Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “mission autonomy”

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 181 records · Page 10
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Exploration Medical Capability Systems Engineering Overview and Update

Long duration Lunar and Martian missions will change the way NASA currently practices medicine. The missions will require more autonomous capability compared to current low Earth orbit operations. For the medical system, lack of consumable resupply, evacuation opportunities, and real-time ground support are key drivers toward greater autonomy. Recognition of the limited mission and vehicle resources available to carry out exploration missions motivates the Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) Element’s approach to enabling the necessary autonomy. The ExMC Systems Engineering (SE) team’s mission is to “Define, develop, validate, and manage the technical system design needed to implement exploration medical capabilities for Mars and test the design in a progression of proving grounds.” The Element’s work must integrate with the overall exploration mission and vehicle design efforts to successfully provide exploration medical capabilities. ExMC is using Model-Based System Engineering (MBSE) to accomplish its integrative goals. The MBSE approach to medical system design offers a paradigm shift toward greater integration between the vehicle and the medical system, and directly supports the transition of Earth-reliant ISS operations to the Earth-independent operations envisioned for Mars. This talk will provide a high-level overview of what the ExMC SE team has accomplished since the last IWS and what they are focusing on for the upcoming year.

Kerry McGuire↗
NASA NTRS1980

Air Force space power technology program

The military spacecraft power subsystem design requirements, developments goals, and planned technology efforts are summarized. The mission drivers of performance (weight and volume), hardening (survivability), autonomy, reliability, and miniaturization influence space mission effectiveness are outlined. The anticipated performance versus power level trends for reactor static conversion systems are illustrated. A conceptual design for a space based radar system is also given.

Barthelemy, R.↗
NASA NTRS2005

The Earth Science Afternoon Constellation: Preparing for Autonomous but Coordinated Operations

This paper describes how the challenges of coordinating the autonomous operations of geographically dispersed mission control centers for several small and large satellites are being overcome. The Earth Science Afternoon Constellation, also referred to as the "A-Train", is an international grouping of five NASA satellites (two major NASA EOS missions and three NASA/Earth System Science Pathfinder missions) and one French satellite orbiting in close proximity. This grouping of satellites provides scientists with the opportunity to perform coincident observations using data from two or more instruments on various satellites with measurements taken at approximately the same time. Three of the six missions are currently on-orbit, with the two missions expected to join the constellation later this year and one mission in 2007. The operational challenges are daunting for several reasons. There are several Mission Control Centers (widely separated on two continents), operating autonomously under tight budget constraints. All of the Mission Control Centers have reasons to be concerned about safety while flying in close proximity to other satellites, but most Centers did not have the resources or the desire to address this concern alone - the interfaces are too numerous and anticipated operations too costly. Clearly, an efficient approach was needed. This paper describes the steps taken to make this Earth science constellation a reality. Agreements were forged to allow the Mission Control Centers to maintain their autonomy, while ensuring their satellite's safety. Each member mission in the constellation operates independently in accordance with its own mission requirements, but the member missions have agreed to coordinate their operations, i.e., orbital positions and control to ensure the safety of the entire constellation. A centralized system was developed at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center to collect, analyze, and distribute ephemeris data used by each of the mission teams to determine the positions of the satellites in the constellation. The system issues warnings regarding possible dangerous configurations, eliminating the need for redundant capabilities at each Mission Control Center. On-orbit contingency situations were identified and analyzed; agreements were reached in advance of contingency operations to ensure that coordination between the Mission Control Centers can be handled expeditiously and fairly. In this manner, recovery from anomalous situations can be more quickly realized, thereby increasing the science return and reducing costs. The process used to develop these contingency procedures and the systems used to facilitate the contingency resolution are described as well.

Case, Warren↗
NASA NTRS2014

Autonomous Mission Operations Roadmap

As light time delays increase, the number of such situations in which crew autonomy is the best way to conduct the mission is expected to increase. However, there are significant open questions regarding which functions to allocate to ground and crew as the time delays increase. In situations where the ideal solution is to allocate responsibility to the crew and the vehicle, a second question arises: should the activity be the responsibility of the crew or an automated vehicle function? More specifically, we must answer the following questions: What aspects of mission operation responsibilities (Plan, Train, Fly) should be allocated to ground based or vehicle based planning, monitoring, and control in the presence of significant light-time delay between the vehicle and the Earth?How should the allocated ground based planning, monitoring, and control be distributed across the flight control team and ground system automation? How should the allocated vehicle based planning, monitoring, and control be distributed between the flight crew and onboard system automation?When during the mission should responsibility shift from flight control team to crew or from crew to vehicle, and what should the process of shifting responsibility be as the mission progresses? NASA is developing a roadmap of capabilities for Autonomous Mission Operations for human spaceflight. This presentation will describe the current state of development of this roadmap, with specific attention to in-space inspection tasks that crews might perform with minimum assistance from the ground.

Mission Operations↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Improving Efficacy and Safety of Pharmacological Treatment Through Precision Medicine and Pharmacogenomics for Human Deep Space Exploration

INTRODUCTION: Future spaceflight will require increased crew medical autonomy as exploration class missions expanding duration and distance from Earth, especially for Mars missions. As mission duration increases, it will be even more essential to have appropriate amounts of effective medication to ensure the maintenance of crew health and performance. Conversely, mass and volume constraints will become more severe as future spaceflight expands beyond low Earth orbit, where resupply is difficult or becomes impossible. These constraints thus convey an urgency to further tailor medications included in the spacecraft formulary and increased examination of appropriate dosing regimens. BACKGROUND: Precision Health is an exciting area of cutting-edge research and medicine focused on maintaining an individual’s health and performance through in-depth understanding of an individual’s unique factors and molecular profiles. This approach can be adapted to better predict, monitor, and address physiological responses to the spaceflight environment. One example is the field of pharmacogenomics (PGX),the study of how the expressed genome impacts drug responses with the goal of prescribing the right dose of the right drug at the right time. Specifically, PGX testing provides valuable information on an individual’s precise allelic variations to guide physicians in making informed decisions on pharmaceutical choice and dosing to avoid adverse drug events and maximize pharmacological efficacy. The goal of this study was to evaluate which drugs in the current space pharmacy could be evaluated using PGX testing and to understand the potential impact on the health and wellness of the astronaut population. Additionally, we sought to evaluate clinically available FDA-approved PGX testing solutions to better understand its applicability. METHODS: A complete list of drugs onboard the International Space Station (ISS) was analyzed for risk and likelihood of drug failure and PGX actionability. This analysis encompassed both personal astronaut medications, including supplements and over the counter drugs (n=151) and ISS MedKit formulary medications (n=95). Duplicate medications and different formulations were removed, which resulted in 157 total drugs used in the subsequent analysis. A 5x5 risk assessment table was produced by examining the likelihood of drug failure compared to the consequence of drug failure. Likelihood of individual drug failure was defined by whether existing processes are sufficient to prevent adverse events, as ranked from 1 (very low, can easily be prevented) to 5 (very high, cannot be prevented) during a Mars mission. In contrast, the consequence of drug failure was defined by impact to safety, schedule, cost or technical and ranked from 1 (very low) to 5 (very high).A comprehensive assessment of commercially available PGX solutions is currently underway to evaluate specimen requirements, cost/benefit analysis (cost vs. number of alleles assessed), utility of variant analysis, relevance to inflight medication usage, quality of reporting in enabling clinical application, and ease of integration into electronic medical records. RESULTS: Risk assessments(LxC 5x5 table) indicated29medicationswere in the yellow or red zone driven predominantly by drug failure or safety concerns, with the remainder(n=128)of the medications in the green zone where risk is acceptable. We found that current PGX testing results could impact 21% of the total medications in the ISS MedKit and IMAK; of these, 9 medications currently have direct clinically actionable guidance available. Results of the clinical PGX solution evaluations as related to these medications will be presented. CONCLUSION: PGX testing has demonstrated clear benefits in terrestrial medicine and clinical environments for the selection of proper medications, avoiding adverse drug reactions, and maximizing drug efficacy. We propose that similar benefits would be bestowed on the astronaut and commercial spaceflight passenger population by performing preemptive pre-flight PGX testing to reduce risk of mission failure due to ineffective or toxic medications, improve targeting drug efficacy and safety, and further open the door to countermeasure research exploring PGX-related allelic variants. For example, PGX results could allow tailoring of specific medications at optimal doses more precisely to each individual astronaut, particularly in areas of space motion sickness, sleep aids, and analgesics. An additional benefit is that PGX results could provide information for better planning of the components of a space pharmacy for deep space missions to be more cost effective and more efficient in the utilization of limited pharmaceutical resources. Finally, while PGX testing of the astronaut corps is not currently conducted, this approach could provide immediate impact in support of mission success by reducing risks, optimizing astronaut performance, and providing valuable insights into long-term astronaut health. Such advancements in clinical decision making are important next steps in building dynamic individual risk profiles for astronauts, increasing crew autonomy and providing tailored countermeasures

Alice R W Tang↗
NASA NTRS2017

Systems Engineering for Space Exploration Medical Capabilities

Human exploration missions to beyond low Earth orbit destinations such as Mars will present significant new challenges to crew health management during a mission compared to current low Earth orbit operations. For the medical system, lack of consumable resupply, evacuation opportunities, and real-time ground support are key drivers toward greater autonomy. Recognition of the limited mission and vehicle resources available to carry out exploration missions motivates the Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) Element's approach to enabling the necessary autonomy. The Element's work must integrate with the overall exploration mission and vehicle design efforts to successfully provide exploration medical capabilities. ExMC is applying systems engineering principles and practices to accomplish its integrative goals. This paper discusses the structured and integrative approach that is guiding the medical system technical development. Assumptions for the required levels of care on exploration missions, medical system guiding principles, and a Concept of Operations are early products that capture and clarify stakeholder expectations. Mobel-Based Systems Engineering techniques are then applied to define medical system behavior and architecture. Interfaces to other flight and ground systems, and within the medical system are identified and defined. Initial requirements and traceability are established, which sets the stage for identification of future technology development needs. An early approach for verification and validation, taking advantage of terrestrial and near-Earth exploration system analogs, is also defined to further guide system planning and development.

Mindock, Jennifer↗
NASA NTRS2020

Preparing for Human Missions to Mars: The role of ISS and Artemis as Analogs for Research and Technology Testing

The hazards of spaceflight to the human system are present in in varying degrees on different spaceflight platforms: altered gravity, isolation and confinement, distance from Earth, radiation, and hostile closed environments. A strategic view of the fidelity of hazards experienced on different platforms can shape the testing plans for human research and technology demonstration related to crew health and performance. Working across the international partnership, the International Space Station (ISS) is planning periods of modified operations to improve the fidelity of Mars simulations. To understand transit durations as an independent variable, a series of 1-year, 6-month and 30-45 day missions are being planned on ISS. Standard measurements across ISS missions of different durations, lunar missions and ground analogs offers the opportunity to distinguish different hazards and their effects in the context of the relevance to future mission concepts. The ISS partnership is planning for additional test cases that are aligned with Mars mission plans. (1) Evaluating crew performance capabilities when transitioning to gravity after long durations in microgravity representative of a Mars transit. (2) Simulating crew medical care under Mars-like autonomous operations. (3) Identification and testing of operations under communications delay and autonomy expected for Mars missions and the linked effects on behavioral health and performance of the crew. Artemis missions serve as a valuable analogs for Mars surface operations, with partial gravity and deep space radiation hazards, but with crewmembers that are probably more physically capable than their counterparts would be after a Mars transit. Getting unobtrusive data from early Artemis missions, and knowledge gained from operational experience as Artemis operations develop can improve engineering design, medical requirements and countermeasures, and ultimately ensure mission success on Mars. Linking Mars architectures with the plans and capabilities for ISS and Artemis allows us to plan to most operationally relevant tests of crew health and performance on current spaceflight missions to inform planning for future missions to Mars. By using human spaceflight platforms as well as ground simulation in an integrated way, the international community can improve exploration readiness, develop countermeasures and reduce risks of future human space missions.

International Space Station↗
NASA NTRS2024

Towards Autonomous Surface Missions on Ocean Worlds

Through advanced autonomy testbed programs, NASA is setting the groundwork for one of its top priorities—the search for signs of life and potentially habitable bodies in our solar system and beyond. The prime destinations for such exploration are bodies containing liquid water, such as Jupiter’s moon Europa and Saturn’s moon Enceladus. Initial missions to these “ocean worlds” will be robotic and require a high degree of onboard autonomy due to long Earth-communication lags and blackouts, harsh surface environments, and limited battery life.

Khalil Michael Dalal↗
NASA NTRS2000

Spacecraft Autonomy and Automation: A Comparative Analysis of Strategies for Cost Effective Mission Operations

The evolution of satellite operations over the last 40 years has drastically changed. October 4, 1957 (during the cold war) the Soviet Union launched the world's first spacecraft into orbit. The Sputnik satellite orbited Earth for three months and catapulted the United States into a race for dominance in space. A year after Sputnik, President Dwight Eisenhower formed the National Space and Aeronautics Administration (NASA). With a team of scientists and engineers, NASA successfully launched Explorer 1, the first US satellite to orbit Earth. During these early years, massive amounts of ground support equipment and operators were required to successfully operate spacecraft vehicles. Today, budget reductions and technological advances have forced new approaches to spacecraft operations. These approaches require increasingly complex, on board spacecraft systems, that enable autonomous operations, resulting in more cost-effective mission operations. NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, considered world class in satellite development and operations, has developed and operated over 200 satellites during its 40 years of existence. NASA Goddard is adopting several new millennium initiatives that lower operational costs through the spacecraft autonomy and automation. This paper examines NASA's approach to spacecraft autonomy and ground system automation through a comparative analysis of satellite missions for Hubble Space Telescope-HST, Near Earth Asteroid Rendezvous-NEAR, and Solar Heliospheric Observatory-SoHO, with emphasis on cost reduction methods, risk analysis and anomalies and strategies employed for mitigating risk.

Wright, Nathaniel, Jr.↗
NASA NTRS2015

AMO EXPRESS: A Command and Control Experiment for Crew Autonomy Onboard the International Space Station

NASA is investigating a range of future human spaceflight missions, including both Mars-distance and Near Earth Object (NEO) targets. Of significant importance for these missions is the balance between crew autonomy and vehicle automation. As distance from Earth results in increasing communication delays, future crews need both the capability and authority to independently make decisions. However, small crews cannot take on all functions performed by ground today, and so vehicles must be more automated to reduce the crew workload for such missions.NASAs Advanced Exploration Systems Program funded Autonomous Mission Operations (AMO) project conducted an autonomous command and control experiment on-board the International Space Station that demonstrated single action intelligent procedures for crew command and control. The target problem was to enable crew initialization of a facility class rack with power and thermal interfaces, and involving core and payload command and telemetry processing, without support from ground controllers. This autonomous operations capability is enabling in scenarios such as initialization of a medical facility to respond to a crew medical emergency, and representative of other spacecraft autonomy challenges. The experiment was conducted using the Expedite the Processing of Experiments for Space Station (EXPRESS) rack 7, which was located in the Port 2 location within the U.S Laboratory onboard the International Space Station (ISS).

Autonomous Mission Operations↗
NASA NTRS2015

AMO EXPRESS: A Command and Control Experiment for Crew Autonomy Onboard the International Space Station

NASA is investigating a range of future human spaceflight missions, including both Mars-distance and Near Earth Object (NEO) targets. Of significant importance for these missions is the balance between crew autonomy and vehicle automation. As distance from Earth results in increasing communication delays, future crews need both the capability and authority to independently make decisions. However, small crews cannot take on all functions performed by ground today, and so vehicles must be more automated to reduce the crew workload for such missions. NASA's Advanced Exploration Systems Program funded Autonomous Mission Operations (AMO) project conducted an autonomous command and control experiment on-board the International Space Station that demonstrated single action intelligent procedures for crew command and control. The target problem was to enable crew initialization of a facility class rack with power and thermal interfaces, and involving core and payload command and telemetry processing, without support from ground controllers. This autonomous operations capability is enabling in scenarios such as initialization of a medical facility to respond to a crew medical emergency, and representative of other spacecraft autonomy challenges. The experiment was conducted using the Expedite the Processing of Experiments for Space Station (EXPRESS) rack 7, which was located in the Port 2 location within the U.S Laboratory onboard the International Space Station (ISS). Activation and deactivation of this facility is time consuming and operationally intensive, requiring coordination of three flight control positions, 47 nominal steps, 57 commands, 276 telemetry checks, and coordination of multiple ISS systems (both core and payload). Utilization of Draper Laboratory's Timeliner software, deployed on-board the ISS within the Command and Control (C&C) computers and the Payload computers, allowed development of the automated procedures specific to ISS without having to certify and employ novel software for procedure development and execution. The procedures contained the ground procedure logic and actions as possible to include fault detection and recovery capabilities.

Stetson, Howard K.↗
NASA NTRS2015

AMO EXPRESS: A Command and Control Experiment for Crew Autonomy Onboard the International Space Station

NASA is investigating a range of future human spaceflight missions, including both Mars-distance and Near Earth Object (NEO) targets. Of significant importance for these missions is the balance between crew autonomy and vehicle automation. As distance from Earth results in increasing communication delays, future crews need both the capability and authority to independently make decisions. However, small crews cannot take on all functions performed by ground today, and so vehicles must be more automated to reduce the crew workload for such missions. NASA's Advanced Exploration Systems Program funded Autonomous Mission Operations (AMO) project conducted an autonomous command and control experiment on-board the International Space Station that demonstrated single action intelligent procedures for crew command and control. The target problem was to enable crew initialization of a facility class rack with power and thermal interfaces, and involving core and payload command and telemetry processing, without support from ground controllers. This autonomous operations capability is enabling in scenarios such as initialization of a medical facility to respond to a crew medical emergency, and representative of other spacecraft autonomy challenges. The experiment was conducted using the Expedite the Processing of Experiments for Space Station (EXPRESS) rack 7, which was located in the Port 2 location within the U.S Laboratory onboard the International Space Station (ISS). Activation and deactivation of this facility is time consuming and operationally intensive, requiring coordination of three flight control positions, 47 nominal steps, 57 commands, 276 telemetry checks, and coordination of multiple ISS systems (both core and payload). Utilization of Draper Laboratory's Timeliner software, deployed on-board the ISS within the Command and Control (C&C) computers and the Payload computers, allowed development of the automated procedures specific to ISS without having to certify and employ novel software for procedure development and execution. The procedures contained the ground procedure logic and actions as possible to include fault detection and recovery capabilities. The autonomous operations concept includes a reduction of the amount of data a crew operator is required to verify during activation or de-activation, as well as integration of procedure execution status and relevant data in a single integrated display. During execution, the auto-procedures (via Timerliner) provide a step-by-step messaging paradigm and a high-level status upon termination. This messaging and high-level status is the only data generated for operator display. To enhance situational awareness of the operator, the Web-based Procedure Display (WebPD) provides a novel approach to the issues of procedure display and execution tracking. WebPD is a web based application that serves as the user interface for electronic procedure execution. It incorporates several aspects of the HTML5 standard. Procedures are written in a dialect of XML called Procedure Representation Language (PRL). WebPD tracks execution status in the procedure or procedures being displayed. WebPD aggregates and simplifies the auto-sequence execution status information, and formatted to be easily followed and understood by an operator who is not dedicated to actively monitoring the task. WebPD also provides an integrated data and control interface to pause or halt the execution in order to provide a check point of operation and to examine progress before starting the next sequence of activities. For this demonstration, the procedure was initiated and monitored from the ground. As the Timeliner sequences executed, their high-level execution status was written to PLMDM memory. This memory is read and downlinked via Ku-Band at a 1 Hz rate. The data containing the high-level execution status is de-commutated on the ground, and rebroadcast for WebPD consumption. A future demonstration will be performed onboard, with ISS astronauts initiating the operations instead of ground controllers. The AMO EXPRESS experiment demonstrated activation and de-activation of EXPRESS rack 7, providing the capability of future single button activations and deactivations of facility class racks. The experiment achieved numerous technical and operations 'firsts' for the ISS

Stetson, Howard K.↗
NASA NTRS2003

On-board autonomous attitude maneuver planning for planetary spacecraft using genetic algorithms

A key enabling technology that leads to greater spacecraft autonomy is the capability to autonomously and optimally slew the spacecraft from and to different attitudes while operating under a number of celestial and dynamic constraints. The task of finding an attitude trajectory that meets all the constraints is a formidable one, in particular for orbiting or fly-by spacecraft where the constraints and initial and final conditions are of time-varying nature. This paper presents an approach for attitude path planning that makes full use of a priori constraint knowledge and is computationally tractable enough to be executed on-board a spacecraft. The approach is based on incorporating the constraints into a cost function and using a Genetic Algorithm to iteratively search for and optimize the solution. This results in a directed random search that explores a large part of the solution space while maintaining the knowledge of good solutions from iteration to iteration. A solution obtained this way may be used 'as is' or as an initial solution to initialize additional deterministic optimization algorithms. A number of example simulations are presented including the case examples of a generic Europa Orbiter spacecraft in cruise as well as in orbit around Europa. The search times are typically on the order of minutes, thus demonstrating the viability of the presented approach. The results are applicable to all future deep space missions where greater spacecraft autonomy is required. In addition, onboard autonomous attitude planning greatly facilitates navigation and science observation planning, benefiting thus all missions to planet Earth as well.

genetic algorithm↗
NASA NTRS1983

Autonomy issues for an operational space station

Within the last decade, both the U.S. and the Soviet space programs have taken significant preliminary steps in developing technology and systems which are appropriate for the establishment of space stations. The degree of autonomy which will be provided for the station and the role of the crew represents one of the most critical considerations. The present investigation is concerned with a review of the major autonomy issues associated with a permanent, low earth orbit, operational space station. It is shown that both operational effectiveness and crew safety issues require a relatively high degree of space station autonomy. The autonomy level should, for instance, be higher than that of the present space shuttle. Attention is given to various levels of spacecraft autonomy, system integrity, attitude determination and control, navigation and orbit maintenance, system maintenance and resupply, mission support, and implementation of autonomy.

Daly, K. C.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) System Options for Mars Transit and Mars Surface Missions

The NASA led Artemis campaign will take humanity back to the Moon and serve as an analog for continued deep space exploration to Mars. Artemis utilizes crewed vehicles and habitats on both the Lunar surface and in Lunar orbit. The exploration of the Lunar surface and buildup of a basecamp is meant to be a “Mars forward” approach to testing and refining new technologies and techniques for living and working far outside of Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and preparing for future Mars missions. The Lunar Surface Habitat is planned as a primary element for long duration crew habitation on the Moon and will be the primary testbed for ECLS system hardware in a partial gravity environment. The Mars Transit Habitat will be the crew vehicle for the roundtrip from Earth to Mars and spend a significant amount of time docked to the Gateway outfitting and testing its systems prior to making the first Mars mission transit. The Mars Transit Habitat will utilize closed loop ECLS system technologies while a Mars Surface Habitat could use either open loop, closed loop, or a mix of both. Better understanding the needs of both these system architectures operating for extended periods in the Lunar environment and outside LEO will help to establish the ECLS system architecture for the future Mars surface mission. There are many aspects to consider such as length of crew stay, level of autonomy and dormancy between crewed missions, power requirements, system mass, and overall system reliability and maintainability. Other considerations will include Mars gravity vs. Lunar gravity, Mars atmospheric pressure vs. hard vacuum, and possible use of in-situ resource utilization.

ECLSS↗