Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Connected and Automated Vehicles”

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.

193 records · Page 11
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2016

Transitioning Autonomous Systems Technology Research to a Flight Software Environment

NASA has developed methods and algorithms for autonomous spacecraft operations,including automated planning and scheduling, fault diagnostics and impact determination,procedure management and display. Making the transition from technology research tooperational flight software requires overcoming significant technical, programmatic andcultural challenges. Technology research is aimed at developing methods that performspecific functions correctly, but the resulting software may not be designed for flightprocessors with limited CPU, memory and network resources, and may not be easilyintegrated into spacecraft flight software. Our objective in the Autonomous Systems andOperations Project is to make significant strides toward the transformation from technologyto operational use. Our focus was twofold: maturing research grade autonomy software intoa flight software environment using broadly accepted languages and tools; and integratingautonomy applications with each other and with representative systems and their data andcommand interfaces. For a target flight software environment, we chose Core FlightSoftware, developed by Goddard Space Flight Center as a common operating systemindependent framework. Our hardware integration environment was provided by theIntegrated Power and Avionics Systems (iPAS) Lab at Johnson Space Center, in whichvarious subsystem development has been conducted to address engineering challenges forthe vehicles and systems required for long-duration missions into the solar system. The iPASand its network of connected facilities provides realistic subsystem hardware or simulationsof spacecraft power, life support, guidance, navigation and control, and command and datahandling subsystems. Interfaces between autonomy applications and the subsystems beingassessed and controlled were developed, assessed and refined. The hardware and softwareenvironment using CFS and the iPAS facility has proven to be a highly flexible and realisticenvironment in which to rapidly integrate applications in an iterative, low cost setting. Usingthe integration environment we have developed, we will turn our focus to performance andsizing analysis to determine the computational requirements for full-scale deployment ofautonomy technology. Scalability of reasoners and the spacecraft models upon which theyoperate, and robustness across the full range of spacecraft conditions and environments willbe explored and improved. We are making significant contributions to the future programsthat will build the spacecraft that will take humans beyond the Earth-Moon system, in whichprogram Systems Engineers will be able to accurately and confidently design in accurate,robust and mature autonomous operations systems.

Flight Software↗
NASA NTRS2023

Safety Case for Small Uncrewed Aircraft Systems (sUAS) Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) Operations at NASA Langley Research Center

This Technical Memorandum (TM) is written to provide for dissemination of the methods and safety considerations for operations of small Uncrewed Aerial Systems (sUAS) Beyond Visual Line-of-Sight (BVLOS)at NASA Langley Research Center. It includes the Safety Case used to acquire a BVLOS Certificate of Authorization (COA) from the FAA and is being published to enable others to benefit from this work. The intended operations, subject to approval from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), will include a combination of Within Visual Line of Sight (WVLOS) and Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) flights, comprising of at most five sUAS operating concurrently, with no more than three operating BVLOS. Flights will occur in a subset of the Langley Air Force Base (LAFB) Class D airspace (KLFI) at a maximum altitude of 400 ft AGL. Most operations within this subset will take place in the City Environment Range Testing for Autonomous Integrated Navigation (CERTAIN) Range. The CERTAIN Range includes airspace inside the borders of NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC). Additional airspace over the northern section of CERTAIN will be requested as part of the Certificate of Authorization (COA). NASA LaRC BVLOS operations on the CERTAIN Range can be broken down into five critical components needed to meet the 14 CFR § 91.113 see and avoid requirement: 1) procedural deconfliction with LAFB for UAS operations at or below 400 ft and manned aircraft at or above 900’ AGL; 2) ground equipment for detection of intruder aircraft and to support communications between crewmembers ; 3) sUAS vehicles with advanced onboard automation capable of autonomously maintaining safe separation; 4) BVLOS standardized operating procedures (SOPs); 5) and personnel to execute the flight operations in accordance with the SOPs and respond to airborne contingencies. The introduction of new ground equipment includes the use of the Remote Operations for Autonomous Missions (ROAM) UAS Operations Center, development and use of an Integrated Airspace Display (IAD), use of the L-STAR and GA-9120 radars, and the incorporation of standardized Vertiports. The ROAM Operations Center will be the central point for all BVLOS sUAS operations. All command and control (C2), voice communications and airspace awareness displays will reside inside ROAM. The IAD will provide raw data from ADS-B, FLARM, radar tracks and telemetered GPS vehicle positions for interpretation by an Airspace Monitor. The radars will search the class D airspace around the CERTAIN Range and serve as a backup to procedural deconfliction procedures coordinated with LAFB. In the event of a procedural deconfliction breakdown, radar detections of non-participating aircraft will be available so that the 91.113 see and avoid requirement can still be safely met. Finally, the incorporation of Vertiports will have video and network connectivity that enables large numbers of sUAS launches and recoveries from a single location. This is a continuation of the remote command and control of unpiloted aircraft component focused on evaluating unpiloted aircraft flight crew roles and responsibilities, control interfaces and the associated data links needed to operate a fleet of aircraft within a UAM Ecosystem. This work supports the development of future aviation operational concepts based on an Urban Air Mobility Maturity Level (UML) 4 environment (Patterson, 2020). It is assumed that future airspace will include hundreds of simultaneous aircraft operations within the airspace, therefore scalable operations are essential for enabling this future airspace to become a reality. Follow on work includes envisioned flights that expand operations beyond the CERTAIN range and lead to an effective Maritime Surveillance capability.

Matthew W Coldsnow↗
NASA NTRS2005

Concepts to Automate Fluid Transfer Capability of Low Impact Docking System (LIDS)

The capability to transfer mass between spacecraft is necessary for many mission scenarios. Docking and berthing operations have enabled fluid, electrical, crew and equipment transfers to some degree on all manned space operations since the Gemini program. The Apollo program performed some sophisticated docking maneuvers to land men on the moon and return them safely to Earth. These programs primarily transferred crew, equipment, and pressurized atmosphere between docked spacecraft. The International Space Station (ISS) U.S. modules are connected by Common Berthing Mechanism (CBM) portals. They provide many feed-through ports for electrical, and fluid transfer between modules, as well as a large diameter crew and equipment tunnel. Fluid and electrical jumpers are manually installed after the CBM sealing surfaces have been securely mated to maintain the pressurized cabin environment. CBM berthing and subsequent fluid transfer capability requires a lengthy manual process involving an active interface that mates with a passive half. The Androgynous Peripheral Attach System (MAS) a Russian technology that docked the Russian Zarya module to Unity, or Node 1, is a more complex system that also is capable of fuel transfer, enabling refueling of the Russian re-boost engines on ISS. For several years, a Low Impact Docking System (LIDS) has been under development at Johnson Space Center (JSC). This docking technology has a requirement to be androgynous in order to allow the fabrication of a single configuration that can dock with all other LIDS units. It is desired to make electrical and fluid coupling mating an automated process to enable routine docking and undocking operations to support future exploration missions. It is envisioned that modular design and vehicle assembly will require an efficient LIDS for fuel, electrical, crew, and equipment transfer. Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) has joined the LIDS development effort and plans to employ fluid transfer concepts and technology from previous development programs, such as the Automated Fluid Interface System (AFIS) and the Ohital Fluid Transfer System (OFTS) that were developed and tested by MSFC. Orbital Expressderived robotic satellite servicing technology is scheduled to fly soon to demonstrate fluid transfer technology developed for the Air Force. This paper will compare known technology against possible fluid transfer requirements for LIDS to develop design strategies for automated fluid transfer.

Miernik, Janie H.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Secure, Mobile, Wireless Network Technology Designed, Developed, and Demonstrated

The inability to seamlessly disseminate data securely over a high-integrity, wireless broadband network has been identified as a primary technical barrier to providing an order-of-magnitude increase in aviation capacity and safety. Secure, autonomous communications to and from aircraft will enable advanced, automated, data-intensive air traffic management concepts, increase National Air Space (NAS) capacity, and potentially reduce the overall cost of air travel operations. For the first time ever, secure, mobile, network technology was designed, developed, and demonstrated with state-ofthe- art protocols and applications by a diverse, cooperative Government-industry team led by the NASA Glenn Research Center. This revolutionary technology solution will make fundamentally new airplane system capabilities possible by enabling secure, seamless network connections from platforms in motion (e.g., cars, ships, aircraft, and satellites) to existing terrestrial systems without the need for manual reconfiguration. Called Mobile Router, the new technology autonomously connects and configures networks as they traverse from one operating theater to another. The Mobile Router demonstration aboard the Neah Bay, a U.S. Coast Guard vessel stationed in Cleveland, Ohio, accomplished secure, seamless interoperability of mobile network systems across multiple domains without manual system reconfiguration. The Neah Bay was chosen because of its low cost and communications mission similarity to low-Earth-orbiting satellite platforms. This technology was successfully advanced from technology readiness level (TRL) 2 (concept and/or application formation) to TRL 6 (system model or prototype demonstration in a relevant environment). The secure, seamless interoperability offered by the Mobile Router and encryption device will enable several new, vehicle-specific and systemwide technologies to perform such things as remote, autonomous aircraft performance monitoring and early detection and mitigation of potential equipment malfunctions. As an additional benefit, team advancements were incorporated into open standards, ensuring technology transfer. Low-cost, commercial products incorporating the new technology are already available. Furthermore, these products are fully interoperable with legacy network technology equipment currently being used throughout the world.

Ivancic, William D.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Commercial Application of In-Space Assembly

In-Space assembly (ISA) expands the opportunities for cost effective emplacement of systems in space. Currently, spacecraft are launched into space and deploy into their operational configuration through a carefully choreographed sequence of operations. The deployment operation dictates the arrangement of the primary systems on the spacecraft, limiting the ability to take full advantage of launch vehicles volume and mass capability. ISA enables vastly different spacecraft architectures and emplacement scenarios to be achieved, including optimal launch configurations ranging from single launch and assembly to on-orbit aggregation of multiple launches at different orbital locations and times. The spacecraft can be visited at different orbital locations and times to effect expansion and maintenance of an operational capability. To date, the primary application of ISA has been in large programs funded by government organizations, such as the International Space Station. Recently, Space Systems Loral (SSL) led a study funded by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), called Dragonfly, to investigate the commercial applicability and economic advantages of ISA. In the study, it was shown that ISA enables SSL to double the capability of a commercial satellite system by taking advantage of alternate packaging approaches for the reflectors. The study included an ultra-light-weight robotic system, derived from Mars manipulator designs, to complete assembly of portions of the antenna system using a tool derived from DARPA orbital express and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) automated structural assembly experience. The mechanical connector that enables robotic ISA takes advantage of decades of development by NASA from the 1970's to 1980's during the Space Station Freedom program, the precursor to the ISS. The mechanical connector was originally designed for rapid astronaut assembly while also providing a high quality structural connection with linear load deflection response. The paper will discuss the business case for ISA, the general approach taken to exploit on-orbit assembly in the GEO communication satellite market, and the concept of operations associated with the ISA approach, thus laying the foundation for ISA to become an accepted operational approach for commercial in-space operations.

Lymer, John↗
NASA NTRS2004

Video Guidance Sensors Using Remotely Activated Targets

Four updated video guidance sensor (VGS) systems have been proposed. As described in a previous NASA Tech Briefs article, a VGS system is an optoelectronic system that provides guidance for automated docking of two vehicles. The VGS provides relative position and attitude (6-DOF) information between the VGS and its target. In the original intended application, the two vehicles would be spacecraft, but the basic principles of design and operation of the system are applicable to aircraft, robots, objects maneuvered by cranes, or other objects that may be required to be aligned and brought together automatically or under remote control. In the first two of the four VGS systems as now proposed, the tracked vehicle would include active targets that would light up on command from the tracking vehicle, and a video camera on the tracking vehicle would be synchronized with, and would acquire images of, the active targets. The video camera would also acquire background images during the periods between target illuminations. The images would be digitized and the background images would be subtracted from the illuminated-target images. Then the position and orientation of the tracked vehicle relative to the tracking vehicle would be computed from the known geometric relationships among the positions of the targets in the image, the positions of the targets relative to each other and to the rest of the tracked vehicle, and the position and orientation of the video camera relative to the rest of the tracking vehicle. The major difference between the first two proposed systems and prior active-target VGS systems lies in the techniques for synchronizing the flashing of the active targets with the digitization and processing of image data. In the prior active-target VGS systems, synchronization was effected, variously, by use of either a wire connection or the Global Positioning System (GPS). In three of the proposed VGS systems, the synchronizing signal would be generated on, and transmitted from, the tracking vehicle. In the first proposed VGS system, the tracking vehicle would transmit a pulse of light. Upon reception of the pulse, circuitry on the tracked vehicle would activate the target lights. During the pulse, the target image acquired by the camera would be digitized. When the pulse was turned off, the target lights would be turned off and the background video image would be digitized. The second proposed system would function similarly to the first proposed system, except that the transmitted synchronizing signal would be a radio pulse instead of a light pulse. In this system, the signal receptor would be a rectifying antenna. If the signal contained sufficient power, the output of the rectifying antenna could be used to activate the target lights, making it unnecessary to include a battery or other power supply for the targets on the tracked vehicle.

Bryan, Thomas C.↗
NASA NTRS2000

Video Based Sensor for Tracking 3-Dimensional Targets

Video-Based Sensor for Tracking 3-Dimensional Targets The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASAs) Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) has been developing and testing video-based sensors for automated spacecraft guidance for several years, and the next generation of video sensor will have tracking rates up to 100 Hz and will be able to track multiple reflectors and targets. The Video Guidance Sensor (VGS) developed over the past several years has performed well in testing and met the objective of being used as the terminal guidance sensor for an automated rendezvous and capture system. The first VGS was successfully tested in closed-loop 3-degree-of-freedom (3- DOF) tests in 1989 and then in 6-DOF open-loop tests in 1992 and closed-loop tests in 1993-4. Development and testing continued, and in 1995 approval was given to test the VGS in an experiment on the Space Shuttle. The VGS flew in 1997 and in 1998, performing well for both flights. During the development and testing before, during, and after the flight experiments, numerous areas for improvement were found. The VGS was developed with a sensor head and an electronics box, connected by cables. The VGS was used in conjunction with a target that had wavelength-filtered retro-reflectors in a specific pattern, The sensor head contained the laser diodes, video camera, and heaters and coolers. The electronics box contained a frame grabber, image processor, the electronics to control the components in the sensor head, the communications electronics, and the power supply. The system works by sequentially firing two different wavelengths of laser diodes at the target and processing the two images. Since the target only reflects one wavelength, it shows up well in one image and not at all in the other. Because the target's dimensions are known, the relative positions and attitudes of the target and the sensor can be computed from the spots reflected from the target. The system was designed to work from I meter out to I 10 meters. The VGS was mounted on the Space Shuttle while its target was mounted on the Spartan free-flyer carried on the same Shuttle flight. The VGS tracked the Spartan at ranges up to 170m, and the VGS range data very closely matched the range data from the Hand-Held Laser- Rangefinder used by the astronauts on board the Shuttle. While the VGS was designed primarily as a terminal guidance sensor for an automated spacecraft, it could be applied to other uses. It could be used as an alignment aid for an operator of a remote system (giving position and attitude feedback data, as well as a camera view of the target), as a feedback system for a robotic arm, or for automated vehicle guidance. The next generation VGS, with its higher tracking rates, smaller size, and lower power could be used in more places than the original VGS, and by using LED's instead of laser diodes, the system would be eye-safe at any range. Other possible uses include tracking 3-dimensional objects with retro-reflectors mounted at various locations or motion analysis by placing several retro-reflectors on the moving object and tracking them at high speeds. There are few sensors capable of performing tasks similar to those the VGS can perform, and the next generation VGS will be even more capable than the original. Some of this work is previously presented in the papers.

Howard, R. T.↗
DOE OSTI2024

Optimization and Evaluation of Energy Savings for Connected and Autonomous Off-Road Vehicles

Off-road vehicles, such as wheel loaders, excavators, and harvesters, are extensively utilized across a wide range of industries, including construction, agriculture, and mining. These machines have become indispensable in supporting the day-to-day operational needs of a nation, playing a critical role in various sectors' infrastructure and productivity. However, despite their utility, off-road vehicles are significant consumers of fossil fuels, resulting in substantial emissions that contribute to environmental degradation. This highlights the pressing need for research and technological advancements aimed at improving their energy efficiency and reducing their carbon footprint. There are, however, two primary challenges that must be addressed to achieve these goals. First, off-road vehicles typically perform both driving and working tasks simultaneously, which introduces a high level of complexity into their overall dynamic systems. Analysis the interactions between these functions is challenging. Second, research into off-road vehicles is inherently interdisciplinary, demanding expertise across several domains such as fluid power systems, vehicle dynamics, control theory, optimization techniques, and real-world implementation. Recognizing these challenges, we proposed the project titled "Optimization and Evaluation of Energy Savings for Connected and Autonomous Off-Road Vehicles" as a comprehensive solution to enhance fuel efficiency while simultaneously improving productivity. This project specifically focuses on autonomous off-road vehicles, with particular attention to wheel loaders, and seeks to develop novel methods to optimize energy consumption without sacrificing operational performance. The project integrates real-time control algorithms, vehicle dynamics modeling, and co-optimization of powertrain system and vehicle system to achieve these goals. Our optimization strategy dynamically co-optimizes critical parameters at both the powertrain and vehicle levels, including vehicle speed, working tool movements, powertrain dynamics, and engine operations in real-time. To streamline this optimization process, we developed a vehicle model that captures the key dynamics while significantly enhancing computational efficiency. This allows the system to intelligently minimize fuel consumption, all while maintaining or even improving productivity through real-time calculations during various off-road operations. To validate the effectiveness of this energy optimization method, we introduced a state-of-the-art Hardware-in-the-Loop (HIL) testbed. This reconfigurable testbed seamlessly integrates the actual engine with virtual models of the wheel loader's subsystems, allowing for accurate emulation of real-world operational loads and environments. By simulating these conditions, the HIL testbed enables us to evaluate the wheel loader’s performance under diverse working scenarios, ensuring the developed solution is applicable in real-world operations. This testbed proved to be instrumental in validating the optimization algorithms and demonstrating the system's practical effectiveness. During the evaluation and testing phase, we employed the HIL testbed to rigorously assess the energy savings and productivity improvements generated by the optimized system. The results were highly encouraging, revealing that the automated wheel loader achieved over 30% fuel savings compared to traditional, human-operated cycles, with comparable or even enhanced levels of productivity. The insights gained from this HIL-based testing provided critical validation of our approach and highlighted the potential for deploying these optimized autonomous technologies in real-world off-road vehicles.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
NASA NTRS2025

Provider of Services for Urban Air Mobility (PSU) Prototype Simulation (X5) Final Report

Urban Air Mobility (UAM) is a new air transportation service concept to carry passengers or cargo in metropolitan areas, leveraged by innovative aircraft and air traffic automation technologies. NASA has conducted a series of simulations, called the X-series simulation, to evaluate the UAM concept of operations and support the development of airspace procedures and services for UAM operations. The simulation called “X5” was conducted in 2023 to test a Provider of Services for UAM (PSU) prototype developed by NASA for UAM flight planning, strategic conflict management support, and data exchange between UAM operators. In this simulation, two strategic conflict management capabilities, Demand-Capacity Balancing and Sequencing and Scheduling, were further investigated. This document describes the UAM system architecture modeled, the X5 simulation environment to be executed (e.g., traffic scenario and UAM airspace construct), and the strategic conflict management processes developed and evaluated in this study. Then, the simulation results are provided using several system performance metrics, such as the number of operations planned and activated, demand-capacity imbalances detected and resolved, and pre-departure delays. Based on these metrics, the test findings and lessons learned from this simulation are discussed. NASA developed a PSU prototype as part of a reference implementation of UAM system architecture and evolved strategic conflict management capabilities for UAM operations from the previous collaborative simulations with industry partners. Below is the summary of the achievements: - Aligned NASA’s UAM reference architecture with the FAA’s UAM ConOps notional architecture - Extended UAM airspace management capabilities to include 1) Demand-Capacity Balancing (DCB) to ensure operators coordinate planned usage of shared vertiports, and 2) Sequencing and Scheduling (S&S) at UAM corridor entry and exit points to help facilitate an orderly flow of traffic - Defined the PSU information exchange APIs and requirements towards informing industry standards - Developed and tested a NASA PSU prototype as reference implementation to validate the requirements and APIs - Developed a prototype service connecting NASA’s PSU and the FAA system for testing future PSU-ATM interface requirements - Tested NASA-developed assumptions for UAM operations such as airspace design, procedures, vehicle performance, and strategic conflict management methods to inform future Cooperative Operating Practices (COPs) development with industry - Evaluated system performance metrics such as number of simultaneous operations and ground delays that can help define system-level requirements. The simulation results showed that the UAM traffic demand could be managed to minimize the needs of tactical separation provision with ground delays assigned by DCB and S&S. These accomplishments and the lessons learned from the PSU Prototype X5 simulation activities will be valuable inputs for the Air Mobility Pathfinders (AMP) project, which is NASA’s new project to create and evaluate a reference architecture for safe, secure, and scalable UAM operations.

Simulation↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

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↗
NASA NTRS2017

Automation of POST Cases via External Optimizer and "Artificial p2" Calculation

During early conceptual design of complex systems, speed and accuracy are often at odds with one another. While many characteristics of the design are fluctuating rapidly during this phase there is nonetheless a need to acquire accurate data from which to down-select designs as these decisions will have a large impact upon program life-cycle cost. Therefore enabling the conceptual designer to produce accurate data in a timely manner is tantamount to program viability. For conceptual design of launch vehicles, trajectory analysis and optimization is a large hurdle. Tools such as the industry standard Program to Optimize Simulated Trajectories (POST) have traditionally required an expert in the loop for setting up inputs, running the program, and analyzing the output. The solution space for trajectory analysis is in general non-linear and multi-modal requiring an experienced analyst to weed out sub-optimal designs in pursuit of the global optimum. While an experienced analyst presented with a vehicle similar to one which they have already worked on can likely produce optimal performance figures in a timely manner, as soon as the "experienced" or "similar" adjectives are invalid the process can become lengthy. In addition, an experienced analyst working on a similar vehicle may go into the analysis with preconceived ideas about what the vehicle's trajectory should look like which can result in sub-optimal performance being recorded. Thus, in any case but the ideal either time or accuracy can be sacrificed. In the authors' previous work a tool called multiPOST was created which captures the heuristics of a human analyst over the process of executing trajectory analysis with POST. However without the instincts of a human in the loop, this method relied upon Monte Carlo simulation to find successful trajectories. Overall the method has mixed results, and in the context of optimizing multiple vehicles it is inefficient in comparison to the method presented POST's internal optimizer functions like any other gradient-based optimizer. It has a specified variable to optimize whose value is represented as optval, a set of dependent constraints to meet with associated forms and tolerances whose value is represented as p2, and a set of independent variables known as the u-vector to modify in pursuit of optimality. Each of these quantities are calculated or manipulated at a certain phase within the trajectory. The optimizer is further constrained by the requirement that the input u-vector must result in a trajectory which proceeds through each of the prescribed events in the input file. For example, if the input u-vector causes the vehicle to crash before it can achieve the orbital parameters required for a parking orbit, then the run will fail without engaging the optimizer, and a p2 value of exactly zero is returned. This poses a problem, as this "non-connecting" region of the u-vector space is far larger than the "connecting" region which returns a non-zero value of p2 and can be worked on by the internal optimizer. Finding this connecting region and more specifically the global optimum within this region has traditionally required the use of an expert analyst.

Dees, Patrick D.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Development of an Inflatable Airlock for a Deep Space Gateway

Inflatable structures technology utilizes high-strength fabric materials and internal pressure to create a stiffened pressure vessel that can replace traditional metallic primary structure in a habitable spacecraft. The flexibility of fabric structures allows them to be compactly stowed for launch and expanded in space, providing significant launch volume savings. The unique construction and design flexibility of these structures can be customized for a variety of uses in space including landing bags, decelerators, long duration in-space and planetary surface habitats, and even airlocks. An airlock is often a required component of a crewed spacecraft to allow for maintenance and human exploration outside of the vehicle. Airlock designs in use today rely on complex hatches and seals connected by metallic walls. Recent developments towards the design of an inflatable airlock structure show feasibility and a significant launch volume savings over a traditional metallic design. This paper will provide a high-level summary of these projects and the current state-of-the-art in inflatable airlock development with additional references and detail about previous and on-going research, providing guidance for the design of a softgoods airlock system. The use of inflatables in space has been in development since the 1960’s for both habitats and airlocks. The first ever EVA was conducted by the USSR in 1965 using an inflatable airlock known as the Volga. This airlock was attached to the Voskhod 2 spacecraft and turned the vehicle into a dual chamber airlock. The airlock was successfully deployed, used and jettisoned after Alexey Leonov’s historic spacewalk. Additional work on human-rated inflatable structures was not continued until the late 1990’s when NASA-JSC led an effort to demonstrate these structures as feasible long-term pressurized elements with the TransHab project. The technology developed and pioneered during this project led to multiple patents and proven feasibility that inflatables could be used for large habitable structures. Following TransHab, Bigelow Aerospace continued the development of inflatable structures with technical support from NASA. This partnership eventually led to the successful flight certification, launch, attachment and deployment of the Bigelow Expandable Activities Module (BEAM) on the ISS in 2016. Inflatable and expandable airlock structures have undergone various detailed feasibility studies and testing for over 15 years, most notably with the Advanced Inflatable Airlock (AIA), Dual-Chamber Hybrid Inflatable Suitlock (DCIS), Minimalistic Advanced Soft Hatch (MASH), and Lightweight External Inflatable Airlock (LEIA). During this time, full-scale articles have been built and pressure-tested, and mock-ups and demonstrators have been constructed and evaluated. During the 2001-2003 timeframe, the AIA concept was matured through requirements development, conceptual design, subscale and full-scale engineering breadboards subjecting various test articles to deployment and pressure testing up to four times operating pressure. These tests proved the feasibility of successful deployment and structural integrity of an inflatable crewlock. Additional testing was performed in the ensuing years, as funding permitted, to further refine additional structural and deployment concepts and to understand the EVA crewmember interfaces, hatches and EVA support equipment interfaces that would be required for a fully functioning airlock. This work resulted in a refinement of the structural requirements and an accounting of the systems needed in an inflatable airlock. In 2014, the MASH project developed an ultra-lightweight airlock concept with a fabric hatch that utilized a unique pressure vessel shape to minimize structural loads around a linear seal. The concept uses an automated zipper-like seal that allows for crew egress/ingress. Most of the development work on the project thus far has focused on the design, analysis and testing of the primary structure and the zipper-like seal system is in the preliminary stages of development with a successful proof-of-concept test. As part of the 2017 LEIA effort, studies were conducted on EVA crewmember interfaces on the inside of an inflatable airlock. These efforts included the design of an internal secondary structure and placement of handholds and foot restraints to enable hatch opening, closing and translation through the airlock. Structural design, analysis and testing was completed on several secondary structure candidates. Crew interface testing was also completed using an inflatable crewlock mockup and the JSC Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) to simulate the movement of an EVA crewmember through an inflatable crewlock in microgravity. The results of these tests helped demonstrate the feasibility of utilizing an inflatable structure as an airlock and informed the required volume, hatch size, and configuration and location of translation aids for crewmembers in a microgravity crewlock. The ISS Quest airlock uses a dual-chamber design with isolated compartments known as the equipment-lock and the crewlock. The equipment-lock houses the Servicing, Performance and Checkout Equipment (SPCE) items (suit batteries, consumables, etc.) while the crewlock has limited internal hardware and is the nominally depressurized compartment during US EVAs. While inflatable dual chamber airlocks have been studied, the current state of the art emphasizes an inflatable crewlock-type structure attached to a rigid equipment-lock type or habitat structure. Since a large portion of the hardware in the equipment-lock are rigid components and connectors that are installed on the ground - and an inflatable structure does not achieve full structural capabilities until pressurized in space - a depressurized fabric structure cannot provide the capabilities of a full equipment-lock. The use of an inflatable as a crewlock, however, provides all the required capabilities for EVA operations in a small launch package that offers significant volume savings over a metallic crewlock. The functions of a traditional equipment lock, including the SPCE, could be provided by a spacecraft’s habitat module or node and not necessarily in a separate equipment lock. An inflatable crewlock would be attached to the vehicle and launched in a packed and compressed state, saving volume under the launch shroud and mass for the overall airlock element compared to a rigid crewlock. Work is currently underway to continue development of an inflatable airlock with a variety of focus areas including the consideration of crew-induced loads and interfaces, the design and development of an internal sub-structure to provide translation aids and restraints, the thermal considerations of a fabric shell depressurized during an EVA, the micrometeorite environment in deep space, and the packaging and deployment of an inflatable airlock.

Deep Space Exploration↗
DOE OSTI2025

Demand Response in Residential Energy Code: Technical Brief

As buildings account for over 75% of U.S. electricity use, effectively managing their loads can greatly facilitate the transition towards a clean, reliable grid. Grid-interactive efficient buildings (GEBs) combine efficiency and demand flexibility with smart technologies and communication to provide occupant comfort and productivity while serving the grid as a distributed energy resource (DER). In turn, GEBs can play a key role in ensuring access to an affordable, reliable, sustainable, and modern U.S. electric power system. Their national adoption could provide $\$$100-200 billion in U.S. electric power system cost savings over the next two decades. The associated reduction in CO 2 emissions is estimated at 6% per year by 2030 (DOE 2021). Building codes represent standard design practice in the construction industry and continually evolve to include advanced technologies and innovative practices. Historically, national model energy codes establish minimum efficiency requirements for new construction (ICC 2020). Expanding codes to support GEB capabilities is a pivotal step towards realizing demand flexibility in support of a clean grid by addressing capabilities to improve interoperability between smart building systems, the grid, and renewable energy resources. Realizing GEBs requires buildings with automated demand response (DR) capabilities that enable standardized communication with or control of, subject to explicit consumer consent, energy smart appliances or home energy management systems. This is achieved through direct or indirect (i.e., via an aggregator) communication between appliances and the electric grid. Energy codes can also support DR communication standardization and advance the deployment of building-integrated DERs such as energy storage, generation, and electric vehicles (EVs). Incorporating automated DR capabilities in energy codes provides many benefits to the consumers. Specifically, it aligns building electric load demand with intermittent renewable energy source availability, decreases peak load on the electric grid, allows buildings to respond to utility price signals, supports electrical network reliability and market growth of products and processes aligned with clean economic growth. The incorporation of DR into the model residential energy codes was considered for both the 2021 and 2024 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) code development cycles. The approved DR measures in the 2021 cycle were removed in response to appeals (ICC 2020). Updated language was presented for consideration again for the 2024 IECC, where it was negotiated and again approved, and again removed in response to appeals (ICC 2024). This resulted in many sections, including sections on demand responsive controls, being moved to the credits options or an appendix as a voluntary application. This technical brief updates the proposed DR components such that they can be considered by states and local governments for direct incorporation into their codes, as well as for future IECC energy code development. The proposal refinements are intended to support consistency in approach and provide a degree of certainty for building owners, designers, contractors, manufacturers, and building and fire safety professionals. The scope of this technical brief includes three strategies for DR in residential buildings: 1) smart thermostats with demand-responsive control, 2) electric water heating incorporating demand-responsive controls and communication and 3) grid Integrated solar and energy storage systems.

2021 IECC↗