Results for “technology development trajectory” — Page 13

NASA NTRS2014

Guidance and Control Architecture Design and Demonstration for Low Ballistic Coefficient Atmospheric Entry

We propose to develop a robust guidance and control system for the ADEPT (Adaptable Deployable Entry and Placement Technology) entry vehicle. A control-centric model of ADEPT will be developed to quantify the performance of candidate guidance and control architectures for both aerocapture and precision landing missions. The evaluation will be based on recent breakthroughs in constrained controllability/reachability analysis of control systems and constrained-based energy-minimum trajectory optimization for guidance development operating in complex environments.

Entry↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Thermal Protection Materials and Systems at NASA Ames Research Center

Thermal Protection Systems (TPS) are critical for enabling NASA missions involving high-speed atmospheric flight where the entries usually include descending into the atmosphere followed by a trajectory that aims to burn off energy and result in a controlled landing. NASA Ames focuses on qualifying and certifying TPS for current missions, sustaining TPS for future missions, and developing new TPS for upcoming missions where a heritage solution is not viable. More recently there is also a focus on advancing and transferring technologies that can benefit both commercial and government space needs. Developing mature thermal protection systems is a lengthy process involving advanced tools, extensive research, and testing. Design and analysis tools are used to predict aerothermal environments, aid the design of test and flight hardware, and support the testing for the thermal/mechanical response of thermal protection systems. More recently, advances in computational methods help reduce the time and cost of technological advances, aid in optimized material architecture design, and improve material properties and performance. While high-enthalpy testing that simulates the conditions of space flight remains essential for the evaluation and development of TPS materials, computational tools are already showing promise in reducing the need for widespread testing and can help fast-track the design cycle. With the exploration of new destinations EDL instrumentation remains an important element of the heatshield and NASA Ames and partners have developed and delivered instrumentation flight hardware in support of recent Mars missions (MSL and M2020) as well as Artemis Orion. Sensors installed on the heatshield and backshell of spacecraft provide coveted information about the aerodynamic and aerothermal environment during entry. Over the years NASA Ames has brought several reusable and ablative TPS materials to a level of readiness to hand off to missions and the branch continues to serve as a TPS steward for the agency. This presentation will cover current developments in the above areas that have enabled recent missions, and look to future TPS needs for missions such as Ice Giants.

thermal protection materials↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Thermal Protection Materials and Systems at NASA Ames Research Center

Thermal Protection Systems (TPS) are critical for enabling NASA missions involving high-speed atmospheric flight where the entries usually include descending into the atmosphere followed by a trajectory that aims to burn off energy and result in a controlled landing. NASA Ames focuses on qualifying and certifying TPS for current missions, sustaining TPS for future missions, and developing new TPS for upcoming missions where a heritage solution is not viable. More recently there is also a focus on advancing and transferring technologies that can benefit both commercial and government space needs.Developing mature thermal protection systems is a lengthy process involving advanced tools, extensive research, and testing. Design and analysis tools are used to predict aerothermal environments, aid the design of test and flight hardware, and support the testing for the thermal/mechanical response of thermal protection systems. More recently, advances in computational methods help reduce the time and cost of technological advances, aid in optimized material architecture design, and improve material properties and performance. While high-enthalpy testing that simulates the conditions of space flight remains essential for the evaluation and development of TPS materials, computational tools are already showing promise in reducing the need for widespread testing and can help fast-trackthe design cycle.With the exploration of new destinations EDL instrumentation remains an important element of the heatshield and NASA Ames and partners have developed and delivered instrumentation flight hardware in support of recent Mars missions,including Mars Science Lab (MSL) and Mars 2020 (M2020),as well as Artemis Orion. Sensors installed on the heatshield and backshell of spacecraft provide coveted information about the aerodynamic and aerothermal environment during entry.Overthe years NASA Ames has brought several reusable and ablative TPS materials to a level of readiness to hand off to missions and the Thermal Protection Materials branch continues to serve as a TPS steward for the agency.

Thermal protection materials↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Strategy for Developing Technologies for Megawatt-class Nuclear Electric Propulsion Systems

In late fiscal year 2020, the Space Nuclear Propulsion (SNP) project began the process of formulating an investment strategy to support development of the technologies required for a high-power (megawatt-class) nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) system capable of performing human-scale missions. This activity was initiated concurrent with several high-level studies and assessments were either under way or had just concluded. Studies of human-scale Mars missions have been performed several times over the past two decades. One of the most recent studies examined opposition-class human Mars missions to occur in the late 2030s timeframe [1,2]. The mission architecture assumed a hybrid NEP/chem-propelled vehicle that used a high specific impulse (Isp) NEP-system and a liquid oxygen (LOx)-liquid methane high thrust chemical stage (two 110 kN (25 klbf) thrust, 365 s Isp engines) for maneuvers performed to enter and exit gravity wells. Trajectory analyses performed in this study showed that such a mission could be performed with 2-4 MWe directed into the electric propulsion system (operating for 20,000+ hours), with the large range representing different opposition-class Mars mission opportunities and permutations on the trajectory design, concept of operations, and technology choices. In 2020, the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) performed a study to evaluate the maturity of the different technologies required for nuclear propulsion systems [3]. The executive summary of this report provided the following top-level conclusions: • “The majority of critical technologies for… NEP/Chem… systems are relatively immature” • “TRLs [technology readiness levels] in the literature are often overestimated” • “The majority of critical technologies… for NEP/Chem… systems are at a relatively high level of advancement degree of difficulty (AD2 > 4) for maturation, requiring a dual development approach” • “The proper assessment of baseline TRL and AD2 values and the estimation of requirements and resources required for advancement have been consistent issues for NEP,” • “Non-advocate reviews should occur at the start of a technology program and at all key milestones.” In 2021, the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) issued a separate report [4] identifying the “primary technical and programmatic challenges, merits, and risks for maturing space nuclear propulsion technologies of interest to a future human Mars exploration mission.” That work contained several important findings, including: • “Developing a MWe-class NEP system for the baseline mission would require increasing power by orders of magnitude relative to NEP system flight- or ground-based technology demonstrations completed to date.” • “Subscale in-space flight testing of NEP systems cannot address many of the risks and potential failure modes associated with the baseline mission NEP system. With sufficient M&S [modeling & simulation] and ground testing, including modular subsystem tests at full scale and power, flight qualification requirements can be met by the cargo missions that will precede the first crewed mission to Mars. Fully integrated ground testing may not be required.” • “As a result of low and intermittent investment over the past several decades, it is unclear if even an aggressive program would be able to develop an NEP system capable of executing the baseline mission in 2039.” These efforts motivated the SNP project to investigate the technologies available for a megawatt-class high power nuclear electric propulsion system. That system is illustrated schematically in Figure 1 and is comprised of five separate top-level critical technology elements (CTEs). 1. Nuclear Reactor – Thermal power source for the system, utilizing high-assay low enriched uranium (HALEU) as the nuclear fuel. Reactor radiation shielding is also included in this CTE. 2. Power Conversion – Operates as a thermodynamic cycle, accepting nuclear reactor thermal power as an input and converting it to mechanical power. 3. Power Management and Distribution (PMAD) – Accepts as an input mechanical power from the power conversion system, which is used to generate electrical power. The PMAD system also distributes the generated electrical power to all other parts of the spacecraft, including the high-power EP system. The PMAD system may also perform duties such as isolation, fault detection, and power transformation/rectification for different spacecraft systems, including the thrusters. 4. Electric Propulsion (EP) – Accepts as an input electrical power, which is used to accelerate a propellant to high speeds to produce thrust. This system includes the power processing unit (PPU), which converts the power it receives to the correct current and voltage required by the thrusters, and the propellant storage and feed systems, which contain and meter the flow of propellant to the thrusters. 5. Thermal Management (Radiators/Heat Rejection) – The cold side of the thermodynamic power conversion cycle, accepts thermal power from the power conversion system and radiatively rejects that heat to space. In this paper, we describe the SNP project formulation and investment strategy that aims to accomplish the research and development required to advance the technology readiness for each CTE. The strategy relies heavily upon experimental testing supported by modeling and simulation to yield realistic assessments of the technologies, which in turn will be used to inform future NEP system-level design decisions and any potential technology downselects.

Kurt A Polzin↗

NASA NTRS2000

First-Generation Jet Propulsion Laboratory "Hockey-Puck" Free-Flying Magnetometers for Distributed In-Situ Multiprobe Measurement of Current Density Filamentation in the Northern Auroral Zone: Enstrophy Mission

The sub-orbital rocket mission was a collaborative project between the University of New Hampshire, Cornell University, and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) to study filamentation phenomena in the northern Auroral zone. The Enstrophy mission test flies the JPL Free-Flying Magnetometer (FFM) concept. The FFM technology development task has been funded by NASA develop miniaturized, low-power, integrated "sensorcrafts". JPL's role was to design, integrate, test, and deliver four FFMs for deployment from the sounding rocket, allowing a unique determination of curl-B. This provides a direct measurement of magnetic-field-aligned current density along the rocket trajectory. A miniaturized three-axis fluxgate magnetometer was integrated with a 4-channel 22-bit sigma-delta Analog to Digital Converter (ADC), four temperature sensors, digital control electronics, seven (Li-SOCl2) batteries, two (4 deg x 170 deg field of view) sun-sensors, a fan-shaped-beam laser diode beacon, a (16 MHz) stable Temperature Compensated Crystal Oscillator (TCXO) clock, Radio Frequency (RF) communication subsystem, and an antenna for approximately 15 minutes of operation where data was collected continuously and transmitted in three (3) bursts (approximately 26 seconds each) to ground station antennas at Poker Flat, Alaska. FFMs were stowed within two trays onboard the rocket during the rocket launch and were released simultaneously using the spinning action of the rocket at approximately 300 km altitude (approximately 100 sec. into the flight). FFMs were deployed with spin rate of approximately 17 Hz and approximately 3 m/sec linear velocity with respect to the rocket. For testing purposes while the rocket was in the launch pad and during flight prior to release of FFMs from the rocket, commands (such as "power on", "test", "flight", "power off', and clock "Reset" signal) were transmitted via a infrared Light Emitting Diode to an infrared detector in the FFM. Special attention was paid to low magnetic signature electronic design and choice of materials in packaging. The miniaturized fluxgate magnetometers had a range of 1-60000 nT with 0.1% full-scale linearity. The frequency range of interest for magnetic measurement was 10 mHz - 50 Hz. Digital data from the magnetometer's three axes were placed in a 4MB Static Random Access Memory (SRAM) in data packages (frames) formatted together with time tags and frame ID. After a specified time was elapsed, the data were Viterbi encoded and transmitted at a rate of 100 kbps (BPSK). Each of the four FFMs transmitted at different frequency. These carrier frequencies were in the range of 2200-2300 MHz. The antenna was a single patch on a high dielectric constant substrate covering one end-plate of the hockey-puck-sized unit. The local clocks aboard the FFMs were reset at the start of the mission and stayed synchronized within 3 msec during the mission. Position of each FFM with respect to the rocket is calculated by the knowledge of its release velocity (measured at exit point of the FFM launcher tract) providing an accuracy of 1 m over the maximum range of 3 km. Spatial and temporal nature of observants can be separated to within 3 m in space or 3 msec time interval.

Javadi, H.↗

NASA NTRS2007

Multi-Sensor Testing for Automated Rendezvous and Docking Sensor Testing at the Flight Robotics Laboratory

The Exploration Systems Architecture defines missions that require rendezvous, proximity operations, and docking (RPOD) of two spacecraft both in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and in Low Lunar Orbit (LLO). Uncrewed spacecraft must perform automated and/or autonomous rendezvous, proximity operations and docking operations (commonly known as AR&D). The crewed missions may also perform rendezvous and docking operations and may require different levels of automation and/or autonomy, and must provide the crew with relative navigation information for manual piloting. The capabilities of the RPOD sensors are critical to the success of the Exploration Program. NASA has the responsibility to determine whether the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) contractor proposed relative navigation sensor suite will meet the requirements. The relatively low technology readiness level of AR&D relative navigation sensors has been carried as one of the CEV Project's top risks. The AR&D Sensor Technology Project seeks to reduce the risk by the testing and analysis of selected relative navigation sensor technologies through hardware-in-the-loop testing and simulation. These activities will provide the CEV Project information to assess the relative navigation sensors maturity as well as demonstrate test methods and capabilities. The first year of this project focused on a series of"pathfinder" testing tasks to develop the test plans, test facility requirements, trajectories, math model architecture, simulation platform, and processes that will be used to evaluate the Contractor-proposed sensors. Four candidate sensors were used in the first phase of the testing. The second phase of testing used four sensors simultaneously: two Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Advanced Video Guidance Sensors (AVGS), a laser-based video sensor that uses retroreflectors attached to the target vehicle, and two commercial laser range finders. The multi-sensor testing was conducted at MSFC's Flight Robotics Laboratory (FRL) using the FRL's 6-DOF gantry system, called the Dynamic Overhead Target System (DOTS). The target vehicle for "docking" in the laboratory was a mockup that was representative of the proposed CEV docking system, with added retroreflectors for the AVGS. The multi-sensor test configuration used 35 open-loop test trajectories covering three major objectives: (1) sensor characterization trajectories designed to test a wide range of performance parameters; (2) CEV-specific trajectories designed to test performance during CEV-like approach and departure profiles; and (3) sensor characterization tests designed for evaluating sensor performance under more extreme conditions as might be induced during a spacecraft failure or during contingency situations. This paper describes the test development, test facility, test preparations, test execution, and test results of the multi-sensor series of trajectories.

Brewster, L.↗

NASA NTRS2008

Multi-Sensor Testing for Automated Rendezvous and Docking Sensor Testing at the Flight Robotics Lab

The Exploration Systems Architecture defines missions that require rendezvous, proximity operations, and docking (RPOD) of two spacecraft both in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and in Low Lunar Orbit (LLO). Uncrewed spacecraft must perform automated and/or autonomous rendezvous, proximity operations and docking operations (commonly known as AR&D). The crewed missions may also perform rendezvous and docking operations and may require different levels of automation and/or autonomy, and must provide the crew with relative navigation information for manual piloting. The capabilities of the RPOD sensors are critical to the success ofthe Exploration Program. NASA has the responsibility to determine whether the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) contractor-proposed relative navigation sensor suite will meet the requirements. The relatively low technology readiness level of AR&D relative navigation sensors has been carried as one of the CEV Project's top risks. The AR&D Sensor Technology Project seeks to reduce the risk by the testing and analysis of selected relative navigation sensor technologies through hardware-in-the-Ioop testing and simulation. These activities will provide the CEV Project information to assess the relative navigation sensors maturity as well as demonstrate test methods and capabilities. The first year of this project focused on a series of "pathfinder" testing tasks to develop the test plans, test facility requirements, trajectories, math model architecture, simulation platform, and processes that will be used to evaluate the Contractor-proposed sensors. Four candidate sensors were used in the first phase of the testing. The second phase of testing used four sensors simultaneously: two Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Advanced Video Guidance Sensors (AVGS), a laser-based video sensor that uses retroreflectors attached to the target vehicle, and two commercial laser range finders. The multi-sensor testing was conducted at MSFC's Flight Robotics Laboratory (FRL) using the FRL's 6-DOF gantry system, called the Dynamic Overhead Target System (DOTS). The target vehicle for "docking" in the laboratory was a mockup that was representative of the proposed CEV docking system, with added retroreflectors for the AVGS.' The multi-sensor test configuration used 35 open-loop test trajectories covering three major objectives: (l) sensor characterization trajectories designed to test a wide range of performance parameters; (2) CEV-specific trajectories designed to test performance during CEV-like approach and departure profiles; and (3) sensor characterization tests designed for evaluating sensor performance under more extreme conditions as might be induced during a spacecraft failure or during contingency situations. This paper describes the test development, test facility, test preparations, test execution, and test results of the multisensor series oftrajectories

Brewster, Linda L.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

BioSentinel: Mission Summary and Lessons Learned From the First Deep Space Biology CubeSat Mission

Launched on Artemis-1, BioSentinel carries a biology experiment into deep space for the first time in 50 years. A 6U CubeSat form factor was utilized for the spacecraft which included technologies newly developed or adapted for operations beyond Earth orbit. The spacecraft carries onboard budding yeast, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, as an analog to human cells to test the biological response to deep space radiation. This was the maiden deep-space voyage for many of the subsystems, and the first time to evaluate their performance in flight operation. Flying a CubeSat beyond LEO comes with unique challenges with respect to trajectory uncertainty and mission operations planning. The nominal plan was a lunar fly-by, followed by an insertion into Heliocentric orbit. However, some possible scenarios included lunar eclipses that could have severely impacted the power budget during that phase of the mission, while others could have resulted in a “Retrograde” hyperbola at swing-by resulting in the spacecraft traveling inward toward Earth or even towards a collision with the lunar surface. The commissioning phase of the mission was successful and completed a week ahead of schedule. It did not come without its exciting moments and challenges. First contact with the spacecraft uncovered that the vehicle was unexpectedly tumbling after deployment, a situation that needed to be corrected urgently. The mission operations team executed a contingency plan to stabilize the spacecraft, with just moments to spare before the battery ran out of power. The BioSensor payload onboard the spacecraft is a complex instrument that includes microfluidics, fluid systems, sensor control electronics, as well at the living yeast cells. BioSentinel also included a TimePix radiation sensor implemented by JSC’s RadWorks group. Dose and Linear Energy Transfer (LET) data is compared directly to the rate of DSB-and repair events measured by the S. cerevisiae cells. BioSentinel mature nanosatellite technologies included: deep space communications and navigation, autonomous attitude control and momentum management, and micro-propulsion systems, to provide an adaptable nanosatellite platform for deep space uses. This paper discusses the performance of the BioSentinel spacecraft through the mission phase, and includes lessons learned from challenges and anomalies. BioSentinel had many successes and will be a pathfinder for future deep space CubeSats and biology missions.

BioSentinel↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Biosentinel: Mission Summary and Lessons Learned From the First Deep Space Biology CubeSat Mission

Launched on Artemis-1, BioSentinel carries a biology experiment into deep space for the first time in 50 years. A 6U CubeSat form factor was utilized for the spacecraft which included technologies newly developed or adapted for operations beyond Earth orbit. The spacecraft carries onboard budding yeast, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, as an analog to human cells to test the biological response to deep space radiation. This was the maiden deep-space voyage for many of the subsystems, and the first time to evaluate their performance in flight operation. Flying a CubeSat beyond LEO comes with unique challenges with respect to trajectory uncertainty and mission operations planning. The nominal plan was a lunar fly-by, followed by an insertion into Heliocentric orbit. However, some possible scenarios included lunar eclipses that could have severely impacted the power budget during that phase of the mission, while others could have resulted in a “Retrograde” hyperbola at swing-by resulting in the spacecraft traveling inward toward Earth or even towards a collision with the lunar surface. The commissioning phase of the mission was successful and completed a week ahead of schedule. It did not come without its exciting moments and challenges. First contact with the spacecraft uncovered that the vehicle was unexpectedly tumbling after deployment, a situation that needed to be corrected urgently. The mission operations team executed a contingency plan to stabilize the spacecraft, with just moments to spare before the battery ran out of power. The BioSensor payload onboard the spacecraft is a complex instrument that includes microfluidics, fluid systems, sensor control electronics, as well at the living yeast cells. BioSentinel also included a TimePix radiation sensor implemented by JSC’s RadWorks group. Dose and Linear Energy Transfer (LET) data is compared directly to the rate of DSB-and repair events measured by the S. cerevisiae cells. BioSentinel mature nanosatellite technologies included: deep space communications and navigation, autonomous attitude control and momentum management, and micro-propulsion systems, to provide an adaptable nanosatellite platform for deep space uses. This paper discusses the performance of the BioSentinel spacecraft through the mission phase, and includes lessons learned from challenges and anomalies. BioSentinel had many successes and will be a pathfinder for future deep space CubeSats and biology missions.

BioSentinel↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Biosentinel: The First Deep Space Biology CubeSat Mission- Mission Summary and Lessons Learned

Launched on Artemis-1, BioSentinel carries a biology experiment into deep space for the first time in 50 years. A 6U CubeSat form factor was utilized for the spacecraft which included technologies newly developed or adapted for operations beyond Earth orbit. The spacecraft carries onboard budding yeast, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, as an analog to human cells to test the biological response to deep space radiation. This was the maiden deep-space voyage for many of the subsystems, and the first time to evaluate their performance in flight operation. Flying a CubeSat beyond LEO comes with unique challenges with respect to trajectory uncertainty and mission operations planning. The nominal plan was a lunar fly-by, followed by an insertion into Heliocentric orbit. However, some possible scenarios included lunar eclipses that could have severely impacted the power budget during that phase of the mission, while others could have resulted in a “Retrograde” hyperbola at swing-by resulting in the spacecraft traveling inward toward Earth or even towards a collision with the lunar surface. The commissioning phase of the mission was successful and completed a week ahead of schedule. It did not come without its exciting moments and challenges. First contact with the spacecraft uncovered that the vehicle was unexpectedly tumbling after deployment, a situation that needed to be corrected urgently. The mission operations team executed a contingency plan to stabilize the spacecraft, with just moments to spare before the battery ran out of power. The BioSensor payload onboard the spacecraft is a complex instrument that includes microfluidics, fluid systems, sensor control electronics, as well at the living yeast cells. BioSentinel also included a TimePix radiation sensor implemented by JSC’s RadWorks group. Dose and Linear Energy Transfer (LET) data is compared directly to the rate of DSB-and repair events measured by the S. cerevisiae cells. BioSentinel mature nanosatellite technologies included: deep space communications and navigation, autonomous attitude control and momentum management, and micro-propulsion systems, to provide an adaptable nanosatellite platform for deep space uses. This paper discusses the performance of the BioSentinel spacecraft through the mission phase, and includes lessons learned from challenges and anomalies. BioSentinel had many successes and will be a pathfinder for future deep space CubeSats and biology missions.

BioSentinel↗

NASA NTRS1982

Galilean satellite mission concepts

Post-Galileo mission concepts considered possible for satellite-intensive investigations are presented, with consideration given to single and multiple target scenarios using orbiter and lander deployments. Candidate missions that satisfy the selected science objectives are identified, and specific scenario/target combinations which fall within performance constraints are chosen. The concepts are then developed into descriptive mission profiles. Also discussed are target encounter and deployment requirements, payload delivery, and operational considerations. Particular attention is given to Jupiter radiation effects and shielding requirements. A wide range of satellite-intensive missions is thought to be within the performance capabilities of earth-gravity-assisted ballistic trajectories and nuclear electric propulsion technology.

Soldner, J. K.↗

NASA NTRS2014

An Integrated Approach to Modeling Solar Electric Propulsion Vehicles During Long Duration, Near-Earth Orbit Transfers

Recent NASA interest in utilizing solar electronic propulsion (SEP) technology to transfer payloads, e.g. from low-Earth orbit (LEO) to higher energy geostationary-Earth orbit (GEO) or to Earth escape, has necessitated the development of high fidelity SEP vehicle models and simulations. These models and simulations need to be capable of capturing vehicle dynamics and sub-system interactions experienced during the transfer trajectories which are typically accomplished with continuous-burn (potentially interrupted by solar eclipse), long duration "spiral out" maneuvers taking several months or more to complete. This paper presents details of an integrated simulation approach achieved by combining a high fidelity vehicle simulation code with a detailed solar array model. The combined simulation tool gives researchers the functionality to study the integrated effects of various vehicle sub-systems (e.g. vehicle guidance, navigation and control (GN&C), electric propulsion system (EP)) with time varying power production. Results from a simulation model of a vehicle with a 50 kW class SEP system using the integrated tool are presented and compared to the results from another simulation model employing a 50 kW end-of-life (EOL) fixed power level assumption. These models simulate a vehicle under three degree of freedom dynamics (i.e. translational dynamics only) and include the effects of a targeting guidance algorithm (providing a "near optimal" transfer) during a LEO to near Earth escape (C (sub 3) = −2.0 km (sup 2) / sec (sup −2) spiral trajectory. The presented results include the impact of the fully integrated, time-varying solar array model (e.g. cumulative array degradation from traversing the Van Allen belts, impact of solar eclipses on the vehicle and the related temperature responses in the solar arrays due to operating in the Earth's thermal environment, high fidelity array power module, etc.); these are used to assess the impact on vehicle performance (i.e. propellant consumption) and transit times.

vehicle↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Approach for Defining IASMS Services, Functions, and Capabilities

Assuring safety in the NAS with the inclusion of new entrants, such as Advanced Air Mobility (AAM), will require overcoming unique safety challenges that result from combining innovative technologies with novel airspace concepts for moving people and cargo using autonomous vehicles. The focus of the In-time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS) is to overcome AAM’s safety assurance challenges. The IASMS Concept of Operations (ConOps) describes an interconnected set of services, functions, and capabilities (SFCs) designed to manage operational risks, identify unknown risks, and inform system designs. This paper describes an approach for defining SFCs based on technology trends in research, assessment of known and unknown risks in voluntary safety reports, and causal and contributing factors in aviation accidents and incidents. This approach would identify potential SFCs that further expand the Monitor, Assess, and Mitigate (M-A-M) functionality that represents the enabling framework of the IASMS. Safety implications that will result from integration of AAM in the transformation of the National Airspace System (NAS) were addressed in National Academies committees reports on AAM and IASMS. Development of a ConOps for IASMS was a top recommendation and can be represented as a reframing of safety assurance that builds on real-time alerting such as the Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System, and adds the more encompassing in-time temporal parameter in recognition of the different timelines for collecting and assessing safety data for risk mitigations. For example, mining for safety trends from data sources such as the Aviation Safety Information Analysis and Sharing system occurs over a longer time period. Research on AAM operations poses that SFCs can be designed to monitor the safety margin appropriate for AAM including with regards to the distance between current flight parameters and nominal ideal conditions. These in-time comparisons will become more complex as the density of operations increases at least in certain areas and can include planned and actual 4D trajectory, and in-time comparisons having implications on conflict modeling and prediction including expected and actual departure time, fix/waypoint crossing times, and arrival time. These comparisons would be integrated as part of SFCs that redefine and inform new safety margin. An increased safety margin improves management of operational risks while reducing the potential for anomalies. An increased safety margin also has implications for operator confidence in the certainty of its operations and trust in automation. Technology trends in research could be used to refine existing SFCs and define needs for additional SFCs that provide safety improvements to the design and operation of vehicles, airspace design, and operator performance requirements. NASA is developing innovative approaches to safeguard against major accidents and incidents that have occurred in the NAS and those anticipated with the inclusion of envisioned AAM operations. The innovations use operational performance data to monitor, detect, and predict flight variations exceeding safe nominal patterns, such as would be caused by navigational error, severe weather complications, or hijacking of UAS controls. These innovative approaches have high potential to prevent accidents and incidents in the new AAM era. It is anticipated that elements of the innovations will evolve into SFCs for the IASMS. Voluntary safety reports can be monitored to identify anomalies related to design or operational performance risks. Reports could be periodically monitored and assessed for specific topics. Reports might serve as weak signals or precursors indicative of emergent risk such as when combined with other safety information. The architecture could include SFCs that are based on voluntary safety reports recognizing the periodic temporal nature of data analysis. As previously mentioned, aviation accidents with their causal and contributing precursors can inform the need for SFCs in the IASMS. Accidents and incidents at San Francisco International Airport such as Asiana 214 and Air Canada 759 illustrate how combinations of different factors lead to increased risk. These types of precursors and different factors have implications on the types of SFCs that could be needed to monitor and manage different sources and types of design and operational risk. Continuing to assure the safety of AAM as designs and operations gain in complexity can be accompanied by defining SFCs that also increase in complexity. These SFCs can leverage information from findings and recommendations synthesized across on-going research, voluntary safety reports, and accident and incident reports. These SFCs can serve to refine accuracy of algorithms and resolve limitations with current practices. The IASMS architecture represents the framework for the SFCs and their critical role in safety assurance.

In-Time Aviation Safety Management System↗

NASA NTRS1998

Spaceborne GPS: Current Status and Future Visions

The Global Positioning System (GPS), developed by the Department of Defense is quickly revolutionizing the architecture of future spacecraft and spacecraft systems. Significant savings in spacecraft life cycle cost, in power, and in mass can be realized by exploiting GPS technology in spaceborne vehicles. These savings are realized because GPS is a systems sensor--it combines the ability to sense space vehicle trajectory, attitude, time, and relative ranging between vehicles into one package. As a result, a reduced spacecraft sensor complement can be employed and significant reductions in space vehicle operations cost can be realized through enhanced on-board autonomy. This paper provides an overview of the current status of spaceborne GPS, a description of spaceborne GPS receivers available now and in the near future, a description of the 1997-2000 GPS flight experiments, and the spaceborne GPS team's vision for the future.

Bauer, Frank H.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Electrodynamic Regolith Conveyor Sub-Orbital Flight Experiment

The Electrodynamic Regolith Conveyor (ERC) is a technology that is being developed for soil sampling, beneficiation, specialized conveying applications and dust mitigation. The ERC is an extension of the Electrodynamic Dust Shield (EDS). The EDS has been developed for lenses, solar panels, radiators, fabric, and other applications and is scheduled for a technology demonstration mission on the Moon in 2024. The objective of the ERC sub-orbital flight experiment is to perform testing to advance the TRL of the ERC technology by measuring the regolith transport flow rate, power consumption and range of particle trajectories at four different inclinations in a simulated lunar gravity environment. This testing supports discrete element modeling efforts by grounding the simulations with test data.

Conveyor↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Electrodynamic Regolith Conveyor Sub-Orbital Flight Experiment

The Electrodynamic Regolith Conveyor (ERC) is a technology that is being developed for soil sampling, beneficiation, specialized conveying applications and dust mitigation. The ERC is an extension of the Electrodynamic Dust Shield (EDS). The EDS has been developed for lenses, solar panels, radiators, fabric, and other applications and is scheduled for a technology demonstration mission on the Moon in 2024. The objective of the ERC sub-orbital flight experiment is to perform testing to advance the TRL of the ERC technology by measuring the regolith transport flow rate, power consumption and range of particle trajectories at four different inclinations in a simulated lunar gravity environment. This testing supports discrete element modeling efforts by grounding the simulations with test data.

Electrodynamic↗

NASA NTRS2019

Development and Analysis of the Automated Object Reentry Survival Analysis Tool Parametric Study Wrapper

The NASA Orbital Debris Program Office (ODPO) studies all aspects of spacecraft end-of-life and orbital debris measurement, modeling, and mitigation. The reentry safety group within the ODPO uses the Object Reentry Survival Analysis Tool (ORSAT) to calculate the casualty risk due to reentry of spacecraft and other types of orbital debris. ORSAT models spacecraft as a collection of fragments that break apart from the parent object at a pre-defined “breakup altitude.” It then calculates the trajectory and aero-heating of these fragments to determine which fragments are completely destroyed and which survive to the ground and pose a risk to human population. Because of the historically high computational cost of these calculations, many simplifying assumptions have been made in the traditional calculation and analysis process used by the ODPO, some of which have been shown by recent research by the ODPO and others to be incorrect. Improvements to the ORSAT code and advancements in computer technology have vastly decreased the program’s processing time, and have allowed the ODPO to develop a capability for large-scale parametric studies and Monte Carlo reentry simulations that can aid in both the initial spacecraft design and provide more detailed and accurate risk analysis to spacecraft operators.

Smith, Andrew N.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Performance Efficient Launch Vehicle Recovery and Reuse

For decades, economic reuse of launch vehicles has been an elusive goal. Recent attempts at demonstrating elements of launch vehicle recovery for reuse have invigorated a debate over the merits of different approaches. The parameter most often used to assess the cost of access to space is dollars-per-kilogram to orbit. When comparing reusable vs. expendable launch vehicles, that ratio has been shown to be most sensitive to the performance lost as a result of enabling the reusability. This paper will briefly review the historical background and results of recent attempts to recover launch vehicle assets for reuse. The business case for reuse will be reviewed, with emphasis on the performance expended to recover those assets, and the practicality of the most ambitious reuse concept, namely propulsive return to the launch site. In 2015, United Launch Alliance (ULA) announced its Sensible, Modular, Autonomous Return Technology (SMART) reuse plan for recovery of the booster module for its new Vulcan launch vehicle. That plan employs a non-propulsive approach where atmospheric entry, descent and landing (EDL) technologies are utilized. Elements of such a system have a wide variety of applications, from recovery of launch vehicle elements in suborbital trajectories all the way to human space exploration. This paper will include an update on ULA's booster module recovery approach, which relies on Hypersonic Inflatable Aerodynamic Decelerator (HIAD) and Mid-Air Retrieval (MAR) technologies, including its concept of operations (ConOps). The HIAD design, as well as parafoil staging and MAR concepts, will be discussed. Recent HIAD development activities and near term plans including scalability, next generation materials for the inflatable structure and heat shield, and gas generator inflation systems will be provided. MAR topics will include the ConOps for recovery, helicopter selection and staging, and the state of the art of parachute recovery systems using large parafoils for space asset recovery and high altitude deployment. The next proposed HIAD flight demonstration is called HULA (for HIAD on ULA), and will feature a 6m diameter HIAD. An update for the HULA concept will be provided in this paper. As proposed, this demonstration will fly as a secondary payload on an Atlas mission. The Centaur upper stage provides the reentry pointing, deorbit burn, and entry vehicle spin up. The flight test will culminate with a recovery of the HIAD using MAR. HULA will provide data from a Low Earth Orbit (LEO) return aeroheating environment that enables predictive model correlation and refinement. The resultant reduction in performance uncertainties should lead to design efficiencies that are increasingly significant at larger scales. Relevance to human scale Mars EDL using a HIAD will also be presented, and the applicability of the data generated from both HULA and SMART Vulcan flights, and its value for NASA's human exploration efforts will be discussed. A summary and conclusion will follow.

Reed, John G.↗