NASA AMMOS Multi-Mission Geographic Information System (MMGIS) Version 2.0: Updates and Mission Operations
No abstract provided
Dahl, L.↗
SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Results for “Multi-Mission Operations”
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.
Adaptive Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) Reduces Risk of Software Impacting Safety in Artemis Missions
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is asking more of its human spaceflight programs than ever before through the collective Artemis Missions. The NASA Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) Program contributes to NASA’s human spaceflight goals by providing IV&V services for NASA’s critical spacecraft and ground software. The IV&V Program is tasked with providing assurance from both individual and integrated mission software perspectives. The Artemis IV&V organization is actively supporting six distinct development efforts: Orion, the Space Launch System (SLS), Exploration Ground Systems (EGS), Mission Control Center (MCC), the Lunar Gateway, and the Human Landing System (HLS), representing a wide diversity of developer organizations, management structures, and development approaches. With much of this extremely complex flight and ground software being essential to human safety both on the ground and in space, Artemis IV&V is likewise challenged to provide more value-added assurance to future Artemis missions within a constrained budget. To meet this challenge, Artemis IV&V employs a variety of novel and evolving “Adaptive IV&V” approaches for planning and executing IV&V analysis to increase both the efficiency and effectiveness of the IV&V Program’s assurance activities, and to address the difficulties imposed by assuring software for a large, highly integrated, multi-mission enterprise managed and executed by physically and organizationally distinct programs. Instilling agile principles like iterative planning cycles, self-organizing teams, and regular retrospectives, into IV&V planning and execution has led to a more rapid turnaround of a minimum viable assurance product and allowed for increased alignment of assurance activities with development progress. Adopting an assurance case methodology has led to greater consistency and clearer communication of assurance design and provided a foundation for long-term maintenance of assurance plans, products, and results across missions. The IV&V-developed Assurance / Safety Case Analytical Network (A-SCAN) framework and tool has enabled the quantification and tracking of system/software risk and confidence. These confidence measures provide a means to repeatedly express the impact of planned and completed assurance work and the remaining residual risk. Applied as part of a “Follow-the-Risk” organizational ethos, this allows consistent rightsizing of analysis rigor and intensity commensurate with the perceived risk of defects, as well as appropriate targeting of the highest risk areas of the software to find safety issues before they can manifest. Finally, the development of the IV&V Advanced Risk Reduction Integrated Software Test and Operations Tri-program Lightweight Environment (ARRISTOTLE), an integrated software-only simulation of Orion, SLS, and EGS systems, has made it possible to independently test integrated pad and flight scenarios and inject faults to observe how the Artemis multi-program, mission software behaves in degraded modes and in response to hazards. These adaptive IV&V investments have enabled Artemis IV&V to become more efficient and effective in IV&V planning and execution and respond more readily to changes in the risk landscape, increasing the breadth and depth of risk reduction possible within the available resources. Residual risk tracking allows IV&V to communicate more effectively with stakeholders, both internal and external at all levels, and inform key decision-making personnel. This evolving assurance design approach provides IV&V surety that work is performed in the highest risk, most value-added areas of the software, to keep our astronauts and ground crews safe and ensure mission success.
Gerek A Whitman↗
NASA Capture, Containment, and Return System: Bringing Mars Samples to Earth
The Capture, Containment, and Return System (CCRS) project is NASA’s last step in bringing back Mars samples. CCRS will close a decades-long multi-mission and multi-agency effort to bring Mars surface samples back to Earth for scientific studies. CCRS will launch in 2027 on the European Earth Return Orbiter (ERO) spacecraft, which will provide communications relay for the Mars Sample Return ground missions, Perseverance rover and the Sample Retrieval Lander (SRL) (to be launched in 2028). The main mission for CCRS begins when the first-ever orbital planetary capture operation occurs with CCRS catching and securing the Orbiting Sample (OS)in low Mars orbit. From this point, the system will perform additional "firsts": it will autonomously contain the OS with heat-shrink-fit, sterilize the outside surface, and assemble the Earth entry capsule, named Earth Entry System (EES), in orbit around Mars using a gantry mechanism. At approximately 2.8 Lunar distances from Earth, or 3-days from entry into Earth’s atmosphere, CCRS will open its micrometeoroid shield and release the EES on a ballistic trajectory to Earth. The EES is designed to be a fully passive system that will enter the atmosphere and land without parachute at the Utah Test and Training Range (UTTR).
Mars mission, Sample return, Mission design↗
NASA AMMOS Multi-Mission Geographic Information System (MMGIS) version 2.0: Updates and Mission Operations.
No abstract provided
Dahl, L↗
A Novel High-Performance Mission-Enabling Multi-Purpose Radioisotope Heat Source
Recent studies indicate science mission concepts targeting access to the sub-surface oceans of icy moons require ice-penetrating cryobots powered by advanced Radioisotope Power Systems (RPS). These systems would deliver waste heat for ice-melting in the range of 10 kW. Minimizing the transit time through the kilometers-thick ice shells to just a few years requires these RPS to utilize heat sources having a higher thermal energy volumetric density than the existing flight-qualified General-Purpose Heat Source (GPHS). A Compact Heat Source (CPHS)has been conceptualized in which the graphite impact shells(GIS) of the existing GPHS are rearranged in a hexagonal aeroshell containing seven GIS per module, as opposed to the standard two per module; offering a thermal energy density of 0.57 W/cm3versus 0.29 W/cm3 offered by the GPHS simply from the repackaging of Technology Readiness Level (TRL)9 subassemblies. Preliminary thermal modeling of the CPHS integrated into a notional radioisotope thermoelectric generator(RTG) structure further suggests that centerline temperatures are well within allowable limits during nominal operation. Given the need for the CPHS for a subset of missions, it is worth exploring the applicability of the CPHS for more general RTG purposes. We discuss herein how the CPHS may be implemented with either heritage or in-development thermoelectric converter technologies into a Next-Generation RTG concept. Due to a higher energy density, the legacy heat rejection fin arrangement must be modified to permit a sufficiently low cold-side temperature. Preliminary finite element analysis suggests fin-root temperatures can be kept as low as 520 K while allowing the generator to fit within the usable dimensions of currently available United States Department of Energy shipping containers. Such temperatures would certainly be compatible with the use of high temperature thermoelectric converter technologies.. A prime candidate is the heritage silicon-germanium (SiGe) unicouple, whose design could be adapted by approximately halving the leg-length, but without changes in hot and cold junction interfaces, which are features critical to the proven performance and reliability of these devices. The estimated Beginning of Life power for a SiGe-based CPHS-RTG using 12 CPHS for a thermal inventory of 10.5 kW is greater than 600 W under deep space operating conditions. Using higher performance segmented couples currently in development that are based on skutterudite,La3−xTe4and 14-1-11 Zintl thermoelectric materials in lieu of the SiGe unicouples would increase the power level to more than1 kW. The high specific power (We/kg) attribute of CPHS-RTGs found in this study could potentially enable Radioisotope Electric Propulsion (REP) mission concepts. Past NASA REP mission concept studies identified specific power needs in excess of 6to 8 We/kg. Based on a GPHS-RTG-like system configuration, we show that at fin root temperatures between 530 K and 570K (deep space environment), specific powers exceeding 10 We/kg are achievable using high performance segmented thermoelectric converters. The compact sizing and power density of the CPHS-RTG would constitute a significant step upgrade in specific power when compared to heritage GPHS-RTG (approximately5.1 We/kg) and off-the-shelf Multi-Mission RTG (approximately 2.6 We/kg).
Nesmith, Bill J.↗
Adaptive Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) Reduces Risk of Software Impacting Safety in Artemis Missions
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is asking more of its human spaceflight programs than ever before through the collective Artemis Missions. The NASA Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) Program contributes to NASA’s human spaceflight goals by providing IV&V services for NASA’s critical spacecraft and ground software. The IV&V Program is tasked with providing assurance from both individual and integrated mission software perspectives. The Artemis IV&V organization is actively supporting six distinct development efforts: Orion, the Space Launch System (SLS), Exploration Ground Systems (EGS), Mission Control Center (MCC), the Lunar Gateway, and the Human Landing System (HLS), representing a wide diversity of developer organizations, management structures, and development approaches. With much of this extremely complex flight and ground software being essential to human safety both on the ground and in space, Artemis IV&V is likewise challenged to provide more value-added assurance to future Artemis missions within a constrained budget. To meet this challenge, Artemis IV&V employs a variety of novel and evolving “Adaptive IV&V” approaches for planning and executing IV&V analysis to increase both the efficiency and effectiveness of the IV&V Program’s assurance activities, and to address the difficulties imposed by assuring software for a large, highly integrated, multi-mission enterprise managed and executed by physically and organizationally distinct programs. Instilling agile principles like iterative planning cycles, self-organizing teams, and regular retrospectives, into IV&V planning and execution has led to a more rapid turnaround of a minimum viable assurance product and allowed for increased alignment of assurance activities with development progress. Adopting an assurance case methodology has led to greater consistency and clearer communication of assurance design and provided a foundation for long-term maintenance of assurance plans, products, and results across missions. The IV&V-developed Assurance / Safety Case Analytical Network (A-SCAN) framework and tool has enabled the quantification and tracking of system/software risk and confidence. These confidence measures provide a means to repeatedly express the impact of planned and completed assurance work and the remaining residual risk. Applied as part of a “Follow-the-Risk” organizational ethos, this allows consistent rightsizing of analysis rigor and intensity commensurate with the perceived risk of defects, as well as appropriate targeting of the highest risk areas of the software to find safety issues before they can manifest. Finally, the development of the IV&V Advanced Risk Reduction Integrated Software Test and Operations Tri-program Lightweight Environment (ARRISTOTLE), an integrated software-only simulation of Orion, SLS, and EGS systems, has made it possible to independently test integrated pad and flight scenarios and inject faults to observe how the Artemis multi-program, mission software behaves in degraded modes and in response to hazards. These adaptive IV&V investments have enabled Artemis IV&V to become more efficient and effective in IV&V planning and execution and respond more readily to changes in the risk landscape, increasing the breadth and depth of risk reduction possible within the available resources. Residual risk tracking allows IV&V to communicate more effectively with stakeholders, both internal and external at all levels, and inform key decision-making personnel. This evolving assurance design approach provides IV&V surety that work is performed in the highest risk, most value-added areas of the software, to keep our astronauts and ground crews safe and ensure mission success.
Gerek Whitman↗
Deep-Space Conjunction Assessment: Recent Developments and Future Evolution
The Multi-mission Automated Deep-space Conjunction Assessment Process (MADCAP) is a NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) capability used to perform conjunction assessment in shared deep-space environments. MADCAP began performing conjunction assessment at Mars and the Moon in 2011, with the Sun/Earth libration points added to its functionality in 2020. There has been an increasing number of missions operating in these environments in recent years, leading to an elevated frequency of close conjunction events, especially in the Lunar orbital environment. MADCAP provides this service not only to NASA missions, but to any operator who is willing to share ephemerides. Since there is no space surveillance network for deep space environments, ephemeris sharing is the only way in which spacecraft operators can ensure the safety of their spacecraft from collision in these orbit regimes. NASA published a set of conjunction assessment best practices in 2020 that cover the MADCAP process. This paper details recent MADCAP operational experience in the deep space environments, including statistics and process improvements. Updates to the MADCAP software and automation framework implemented to handle the recent growth in the number of deep space missions are also discussed. Future enhancements planned in anticipation of increasingly crowded deep-space environments, such as non-standard runs based on exploratory scenarios, are also discussed.
conjunction assessment↗
Machine Learning for Predicting Team Functioning in HERA Missions
Team functioning is integral to success in future long term space exploration missions. Proactively detecting declines in team functioning can mitigate conflict and ensure mission success. This project developed a speech-based artificial intelligence (AI) system that unobtrusively predicts degradation in team functioning, including performance and cohesion, in the Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA) Campaigns 4 and 5. The AI system conducted automated analysis of the prosodic (tone of voice) and linguistic (language content) components of speech, modeling interpersonal dynamics at both the turn-taking and day-wide levels. We investigated team functioning via observing structured interactions (i.e., multi-mission space exploration vehicle-extra vehicular activity [MMSEV-EVA], team interaction battery [TIB]) and unstructured interactions before the MMSEV-EVA task. We developed machine learning models to predict team functioning (objective task accuracy, self reported team efficacy and self reported team cohesion) by analyzing OpenSmile acoustic features, linguistic descriptors extracted via the linguistic inquiry and word count (LIWC) dictionary, and semantic embeddings. In the TIB, static models using logistic regression and random forests were not able to predict task accuracy, but predicted team efficacy and cohesion during both the decision making and relational tasks to a moderate level (60-70%). Majority voting on the individual turns to predict day long team efficacy further increased accuracies (70-80%). Finally, long short-term memory (LSTM) models showed the best performance across all variables (80-91%), including task performance. In the MMSEV-EVA, static models achieved an accuracy of 60% with majority voting, which increased to 80% through the incorporation of mission day as a variable, accounting for the learning effect. A key finding across both tasks was the "team-dependent" nature of these interactions; models achieved much higher accuracy when trained on prior days of the same team's data rather than attempting to generalize across entirely different teams, with even 1-2 days of prior data per team achieving 5-15% improvement over team-independent models. In addition, the incorporation of pre-task data from the same team also improves model performance, e.g., incorporating data from the decision-making task of the TIB, which preceded the relational task, improved the prediction of team efficacy and cohesion during the latter. We compared model performance when trained on machine-generated data compared to data that had been further corrected by human annotators. Overall, models trained on human-corrected data exhibited a modest improvement in performance, particularly when acoustic features were used. We found no significant correlation between word error rate (WER) and model accuracy (r(55) = -0.08, p = 0.51), but model’s accuracy was significantly higher for medium/high quality transcription (0.74 (SD = 0.48)) compared to the low-quality group (0.64 (SD = 0.36)) (t(63)=2.82, p = 0.006). Based on these, several design recommendation emerge, that could inform Standards at NASA. Models predicting team functioning should incorporate at least one to two days of historical interaction data, include brief pre-task discussions, and explicitly model temporal learning effects, especially for longer operational tasks. Minimum quality standards for automated speech-processing pipelines are needed, given the performance gains observed with manually corrected acoustic data. Finally, systems should leverage both acoustic features and language embeddings in complementary ways, with modality choices and fusion strategies tailored to mission context, task demands, and data quality requirements.
Shrivatsa Mishra↗