Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “core Flight Software”

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 235 records · Page 13

Dynamic Assurance of Autonomous Systems through Ground Control Software

Assurance cases are being increasingly acknowledged as a way to build trust in complex systems with autonomous capabilities [1]. An assurance case is a comprehensive, defensible, and valid justification that a system will function as intended for the specific mission and operating environment. Such justifications for systems with autonomous capabilities are often based on various probabilistic quantifications [2]. Due to the dynamic nature of the environmental conditions in which these systems operate, as well as the changing nature of the autonomous systems themselves, these probabilistic quantifications cannot be simply estimated once during design time. Rather, they need to be continually evaluated during systems operations to ensure that the assurance case justifications are valid. We refer to the assurance case that combines both the static and dynamic elements as a Dynamic Assurance Case (DAC). Such complex systems with autonomous capabilities are often deployed with a Ground Control Software (GCS) component to enable remote operation. Whether the system is composed of a single unit or a fleet of units, deployed distributed or in remote environments, GCS acts as a window into the behavior of the deployed system. It receives telemetry from the system, issues commands to the system and provides various functionalities to visualize the system performance. We propose a dynamic assurance framework where the GCS acts as a relay between the autonomous system and its DAC. GCS can be used to measure both unit-specific as well as system-wide probabilistic quantifications using the incoming telemetry. We embed these quantifications throughout the DAC as variables that can be updated by external sources. We use the GCS to periodically update these variables, which allows us to continually evaluate the formally defined assurance case justifications. We demonstrate our dynamic assurance framework in the NASA Ames project Troupe1 that aims at developing a fleet of rovers capable of au- tonomously mapping their environment. The rovers work cooperatively, each collecting data for different parts of the environment. Each rover runs an identical core Flight System (cFS) [4] application. Troupe1 uses OpenC3 Cosmos [5] as the ground system, and AdvoCATE [3] to capture the system DAC. We show how we can measure both rover-specific and system-wide quantifications in Cosmos using its Ruby scripting editor and pass them into the DAC modelled in AdvoCATE. Then, we show how these incoming variables can be embedded in different parts of the DAC and how effects of their updates can be observed

Irfan Sljivo↗

Characterization Study of TestBed Infrastructure Performance in a Distributed Simulation Environment: Baseline Analysis

Characterization of the performance of Air Traffic Management Exploration (ATM-X) TestBed integration environment has been investigated and documented for one system configuration for progressively increasing traffic. Several statistical parameters were used to assess the performance of the TestBed distributed system such as mean, standard deviation, skewness, and kurtosis of latency, and update rate for aircraft state messages that are transmitted through the simulated system under investigation. It is necessary to assess the performance characteristics of distributed systems in terms of the indicated statistical parameters mentioned above. It is critical to verify the system performance with respect to a researcher’s required system performance. Computer host specifications are documented in terms of Central Processing Unit (CPU) clock speed and core count. Transmission Control Protocol/ Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) message protocol was used for data transmission. The system network topology also contributes to the latency and update rate variations from the one imposed by the data source. The motivation for selecting the TestBed infrastructure as the focus of this study can be attributed to the number of services and capabilities it provides that help simplify the process of preparing and conducting a simulation. These capabilities include an easy to use GUI for simulation configuration, access to TestBed library by the end-user of other simulation software components, a modular adapter paradigm that allows simple connectivity of external software to TestBed, connectivity with other simulation laboratories, and a Software Development Kit (SDK) for quicker development. Two types of traffic generators, Air Traffic Generator (ATG) and Multi Aircraft Control System (MACS) were used to generate messages that were injected into the TestBed distributed environment. Eight different air traffic scenarios with progressively increasing loads were generated for each air traffic simulator. The corresponding air traffic loads between the two simulators had an identical number of aircraft per scenario, but different flight plans. It was observed that the performance of MACS degraded for air traffic scenarios containing more than 200 aircraft (37.5 KB/s nominal throughput). However, ATG performed adequately under all tested air traffic loads up to 1200 aircraft (225. KB/s nominal throughput). The tests show that MACS exhibits better latency performance with smaller aircraft loads when compared to ATG. The tests also show that the TestBed infrastructure successfully transmits 1200 aircraft without significant degradation of its performance. From the latency trends for both MACS and ATG, it is clear that as aircraft load increases, the latency in the system increases as well as its standard deviation. Likewise, the trends for the update data rate for both MACS and ATG show that as the aircraft load increases, so does the standard deviation and mean of the update rates which can be attributed to the performance of MACS and ATG applications. The analysis of the results of this study have proven that the overall system performance is dependent on the individual performance of each system component that is connected to TestBed, which subsequently propagates into the system. All TestBed characterization tests were conducted in SimLabs at NASA Ames Research Center in November 2019. This study addresses the need for a baseline TestBed characterization, and the results will serve as a reference for more complex simulation systems.

Air Traffic Management simulations↗

SpaceWire as a Cube-Sat Instrument Interface

SpaceWire is used in the control and data interface for an instrument on a pair of small satellites, one of which was launched in summer 2017. The instrument SpaceWire interface is implemented in a Field Programmable Gate Array as an instantiated core controlled by a LEON3FT CPU, which is also implemented as an instantiated core. The UT699 processor in the flight computer provides the spacecraft side’s SpaceWire interface. A simple message based protocol consisting of four message types was defined, based on existing SpaceWire standards. One was for passing commands to and responses from the instrument in the form of text strings similar to those from a system console where each line of text is passed in a SpaceWire message. Another was for passing spacecraft time to the instrument. The third was for transferring files using a subset of the Remote Memory Access Protocol (RMAP). The fourth was for retrieving science data from the instrument. A set of user application programming interface (API) routines provided an abstracted interface to both the serial console (used during debug) and the SpaceWire device interface. Early instrument development and testing was done with a set of utilities that controlled a Star-Dundee USB-SpaceWire brick providing a user interface similar to a serial console terminal emulator with the addition of file and data transfers. Later in the integration and test process, these utilities were integrated with the COSMOS ground systems software used for spacecraft control, providing a seamless transition from standalone instrument tests to benchtop flat-sat test and full spacecraft level tests.

Lux, James P.↗

NASA Tech Briefs, September 2013

Topics include: ISS Ammonia Leak Detection Through X-Ray Fluorescence; A System for Measuring the Sway of the Vehicle Assembly Building; Fast, High-Precision Readout Circuit for Detector Arrays; Victim Simulator for Victim Detection Radar; Hydrometeor Size Distribution Measurements by Imaging the Attenuation of a Laser Spot; Quasi-Linear Circuit; High-Speed, High-Resolution Time-to-Digital Conversion; Li-Ion Battery and Supercapacitor Hybrid Design for Long Extravehicular Activities; Ultrasonic Low-Friction Containment Plate for Thermal and Ultrasonic Stir Weld Processes; High-Powered, Ultrasonically Assisted Thermal Stir Welding; Next-Generation MKIII Lightweight HUT/Hatch Assembly; Centrifugal Sieve for Gravity-Level-Independent Size; Segregation of Granular Materials; Ion Exchange Technology Development in Support of the Urine Processor Assembly; Nickel-Graphite Composite Compliant Interface and/or Hot Shoe Material; UltraSail CubeSat Solar Sail Flight Experiment; Mechanism for Deploying a Long, Thin-Film Antenna From a Rover; Counterflow Regolith Heat Exchanger; Acquisition and Retaining Granular Samples via a Rotating Coring Bit; Very-Low-Cost, Rugged Vacuum System; Medicine Delivery Device With Integrated Sterilization and Detection; FRET-Aptamer Assays for Bone Marker Assessment, C-Telopeptide, Creatinine, and Vitamin D; Multimode Directional Coupler for Utilization of Harmonic Frequencies from TWTAs; Dual-Polarization, Multi-Frequency Antenna Array for use with Hurricane Imaging Radiometer; Complementary Barrier Infrared Detector (CBIRD) Contact Methods; Autonomous Control of Space Nuclear Reactors; High-Power, High-Speed Electro-Optic Pockels Cell Modulator; Covariance Analysis Tool (G-CAT) for Computing Ascent, Descent, and Landing Errors; Enigma Version 12; Micrometeoroid and Orbital Debris (MMOD) Shield Ballistic Limit Analysis Program; Spitzer Telemetry Processing System; Planetary Protection Bioburden Analysis Program; Wing Leading Edge RCC Rapid Response Damage Prediction Tool (IMPACT2); ISSM: Ice Sheet System Model; Automated Loads Analysis System (ATLAS); Integrated Main Propulsion System Performance Reconstruction Process/Models. Phoenix Telemetry Processor; Contact Graph Routing Enhancements Developed in ION for DTN; GFEChutes Lo-Fi; Advanced Strategic and Tactical Relay Request Management for the Mars Relay Operations Service; Software for Generating Troposphere Corrections for InSAR Using GPS and Weather Model Data; Ionospheric Specifications for SAR Interferometry (ISSI); Implementation of a Wavefront-Sensing Algorithm; Sally Ride EarthKAM - Automated Image Geo-Referencing Using Google Earth Web Plug-In; Trade Space Specification Tool (TSST) for Rapid Mission Architecture (Version 1.2); Acoustic Emission Analysis Applet (AEAA) Software; Memory-Efficient Onboard Rock Segmentation; Advanced Multimission Operations System (ATMO); Robot Sequencing and Visualization Program (RSVP); Automating Hyperspectral Data for Rapid Response in Volcanic Emergencies; Raster-Based Approach to Solar Pressure Modeling; Space Images for NASA JPL Android Version; Kinect Engineering with Learning (KEWL); Spacecraft 3D Augmented Reality Mobile App; MPST Software: grl_pef_check; Real-Time Multimission Event Notification System for Mars Relay; SIM_EXPLORE: Software for Directed Exploration of Complex Systems; Mobile Timekeeping Application Built on Reverse-Engineered JPL Infrastructure; Advanced Query and Data Mining Capabilities for MaROS; Jettison Engineering Trajectory Tool; MPST Software: grl_suppdoc; PredGuid+A: Orion Entry Guidance Modified for Aerocapture; Planning Coverage Campaigns for Mission Design and Analysis: CLASP for DESDynl; and Space Place Prime.

Source record↗

Virtual Machine Language 2.1

VML (Virtual Machine Language) is an advanced computing environment that allows spacecraft to operate using mechanisms ranging from simple, time-oriented sequencing to advanced, multicomponent reactive systems. VML has developed in four evolutionary stages. VML 0 is a core execution capability providing multi-threaded command execution, integer data types, and rudimentary branching. VML 1 added named parameterized procedures, extensive polymorphism, data typing, branching, looping issuance of commands using run-time parameters, and named global variables. VML 2 added for loops, data verification, telemetry reaction, and an open flight adaptation architecture. VML 2.1 contains major advances in control flow capabilities for executable state machines. On the resource requirements front, VML 2.1 features a reduced memory footprint in order to fit more capability into modestly sized flight processors, and endian-neutral data access for compatibility with Intel little-endian processors. Sequence packaging has been improved with object-oriented programming constructs and the use of implicit (rather than explicit) time tags on statements. Sequence event detection has been significantly enhanced with multi-variable waiting, which allows a sequence to detect and react to conditions defined by complex expressions with multiple global variables. This multi-variable waiting serves as the basis for implementing parallel rule checking, which in turn, makes possible executable state machines. The new state machine feature in VML 2.1 allows the creation of sophisticated autonomous reactive systems without the need to develop expensive flight software. Users specify named states and transitions, along with the truth conditions required, before taking transitions. Transitions with the same signal name allow separate state machines to coordinate actions: the conditions distributed across all state machines necessary to arm a particular signal are evaluated, and once found true, that signal is raised. The selected signal then causes all identically named transitions in all present state machines to be taken simultaneously. VML 2.1 has relevance to all potential space missions, both manned and unmanned. It was under consideration for use on Orion.

Riedel, Joseph E.↗

Flight Deck Surface Trajectory-Based Operations (STBO): A Four-Dimensional Trajectory (4DT) Simulation

Within human factors there is burgeoning interest in the Human-Autonomy Teaming (HAT) concept as away to address the challenges of interacting with complex, increasingly autonomous systems. The HAT concept comes out of an aspiration to interact with increasingly autonomous automation as a team member, rather than simply use automation as a tool. The authors, and others, have proposed core tenets for HAT that include bi-directional communication, automation and system transparency, and advanced coordination between human and automated teammates via predefined, dynamic task sequences known as plays (Shively et al., 2017). It is believed that, with proper implementation, HAT should foster appropriate teamwork, thus increasing trust and reliance on the system, which in turn will reduce workload, increase situation awareness, and improve performance. To this end, HAT has been demonstrated and/or studied in multiple applications including search and rescue operations (Nourbakhsh et al., 2005), healthcare and medicine (Tsui Yanco, 2007), autonomous vehicles (Parasuraman, Barnes, Cosenzo, Mulgund, 2007), photography (Lachter, Brandt, Sadler, Shively, in press), and aviation (Shively et al., in press). The current paper presents one such effort to apply HAT. It details the design of a R-HAT Agent developed as part of a NASA Research Agreement awarded to Human-Autonomy Teaming Solutions Inc. (HATS Inc), and developed in collaboration with the Human-Autonomy Teaming Laboratory at NASA Ames Research Center. The role of this Agent is to mediate interaction between the automation and the human operator of an advanced ground dispatch station, with this mediation based upon previously mentioned core tenets for HAT and the many lessons learned from the HAT research literature. This dispatch station was developed to support a NASA project investigating a concept called Reduced Crew Operations (RCO; Lachter, Brandt, Battiste, Matessa, Johnson, in press). Part of the RCO concept involves a ground operator providing enhanced support to a large number of aircraft with a single pilot on the flight deck. When assisted by the Agent, operators can monitor and support or manage a large number of aircraft and use plays to respond in real-time to complicated, workload-intensive events (e.g., an airport closure). A play is a plan that encapsulates goals, tasks, and a task allocation strategy appropriate for a particular situation. In the current implementation, when a play is initiated by a user, the Agent determines what tasks need to be done and has the ability to autonomously execute them (e.g., determining diversion options and uplinking new routes to aircraft) when it is safe and appropriate. The R-HAT Agent has been designed to both support end users and research in RCO and HAT. Additionally, the Agent and its underlying architecture were developed with generalizability in mind as a modular piece of software applicable outside of RCO aviation in domains such as those mentioned above. This paper will also discuss future further development and testing of the R-HAT Agent.

Bakowski, Deborah L.↗

Verification of the Generalized Aerospace Simulation in Simulink

NASA uses six-degrees-of-freedom (6-DOF) simulations tools to design, test, develop Guidance Navigation and Control (GN&C) software, and certify vehicle performance prior to flight. Therefore, it is critical that the 6-DOF tools used for vehicle design and certification are validated. The focus of this work is the validation of the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center 6-DOF “GeneraLized Aerospace Simulation in Simulink” (GLASS) framework tool. The GLASS tool framework is currently used to support NASA GN&C insight for the Human Landing System (HLS) project, simulating vehicle dynamics during lunar descent and ascent. The GLASS framework utilizes the off-the-shelf Mathworks (R) Simscape (TM) Multibody (TM) toolbox to model vehicle multi-body dynamics. NASA’s Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) provides a set of 6-DOF simulation verification “check cases” that are available to any user needing to verify 6-DOF tools. The check cases contain seventeen atmospheric and twenty-six orbital test scenarios are provided to validate equations of motion, environmental models (e.g., atmosphere, gravitation, and geodesy) and tool propagators. This paper compares GLASS 6-DOF simulation results against the NESC check cases’ results via simulation-to-simulation comparisons. The comparison demonstrates that GLASS simulation results are “in family” with the outputs of the applicable NASA NESC check-cases and verify the GLASS core framework dynamics and the implementation of the check case scenario models.

6-Dof↗

Verification of the Generalized Aerospace Simulation in Simulink (R)

NASA uses six-degrees-of-freedom (6-DOF) simulations tools to design, test, develop Guidance Navigation and Control (GN&C) software, and certify vehicle performance prior to flight. Therefore, it is critical that the 6-DOF tools used for vehicle design and certification are validated. The focus of this work is the vali-dation of the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center 6-DOF “GeneraLized Aero-space Simulation in Simulink” (GLASS) framework tool. The GLASS tool framework is currently used to support NASA GN&C insight for the Human Landing System (HLS) project, simulating vehicle dynamics during lunar descent and as-cent. The GLASS framework utilizes the off-the-shelf Mathworks ® Simscape Multibody® toolbox to model vehicle multi-body dynamics. NASA’s Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) provides a set of 6-DOF simulation verification “check cases” that are available to any user needing to verify 6-DOF tools. The check cases contain seventeen atmospheric and twenty-six orbital test scenarios are provided to validate equations of motion, environmental models (e.g., atmosphere, gravitation, and geodesy) and tool propagators. This paper compares GLASS 6-DOF simulation results against the NESC check cases’ results via simulation-to-simulation comparisons. The comparisons demonstrate that GLASS simulation results are “in family” with the outputs of the applicable NASA NESC check cases and verifies the GLASS core framework dynamics and the correct implementation of the check case scenario models.

6-Dof↗

Collaborative Systems Engineering in the Ascent Abort-2 Crew Module/Separation Ring Project

Generally speaking, systems engineering (SE) tool-sets face a dilemma balancing power and accessibility. High-powered SE tools (MagicDraw, Cradle, Core, etc.) tend to be specialized and are available only to highly trained Systems Engineers, and/or through the use of a 'back room' developer team making the output products available to the broader team. On the other hand, highly accessible tools (MS Word, Excel, etc.) do not have the power to implement SE in a rigorous manner. NASA has to test all aspects of the new human-rated Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle spacecraft prior to its first crewed mission. The test program includes uncrewed launch abort flight tests to demonstrate the capability to save the crew in the event that a launch failure occurs. Orion's second abort flight test will be a low-altitude flight test known as "Ascent Abort 2 (AA-2)." This test is currently scheduled to be carried out at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station's Space Launch Complex 46 (SLC-46) in Florida in 2019. NASA's in-house AA-2 Crew Module and Separation Ring (CSR) Team is producing the crew module and separation ring. Operating jointly as both an Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) Project and an Orion Project, the CSR project charter includes development of innovative, streamlined and generally more efficient practices for creation of flight hardware and software. One result of this tasking has been development of a collaborative and data-centric systems engineering environment within the team's shared web environment (Microsoft SharePoint). Through the use of built-in, 'out of the box capabilities' present in MS SharePoint, the CSR Systems Engineering team has created (with some limited developer support) a data-centric architecture for the project's SE implementation, including functional and interface analysis, requirements development and management, risk management, verification planning and management, test results, and end item management. Data elements are linked between data structures so as to define and control relationships between item types, link requirements to parents and children, and link tests to the requirements that they verify. The overall project team integration is increased by also linking SE content to project management content over the project life cycle, including team communication, action items, configuration management, decisional and meeting materials, and life cycle reviews. This presentation will provide an overview of the collaborative SE environment, showing how it provides the power for a number of SE tasks while still providing the accessibility and transparency to allow the full project team to collaborate and succeed. Given the project phase, we'll be able to present a nearly full lifecycle discussion, from concept through verification and approaching delivery.

Systems Engineering environments↗

Intelligent systems and advanced user interfaces for design, operation, and maintenance of command management systems

Historically, command management systems (CMS) have been large and expensive spacecraft-specific software systems that were costly to build, operate, and maintain. Current and emerging hardware, software, and user interface technologies may offer an opportunity to facilitate the initial formulation and design of a spacecraft-specific CMS as well as to develop a more generic CMS system. New technologies, in addition to a core CMS common to a range of spacecraft, may facilitate the training and enhance the efficiency of CMS operations. Current mission operations center (MOC) hardware and software include Unix workstations, the C/C++ programming languages, and an X window interface. This configuration provides the power and flexibility to support sophisticated and intelligent user interfaces that exploit state-of-the-art technologies in human-machine interaction, artificial intelligence, and software engineering. One of the goals of this research is to explore the extent to which technologies developed in the research laboratory can be productively applied in a complex system such as spacecraft command management. Initial examination of some of these issues in CMS design and operation suggests that application of technologies such as intelligent planning, case-based reasoning, human-machine systems design and analysis tools (e.g., operator and designer models), and human-computer interaction tools (e.g., graphics, visualization, and animation) may provide significant savings in the design, operation, and maintenance of the CMS for a specific spacecraft as well as continuity for CMS design and development across spacecraft. The first six months of this research saw a broad investigation by Georgia Tech researchers into the function, design, and operation of current and planned command management systems at Goddard Space Flight Center. As the first step, the researchers attempted to understand the current and anticipated horizons of command management systems at Goddard. Preliminary results are given on CMS commonalities and causes of low re-use, and methods are proposed to facilitate increased re-use.

Potter, William J.↗

Development of a Ground Test and Analysis Protocol for NASA's NextSTEP Phase 2 Habitation Concepts

The NASA Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) program is a public-private partnership model that seeks commercial development of deep space exploration capabilities to support human spaceflight missions around and beyond cislunar space. NASA first issued the Phase 1 NextSTEP Broad Agency Announcement to U.S. industries in 2014, which called for innovative cislunar habitation concepts that leveraged commercialization plans for low-Earth orbit. These habitats will be part of the Deep Space Gateway (DSG), the cislunar space station planned by NASA for construction in the 2020s. In 2016, Phase 2 of the NextSTEP program selected five commercial partners to develop ground prototypes. A team of NASA research engineers and subject matter experts (SMEs) have been tasked with developing the ground-test protocol that will serve as the primary means by which these Phase 2 prototypes will be evaluated. Since 2008, this core test team has successfully conducted multiple spaceflight analog mission evaluations utilizing a consistent set of operational tools, methods, and metrics to enable the iterative development, testing, analysis, and validation of evolving exploration architectures, operations concepts, and vehicle designs. The purpose of implementing a similar evaluation process for the Phase 2 Habitation Concepts is to consistently evaluate different commercial partner ground prototypes to provide data-driven, actionable recommendations for Phase 3. This paper describes the process by which the ground test protocol was developed and the objectives, methods, and metrics by which the NextSTEP Phase 2 Habitation Concepts will be rigorously and systematically evaluated. The protocol has been developed using both a top-down and bottom-up approach. Top-down development began with the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD) exploration objectives and ISS Exploration Capability Study Team (IECST) candidate flight objectives. Strategic questions and associated rationales, derived from these candidate architectural objectives, provide the framework by which the ground-test protocol will address the DSG stack elements and configurations, systems and subsystems, and habitation, science, and EVA functions. From these strategic questions, high-level functional requirements for the DSG were drafted and associated ground-test objectives and analysis protocols were established. Bottom-up development incorporated objectives from NASA SMEs in autonomy, avionics and software, communication, environmental control and life support systems, exercise, extravehicular activity, exploration medical operations, guidance navigation and control, human factors and behavioral performance, human factors and habitability, logistics, Mission Control Center operations, power, radiation, robotics, safety and mission assurance, science, simulation, structures, thermal, trash management, and vehicle health. Top-down and bottom-up objectives were integrated to form overall functional requirements - ground-test objectives and analysis mapping. From this mapping, ground-test objectives were organized into those that will be evaluated through inspection, demonstration, analysis, subsystem standalone testing, and human-in-the-loop (HITL) testing. For the HITL tests, mission-like timelines, procedures, and flight rules have been developed to directly meet ground test objectives and evaluate specific functional requirements. Data collected from these assessments will be analyzed to determine the acceptability of habitation element configurations and the combinations of capabilities that will result in the best habitation platform to be recommended by the test team for Phase 3.

Gernhardt, Michael L.↗

Lunar Search & Rescue Applications of Lunar GNSS

Accurate lunar navigation and timing knowledge provides for the development of safety-critical services in the cislunar and lunar surface domain. Currently under development, the Goddard Space Flight Center’s (GSFC) Search and Rescue Mission Office is investigating and integrating search and rescue (SAR) capability into planned and future lunar communication and navigation interfaces. Lunar Search and Rescue (LunaSAR) development has a stated end-goal for assured, reliable, and timely indication of distress events for a wide variety of lunar surface users, including government-sponsored, commercial, and international users. LunaSAR performance requirements are modelled after the current terrestrial Cospas-Sarsat distress notification system, leveraging an internationally robust global navigation satellite system (GNSS) ecosystem as a core element of survivor locating capability. This presentation will discuss NASA’s work to develop user-focused distress messaging capabilities including infusion of example sensor data for triggering of automated distress alerts coupled with location-tagging. Additionally, the presentation will examine overall message structures, rotating fields for use in bi-directional distress messaging, and specific use cases based on NASA’s lunar exploration and lunar communication relay architectures. Modelling and simulation of LunaSAR use by individual lunar explorers will be discussed, based on notional industry and government design reference missions and mission considerations. Results from GSFC-funded Internal Research and Development (IRAD) efforts will be detailed, including successful distress message formulation simulating the ingestion of example legacy space suit telemetry fields. Hardware-in-the-loop testing using high-reliability software defined radio (SDR) modules serve as an example of IRAD successes and the framework for technical requirements. Architectural development and technical evolution from 2020 to 2021 included alignment of LunaSAR distress waveforms with ongoing NASA LunaNet interoperability development, as well as engagement with NASA Lunar Spectrum authorities for allocation of UHF-band distress frequencies on the lunar surface. S-Band and UHF-band transmission characteristics will be detailed, along with band-specific applications of each emission type. Additionally, examples of ingestion and formatting of GNSS signals (using historical terrestrial National Marine Electronics Association-formatted GNSS data) will be detailed, underscoring lunar user needs for a common lunar GNSS receiver output message framework. Maturity and ability to support evolving lunar exploration goals has been demonstrated and will be detailed, with maturity gaps such as position, navigation, and timing (PNT) and lunar reference frames identified within the context of distress message generation. Provision of LunaSAR services for lunar surface users represents a new era of ensured safety for lunar explorers and builds off of forty years of the Cospas-Sarsat program, underscoring the importance of lunar GNSS for safety-critical applications and growing interest in safe, reliable lunar surface operations. Enabled by new GNSS systems being developed by government and industry partners, NASA will continue to evolve and integrate lunar GNSS types into distress message generation, with a focus on compact and efficient message transmission over various lunar communication links. When fielded, LunaSAR will be the first dedicated search and rescue notification system employed on another celestial body. Robust lunar navigation and timing services form the core of LunaSAR capabilities, allowing for system syncing with time-dominant sensors, and high-accuracy location of those in distress while engaged in lunar surface activities.

Search and Rescue↗

Computational Fluid Dynamics Study on the Effects of RATO Timing on the Scale Model Acoustic Test

The Scale Model Acoustic Test (SMAT) is a 5% scale test of the Space Launch System (SLS), which is currently being designed at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). The purpose of this test is to characterize and understand a variety of acoustic phenomena that occur during the early portions of lift off, one being the overpressure environment that develops shortly after booster ignition. The SLS lift off configuration consists of four RS-25 liquid thrusters on the core stage, with two solid boosters connected to each side. Past experience with scale model testing at MSFC (in ER42), has shown that there is a delay in the ignition of the Rocket Assisted Take Off (RATO) motor, which is used as the 5% scale analog of the solid boosters, after the signal to ignite is given. This delay can range from 0 to 16.5ms. While this small of a delay maybe insignificant in the case of the full scale SLS, it can significantly alter the data obtained during the SMAT due to the much smaller geometry. The speed of sound of the air and combustion gas constituents is not scaled, and therefore the SMAT pressure waves propagate at approximately the same speed as occurs during full scale. However, the SMAT geometry is much smaller allowing the pressure waves to move down the exhaust duct, through the trench, and impact the vehicle model much faster than occurs at full scale. To better understand the effect of the RATO timing simultaneity on the SMAT IOP test data, a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis was performed using the Loci/CHEM CFD software program. Five different timing offsets, based on RATO ignition delay statistics, were simulated. A variety of results and comparisons will be given, assessing the overall effect of RATO timing simultaneity on the SMAT overpressure environment.

Nielsen, Tanner↗

Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) Upper Stage Configuration Selection Process

The Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV), a key component of NASA's blueprint for the next generation of spacecraft to take humans back to the moon, is being designed and built by engineers at NASA s Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). The vehicle s design is based on the results of NASA's 2005 Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS), which called for development of a crew-launch system to reduce the gap between Shuttle retirement and Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) Initial Operating Capability, identification of key technologies required to enable and significantly enhance these reference exploration systems, and a reprioritization of near- and far-term technology investments. The Upper Stage Element (USE) of the CLV is a clean-sheet approach that is being designed and developed in-house, with element management at MSFC. The USE concept is a self-supporting cylindrical structure, approximately 115' long and 216" in diameter, consisting of the following subsystems: Primary Structures (LOX Tank, LH2 Tank, Intertank, Thrust Structure, Spacecraft Payload Adaptor, Interstage, Forward and Aft Skirts), Secondary Structures (Systems Tunnel), Avionics and Software, Main Propulsion System, Reaction Control System, Thrust Vector Control, Auxiliary Power Unit, and Hydraulic Systems. The ESAS originally recommended a CEV to be launched atop a four-segment Space Shuttle Main Engine (SSME) CLV, utilizing an RS-25 engine-powered upper stage. However, Agency decisions to utilize fewer CLV development steps to lunar missions, reduce the overall risk for the lunar program, and provide a more balanced engine production rate requirement prompted engineers to switch to a five-segment design with a single Saturn-derived J-2X engine. This approach provides for single upper stage engine development for the CLV and an Earth Departure Stage, single Reusable Solid Rocket Booster (RSRB) development for the CLV and a Cargo Launch Vehicle, and single core SSME development. While the RSRB design has changed since the CLV Project's inception, the USE design has remained essentially a clean-sheet approach. Although a clean-sheet upper stage design inherently carries more risk than a modified design, it does offer many advantages: a design for increased reliability; built-in extensibility to allow for commonality/growth without major redesign; and incorporation of state-of-the-art materials, hardware, and design, fabrication, and test techniques and processes to facilitate a potentially better, more reliable system. Because consideration was given in the ESAS to both clean-sheet and modified USE designs, this paper will highlight the advantages and disadvantages of both approaches and provide a detailed discussion of trades/selections made that led to the final upper stage configuration.

Davis, Daniel J.↗

Architectural Analysis of Complex Evolving Systems of Systems

The goal of this collaborative project between FC-MD, APL, and GSFC and supported by NASA IV&V Software Assurance Research Program (SARP), was to develop a tool, Dynamic SAVE, or Dyn-SAVE for short, for analyzing architectures of systems of systems. The project team was comprised of the principal investigator (PI) from FC-MD and four other FC-MD scientists (part time) and several FC-MD students (full time), as well as, two APL software architects (part time), and one NASA POC (part time). The PI and FC-MD scientists together with APL architects were responsible for requirements analysis, and for applying and evaluating the Dyn-SAVE tool and method. The PI and a group of FC-MD scientists were responsible for improving the method and conducting outreach activities, while another group of FC-MD scientists were responsible for development and improvement of the tool. Oversight and reporting was conducted by the PI and NASA POC. The project team produced many results including several prototypes of the Dyn-SAVE tool and method, several case studies documenting how the tool and method was applied to APL s software systems, and several published papers in highly respected conferences and journals. Dyn-SAVE as developed and enhanced throughout this research period, is a software tool intended for software developers and architects, software integration testers, and persons who need to analyze software systems from the point of view of how it communicates with other systems. Using the tool, the user specifies the planned communication behavior of the system modeled as a sequence diagram. The user then captures and imports the actual communication behavior of the system, which is then converted and visualized as a sequence diagram by Dyn-SAVE. After mapping the planned to the actual and specifying parameter and timing constraints, Dyn-SAVE detects and highlights deviations between the planned and the actual behavior. Requirements based on the need to analyze two inter-system communication protocols that are representative of protocols used in the Aerospace industry have been specified. The protocols are related: APL s Common Ground System (CGS) as used in the MErcury Surface, Space ENvironment, GEochemistry, and Ranging (MESSENGER) and the Radiation Belt Space Probes (RBSP) missions. The analyzed communications were implementations of the Telemetry protocol and the CCSDS File Delivery Protocol (CFDP) protocol. Based on these requirements, three prototypes of Dyn-SAVE were developed and applied to these protocols. The application of Dyn-SAVE to these protocols resulted in the detection of several issues. Dyn-SAVE was also applied to several Testbeds that have previously been used for experimentation earlier on this project, as well as, to other protocols and logs for testing its broader applicability. For example, Dyn-SAVE was used to analyze 1) the communication pattern between a web browser and a web server, 2) the system log of a computer in order to detect offnominal computer shut-down behavior, and 3) the actual test cases of NASA Goddard s Core Flight System (CFS) and automatically generated test cases in order to determine the overlap between the two sets of test cases. In all cases, Dyn-SAVE assisted in providing insightful conclusions about each of the cases identified above.

Lindvall, Mikael↗

DSN Beowulf Cluster-Based VLBI Correlator

The NASA Deep Space Network (DSN) requires a broadband VLBI (very long baseline interferometry) correlator to process data routinely taken as part of the VLBI source Catalogue Maintenance and Enhancement task (CAT M&E) and the Time and Earth Motion Precision Observations task (TEMPO). The data provided by these measurements are a crucial ingredient in the formation of precision deep-space navigation models. In addition, a VLBI correlator is needed to provide support for other VLBI related activities for both internal and external customers. The JPL VLBI Correlator (JVC) was designed, developed, and delivered to the DSN as a successor to the legacy Block II Correlator. The JVC is a full-capability VLBI correlator that uses software processes running on multiple computers to cross-correlate two-antenna broadband noise data. Components of this new system (see Figure 1) consist of Linux PCs integrated into a Beowulf Cluster, an existing Mark5 data storage system, a RAID array, an existing software correlator package (SoftC) originally developed for Delta DOR Navigation processing, and various custom- developed software processes and scripts. Parallel processing on the JVC is achieved by assigning slave nodes of the Beowulf cluster to process separate scans in parallel until all scans have been processed. Due to the single stream sequential playback of the Mark5 data, some ramp-up time is required before all nodes can have access to required scan data. Core functions of each processing step are accomplished using optimized C programs. The coordination and execution of these programs across the cluster is accomplished using Pearl scripts, PostgreSQL commands, and a handful of miscellaneous system utilities. Mark5 data modules are loaded on Mark5 Data systems playback units, one per station. Data processing is started when the operator scans the Mark5 systems and runs a script that reads various configuration files and then creates an experiment-dependent status database used to delegate parallel tasks between nodes and storage areas (see Figure 2). This script forks into three processes: extract, translate, and correlate. Each of these processes iterates on available scan data and updates the status database as the work for each scan is completed. The extract process coordinates and monitors the transfer of data from each of the Mark5s to the Beowulf RAID storage systems. The translate process monitors and executes the data conversion processes on available scan files, and writes the translated files to the slave nodes. The correlate process monitors the execution of SoftC correlation processes on the slave nodes for scans that have completed translation. A comparison of the JVC and the legacy Block II correlator outputs reveals they are well within a formal error, and that the data are comparable with respect to their use in flight navigation. The processing speed of the JVC is improved over the Block II correlator by a factor of 4, largely due to the elimination of the reel-to-reel tape drives used in the Block II correlator.

Rogstad, Stephen P.↗

Utilizing the ISS Mission as a Testbed to Develop Cognitive Communications Systems

The ISS provides an excellent opportunity for pioneering artificial intelligence software to meet the challenges of real-time communications (comm) link management. This opportunity empowers the ISS Program to forge a testbed for developing cognitive communications systems for the benefit of the ISS mission, manned Low Earth Orbit (LEO) science programs and future planetary exploration programs. In November, 1998, the Flight Operations Directorate (FOD) started the ISS Antenna Manager (IAM) project to develop a single processor supporting multiple comm satellite tracking for two different antenna systems. Further, the processor was developed to be highly adaptable as it supported the ISS mission through all assembly stages. The ISS mission mandated communications specialists with complete knowledge of when the ISS was about to lose or gain comm link service. The current specialty mandated cognizance of large sun-tracking solar arrays and thermal management panels in addition to the highly-dynamic satellite service schedules and rise/set tables. This mission requirement makes the ISS the ideal communications management analogue for future LEO space station and long-duration planetary exploration missions. Future missions, with their precision-pointed, dynamic, laser-based comm links, require complete autonomy for managing high-data rate communications systems. Development of cognitive communications management systems that permit any crew member or payload science specialist, regardless of experience level, to control communications is one of the greater benefits the ISS can offer new space exploration programs. The IAM project met a new mission requirement never previously levied against US space-born communications systems management: process and display the orientation of large solar arrays and thermal control panels based on real-time joint angle telemetry. However, IAM leaves the actual communications availability assessment to human judgment, which introduces unwanted variability because each specialist has a different core of experience with comm link performance. Because the ISS utilizes two different frequency bands, dynamic structure can be occasionally translucent at one frequency while it can completely interdict service at the other frequency. The impact of articulating structure on the comm link can depend on its orientation at the time it impinges on the link. It can become easy for a human specialist to cross-associate experience at one frequency with experience at the other frequency. Additionally, the specialist's experience is incremental, occurring one nine-hour shift at a time. Only the IAM processor experiences the complete 24x7x365 communications link performance for both communications links but, it has no "learning capability." If the IAM processor could be endowed with a cognitive ability to remember past structure-induced comm link outages, based on its knowledge of the ISS position, attitude, communications gear, array joint angles and tracking accuracy, it could convey such experience to the human operator. It could also use its learned communications link behaviors to accurately convey the availability of future communications sessions. Further, the tool could remember how accurately or inaccurately it predicted availability and correct future predictions based on past performance. The IAM tool could learn frequency-specific impacts due to spacecraft structures and pass that information along as "experience." Such development would provide a single artificial intelligence processor that could provide two different experience bases. If it also "knew" the satellite service schedule, it could distinguish structure blockage from schedule or planet blockage and then quickly switch to another satellite. Alternatively, just as a human operator could judge, a cognizant comm system based on the IAM model could "know" that the blockage is not going to last very long and continue tracking a comm satellite, waiting for it to track away from structure. Ultimately, once this capability was fully developed and tested in the Mission Control Center, it could be transferred on-orbit to support development of operations concepts that include more advanced cognitive communications systems. Future applications of this capability are easily foreseen because even more dynamic satellite constellations with more nodes and greater capability are coming. Currently, the ISS fully employs a 300 million bit-per-second (Mbps) return link for harvesting payload science. In the coming eighteen months, it will step up to 600 Mbps. Already there is talk of a 1.2 billion bit-per-second (Gbps) upgrade for the ISS and laser comm links have already been tested from the ISS. Every data rate upgrade mandates more complicated and sensitive communications equipment which implies greater expertise invested in the human operator. Future on-orbit cognizant comm systems will be needed to meet greater performance demands aboard larger, far more complicated spacecraft. In the LEO environment, the old-style one-satellite-per-spacecraft operations concept will give way to a new concept of a single customer spacecraft simultaneously using multiple comm satellites. Much more highly-dynamic manned LEO missions with decades of crew members potentially increase the demand for communications link performance. A cognizant on-board communications system will meet advanced communications demands from future LEO missions and future planetary missions. The ISS has fledgling components of future exploration programs, both LEO and planetary. Further, the Flight Operations Directorate, through the IAM project, has already begun to develop a communications management system that attempts to solve advanced problems ideally represented by dynamic structure impacting scheduled satellite service. With an earnest project to integrate artificial intelligence into the IAM processor, the ISS Program could develop a cognizant communications system that could be adapted and transferred to future on-orbit avionics designs.

Jackson, Dan↗

Utilizing the ISS Mission as a Testbed to Develop Cognitive Communications Systems

The ISS provides an excellent opportunity for pioneering artificial intelligence software to meet the challenges of real-time communications (comm) link management. This opportunity empowers the ISS Program to forge a testbed for developing cognitive communications systems for the benefit of the ISS mission, manned Low Earth Orbit (LEO) science programs and future planetary exploration programs. In November, 1998, the Flight Operations Directorate (FOD) started the ISS Antenna Manager (IAM) project to develop a single processor supporting multiple comm satellite tracking for two different antenna systems. Further, the processor was developed to be highly adaptable as it supported the ISS mission through all assembly stages. The ISS mission mandated communications specialists with complete knowledge of when the ISS was about to lose or gain comm link service. The current specialty mandated cognizance of large sun-tracking solar arrays and thermal management panels in addition to the highly-dynamic satellite service schedules and rise/set tables. This mission requirement makes the ISS the ideal communications management analogue for future LEO space station and long-duration planetary exploration missions. Future missions, with their precision-pointed, dynamic, laser-based comm links, require complete autonomy for managing high-data rate communications systems. Development of cognitive communications management systems that permit any crew member or payload science specialist, regardless of experience level, to control communications is one of the greater benefits the ISS can offer new space exploration programs. The IAM project met a new mission requirement never previously levied against US space-born communications systems management: process and display the orientation of large solar arrays and thermal control panels based on real-time joint angle telemetry. However, IAM leaves the actual communications availability assessment to human judgement, which introduces unwanted variability because each specialist has a different core of experience with comm link performance. Because the ISS utilizes two different frequency bands, dynamic structure can be occasionally translucent at one frequency while it can completely interdict service at the other frequency. The impact of articulating structure on the comm link can depend on its orientation at the time it impinges on the link. It can become easy for a human specialist to cross-associate experience at one frequency with experience at the other frequency. Additionally, the specialist's experience is incremental, occurring one nine-hour shift at a time. Only the IAM processor experiences the complete 24x7x365 communications link performance for both communications links but, it has no "learning capability." If the IAM processor could be endowed with a cognitive ability to remember past structure-induced comm link outages, based on its knowledge of the ISS position, attitude, communications gear, array joint angles and tracking accuracy, it could convey such experience to the human operator. It could also use its learned communications link behaviors to accurately convey the availability of future communications sessions. Further, the tool could remember how accurately or inaccurately it predicted availability and correct future predictions based on past performance. The IAM tool could learn frequency-specific impacts due to spacecraft structures and pass that information along as "experience." Such development would provide a single artificial intelligence processor that could provide two different experience bases. If it also "knew" the satellite service schedule, it could distinguish structure blockage from schedule or planet blockage and then quickly switch to another satellite. Alternatively, just as a human operator could judge, a cognizant comm system based on the IAM model could "know" that the blockage is not going to last very long and continue tracking a comm satellite, waiting for it to track away from structure. Ultimately, once this capability was fully developed and tested in the Mission Control Center, it could be transferred on-orbit to support development of operations concepts that include more advanced cognitive communications systems. Future applications of this capability are easily foreseen because even more dynamic satellite constellations with more nodes and greater capability are coming. Currently, the ISS fully employs its high-data-rate return link for harvesting payload science. In the coming months, it will double that data rate and is forecast to fully utilize that capability. Already there is talk of an upgrade that quadruples the current data rate allocated to ISS payload science before the end of its mission and laser comm links have already been tested from the ISS. Every data rate upgrade mandates more complicated and sensitive communications equipment which implies greater expertise invested in the human operator. Future on-orbit cognizant comm systems will be needed to meet greater performance demands aboard larger, far more complicated spacecraft. In the LEO environment, the old-style one-satellite-per-spacecraft operations concept will give way to a new concept of a single customer spacecraft simultaneously using multiple comm satellites. Much more highly-dynamic manned LEO missions with decades of crew members potentially increase the demand for communications link performance. A cognizant on-board communications system will meet advanced communications demands from future LEO missions and future planetary missions. The ISS has fledgling components of future exploration programs, both LEO and planetary. Further, the Flight Operations Directorate, through the IAM project, has already begun to develop a communications management system that attempts to solve advanced problems ideally represented by dynamic structure impacting scheduled satellite service. With an earnest project to integrate artificial intelligence into the IAM processor, the ISS Program could develop a cognizant communications system that could be adapted and transferred to future on-orbit avionics designs.

Jackson, Dan↗