation interfaces, an over-reliance on text displays, and complicated sequences of menu selection to perform routine tasks. Some of the interface problems may have been prevented had an existing regulation or cockpit design principle been applied. In other cases, the design problems may indicate a lack of suitable guidance material.

unmanned aircraft systems

Uncrewed Lunar Surface Operations and Support Activities

Sustained human presence on the surface of the Moon and future missions to Mars require increased independence from surface crews and Earth-based mission control to operate efficiently, safely, and reliably. The time for surface crews to perform tasks will be limited. Extravehicular activities by surface personnel are burdensome and time-consuming, even when a continuous human presence on the surface occurs. Identifying and balancing human/automation roles and tasks and infusing automation and autonomy practices early in a system’s lifecycle will be essential to achieve mission objectives. Among these objectives are attaining a sustained human presence, improving performance and mission effectiveness, reducing operations and maintenance (O&M) costs, and ensuring operations that are robust to communication delays. To achieve these objectives, an operational shift toward increased automation and autonomy with less reliance on humans is needed. Uncrewed lunar surface operations and support activities occur when surface crews are not present or are independent of surface crew timeline activities requiring no surface crew oversight or intervention. These uncrewed surface opportunities can also be planned to minimize crew workload that avoids routine maintenance and support tasks, thus maximizing crew exploration time. Uncrewed preparations such as staging and prepositioning equipment and materials before the crew arrives could improve crew task efficiency. Additional opportunities exist to conduct uncrewed science, exploration, and utilization. Uncrewed surface architecture functions can include science and exploration; habitation; launch and landing support; surface communication and navigation; surface power generation and distribution; human surface mobility; lifting, handling, manipulating; excavation, construction, and site preparation; logistics management; maintenance and repair; surface resource utilization; integrated site operations and shared support services (e.g., site scheduling/prioritization, dust mitigation/contamination control, and surface safety). Early robotic lunar surface campaigns will provide information on the availability of resources, such as oxygen and water, and demonstrate surface-based technologies. After the Artemis III human lunar return mission, a series of landers will deliver surface systems, cargo, supplies, science packages, spare parts, and commodities. A balance of crewed and uncrewed surface operations will enable a sustained lunar surface presence at the South Pole of the Moon at a site that will be known as the Artemis Base Camp (ABC). It is envisioned that base camp operations on and around the Moon will then help prepare for the mission durations and activities needed to support the first human mission to Mars. Before long-duration crew missions to the base camp can occur, the necessary surface infrastructure will be pre-deployed and verified operational. Surface assets will be teleoperated and remotely managed from Earth. Additionally, robotic and short-duration crewed missions to the ABC will ensure the site’s merit to achieve long-term science objectives, availability of usable resources, and that terrain, seasonal variations, and illumination conditions are acceptable. ABC will consist of different areas where specific functions and services are rendered, including: • Launch and Landing Area • Habitation Area • Power Production Area • Resource Areas Launch and Landing Area—The launch and landing area will support associated functions for the arrival and departure of vehicles, such as crewed landing and ascent and uncrewed cargo deliveries and offloading. It will evolve from an unimproved site at the beginning of the exploration campaign to a more sustainable landing and launch area that can support repeated arrivals and departures. Initial uncrewed Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) surface operations may include emplacement of navigation beacons and communication equipment, real-time video and photography of landing/liftoff events, and element repositioning, such as portable utility power (PUP) (applicable for other landed assets at other areas). Site preparations, such as surface leveling, soil compaction, and berm/path construction, may be needed for a more sustainable launch and landing area capable of accommodating vehicles that are increasingly more reusable and reduce the effects of plume surface interactions and ejecta impacts on nearby surface assets. During the ABC missions, cargo and logistics will be delivered to the lunar surface via robotic cargo landers before the crew arrives. These shipments, which can arrive in pressurized logistics carriers, will deliver the logistics necessary to support a crewed mission and include items such as food, water, equipment spares, etc. Providing the capability to retrieve, offload, and transport the logistics closer to the ABC site before the arrival of the crew will increase the overall efficiency of crew operations once they arrive. In the sustained phase of exploration, other supporting services may be needed, such as lander propellant servicing, surface power services, commodity refreshes, and additional inspection, maintenance, and repair capabilities, to sustain a cadence of extended personnel stays and cargo arrivals and departures. Habitation Area—Uncrewed support to surface habitation could involve supporting activation and pre-entry operations of the habitat while the crew is in orbit at the Gateway outpost preparing for a surface landing. Surface Habitat (SH) uncrewed operations may include bringing the cabin environment to a habitable temperature and air mix and activating other critical crew support systems. Potential crop production uncrewed tasks in the SH could also include autonomous watering and tending. Additionally, when the crew departs, the SH enters dormancy for the long period of uncrewed operation. A logistical staging area could also be collocated near the SH. If so, staging operations for crew supplies, waste re-location, and recycling operations may be opportunities for uncrewed operations. Power Production Area—The Fission Surface Power (FSP) element and its supporting distribution equipment provide power to surface elements as needed across the ABC to supplement day-to-day operations and survive lunar nights. Uncrewed support of this power system includes any initial LTV-assisted deployments of cables and other distributed equipment, associated electrical connections, and system testing and activation operations. Robotically performing some inspections, maintenance, or repair tasks on the power distribution equipment could reduce the surface crew workload. Resource Area— Uncrewed resource prospecting, mapping, and characterizing possible resource sites is likely to be time-consuming and represents an opportunity for uncrewed operations between crewed missions. Uncrewed mobile equipment operations will be needed in the extreme environments of permanently shadowed locations where resource extractions occur. As In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) pilot plant operations begin, uncrewed surface support activities with available mobile and portable assets (LTV, PUP, etc.) will better support these operations. Any produced commodities can be stored at a centralized storage location for future use. Also associated with these operations is the use of mobile robotic excavators for resource acquisition and robotic/autonomous regolith processing. The waste tailings generated during excavation and regolith processing would also need to be transported and deposited at a dedicated location. Surface assets will continue operating between crew visits to maintain surface capabilities, conduct lunar surface science, technology demonstrations, and public outreach opportunities. Additionally, certain sustaining tasks that would consume valuable crew time could be performed before crew arrival, or after their departure. This capability may offer more affordable options to construct, activate, test, and maintain a broad set of surface assets. Telerobotically operated human surface mobility systems, such as the LTV and Pressurized Rover (PR), can be utilized for various tasks. Surface environmental conditions pose a distinct challenge for all these activities. Surface illumination and localized shadows are one such factor. Night-survival operations could consist of thermal management, battery pre-charging, and load shedding. Some surface systems may hibernate through the night and then awake and continue nominal operations. Uncrewed mobile assets may use a more adaptive approach to optimize their power and operations; one method is to follow the sunlight. Night-survival operations may be initiated remotely by teleoperation, automated, or accomplished by supervised autonomous operation. The ability to pre-deploy and control remote assets in orbit or on Mars before the arrival of the mission crew is a key capability that can be simulated on the moon. The base camp provides a venue where these advanced operational concepts, technologies, and autonomous methods and techniques, including the incorporation of time delays to simulate Earth-Mars latency can be replicated to help buy down future Mars mission risks. This paper will examine the evolution of uncrewed lunar surface operations and support activities. It will also discuss the lunar surface environmental conditions (thermal, lighting, terrain, topography, communications) along with the challenges they pose on uncrewed surface operations, and the performance of these activities with limited to minimal human interaction and/or teleoperation. Since lunar missions include Mars mission analogs, such investigation provides the framework for future uncrewed Mars mission support.

Mark E Lewis

Autonomous Operations: Expectations vs. Reality (at NASA)

- Future deep-space exploration drives need for autonomy - Communication time delay between Earth and deep-space system precludes Earth-based remote-control - Autonomy is: - Acting separately from others (Webster’s Dictionary) - Able to independently choose how to act to achieve goals - Autonomy is a relative term: Autonomous from whom? for what purpose? and when? - Autonomous Operations is: - Automatically controlled operation of a system that replaces human effort - Able to perform a pre-specified set of instructions on its own - Automation is a tool that enables and supports autonomy

Autonomous Operation

Practical Insights on Applying Simulation-Based Control Methods in Experimental Studies

Advanced nuclear reactors are crucial to the future of energy both in the United States and around the globe. In contrast to the current operating fleet, they are characterized as being deployable in remote locations and able to operate in semi-autonomous or autonomous fashion. This leap forward necessitates a new reactor control paradigm. Because advanced nuclear reactors are still under development in the United States, the creation of new control methods to achieve autonomous operations has been based on systems modeling and simulation. However, an important factor in successfully deploying these new control methods is the ability to seamlessly transition from simulation environments to real-world settings. Control methods tested in both simulation and experimental settings need to be investigated in the context of advanced reactor applications. This work developed a series of simple controllers for Idaho National Laboratory (INL)’s Microreactor Applications Research Validation and Evaluation (MARVEL) microreactor operating in load-following scenarios. These controllers were tested in both simulation and experimental settings, and a comparative performance analysis was performed. The simulation tests leveraged the Control and Optimization Modular Modeling Application for Nuclear Deployment (COMMAND) software developed in a previous stage of the current effort, along with the MARVEL Reactor Excursion and Leak Analysis Program (RELAP5-3D) and Monte Carlo N-Particle (MCNP) models. The experimental tests leveraged the COMMAND software, MARVEL models, and the U.S. Department of Energy Microreactor Program’s Microreactor Automated Control System (MACS). MACS was developed to serve as a control method testbed. It was customized to mirror the MARVEL microreactor, and COMMAND enabled MACS to emulate the physics of MARVEL. The load-following controller was developed using the simulation platform, with efforts to emulate real systems by introducing actuator saturation and noise. These factors were incrementally accounted for in the controller design. After finalizing the controller design, it was implemented with the experimental setup. The experimental conditions tested included an initial test under conditions similar to the final simulation test, and two additional scenarios. The first scenario introduced additional actuator saturation to account for equipment aging over time, which was unknown to the controller. The second scenario introduced sensor delay, a phenomenon anticipated with the use of remote operations or wireless communication in advanced reactors. These tests revealed several notable differences. While the controller performed well in simulation, it exhibited several limitations when transitioning to hardware. The main challenges involved maintaining the steady-state target power, as evidenced by larger error values between the true reactor power and setpoint power, as well as persistent oscillations in controlled reactor power. These issues could lead to unacceptable transient conditions in real reactor testing. Introducing actuator aging and stochastic delays in the experimental setup significantly impacted controller performance, resulting in increased overshoot and undershoot, and exacerbated error and oscillations previously mentioned. These findings underscore the importance of experimental testbeds for testing and validating control methods, as controllers developed using only theory and/or simulation may perform unexpectedly when applied to actual hardware. This research emphasizes the need for an experimental testbed for achieving such validation.

46 - INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AN