Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Autonomie simulation”

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.

258 records · Page 15

Supervised Autonomous Assembly to Create and Evolve Persistent Assets

Supervised autonomous assembly (SAA) will create a paradigm shift in the planning and design of future persistent assets (PAs), both in near zero-g environments and on planetary surfaces. SAA refers to an autonomy approach that has the benefits of autonomous assembly as well as the benefits provided by a supervisor (operator) who is available to resolve unexpected situations. SAA provides both increased design freedom as well as reduced programmatic risk. SAA enables evolution of future PAs over decades as in-space operations transition from single purpose missions to creation of PAs, such as laboratories and experimental stations which more closely resembling terrestrial laboratories that can easily adapt and evolve to new missions leveraging repeated visits to the PA. The ability to evolve enables PAs to rapidly respond to changing objectives resulting from new questions as our understanding improves. A recently initiated National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) project in the Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) Game Changing Development (GCD) Program called the Precision Assembled Space Structure (PASS), leverages the advantages of SAA to develop technologies that enable efficient creation and evolution of hexagonal topologies; both planar (example: fuel depots) and curved (examples: telescopes and shelters). PASS will be used to provide context for the philosophy and concepts discussed as well as the decision and selections made. PASS objectives are: a) Develop confidence in SAA and on-orbit servicing, assembly and manufacturing (OSAM) technologies by executing a test campaign that uses a path-to-flight autonomous precision assembly process directly applicable to future space telescopes. b) Test autonomous technologies including automated path planning and error recovery, to emphasize a robust approach that relies on generic robots and special purpose tools. c) Validate critical component models using a digital twin that includes the assembled primary mirror support structure and assembly process. A digital twin is a high-fidelity simulation of the asset capable of predicting the on-orbit performance. The paper concludes after identifying the critical need for a modest assembly flight experiment to validate and develop confidence in the SAA paradigm, thus accelerating adoption of the benefits described. SAA is a game changing paradigm that enhances the ability of an organization to infuse new technology through rapid evolution of PAs while leveraging OSAM technologies.

Structural Modeling↗

A Virtual Laboratory for Aviation and Airspace Prognostics Research

Integration of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), autonomy, spacecraft, and other aviation technologies, in the airspace is becoming more and more complicated, and will continue to do so in the future. Inclusion of new technology and complexity into the airspace increases the importance and difficulty of safety assurance. Additionally, testing new technologies on complex aviation systems and systems of systems can be challenging, expensive, and at times unsafe when implementing real life scenarios. The application of prognostics to aviation and airspace management may produce new tools and insight into these problems. Prognostic methodology provides an estimate of the health and risks of a component, vehicle, or airspace and knowledge of how that will change over time. That measure is especially useful in safety determination, mission planning, and maintenance scheduling. In our research, we develop a live, distributed, hardware- in-the-loop Prognostics Virtual Laboratory testbed for aviation and airspace prognostics. The developed testbed will be used to validate prediction algorithms for the real-time safety monitoring of the National Airspace System (NAS) and the prediction of unsafe events. In our earlier work1 we discussed the initial Prognostics Virtual Laboratory testbed development work and related results for milestones 1 & 2. This paper describes the design, development, and testing of the integrated tested which are part of milestone 3, along with our next steps for validation of this work. Through a framework consisting of software/hardware modules and associated interface clients, the distributed testbed enables safe, accurate, and inexpensive experimentation and research into airspace and vehicle prognosis that would not have been possible otherwise. The testbed modules can be used cohesively to construct complex and relevant airspace scenarios for research. Four modules are key to this research: the virtual aircraft module which uses the X-Plane simulator and X-PlaneConnect toolbox, the live aircraft module which connects fielded aircraft using onboard cellular communications devices, the hardware in the loop (HITL) module which connects laboratory based bench-top hardware testbeds and the research module which contains diagnostics and prognostics tools for analysis of live air traffic situations and vehicle health conditions. The testbed also features other modules for data recording and playback, information visualization, and air traffic generation. Software reliability, safety, and latency are some of the critical design considerations in development of the testbed.

LVC-DE↗

m:N ConOps/R&R Remote Simulation

This presentation details the experimental design of an investigation of small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS) operations involving multiple vehicle management by a remote operator. The study is part of an ongoing effort to explore multiple vehicle control by multiple operators, i.e., the control of N vehicles by m operators (m:N operations). For this effort, NASA and collaborators have developed prototypes of a concept of operations (ConOps), roles and responsibilities (R&R) for operators and supervisors, and a ground control station (GCS), including software displays and interfaces. Participants in this study acted as the pilot-in-command of twelve aircraft flying pre-approved routes in a simulation of a food delivery operation utilizing sUAS in the San Diego, CA area. Each participant experienced four experimental trials. Twice within the course of each trial, participants were responsible for responding to a sudden, unanticipated, and high-priority contingency: an airspace restriction for sUAS operations known as a UAS Volume Reservation (UVR). Upon issuance of a UVR, pilots were expected to reroute affected vehicles around the airspace. The level of automation (LoA) and workload of the flight rerouting task were varied. The LoA was manipulated by providing reroute suggestions ("auto" condition) for aircraft or by requiring pilots to manually reroute ("manual" condition) affected vehicles. Workload was varied as a function of the number of vehicles affected by the UVR contingencies: 2 vehicles ("low workload" condition) versus 4 vehicles ("high workload" condition). Additionally, some vehicles required pilots to adjust for terrain conflicts while avoiding the UVR region. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, in-person data collection for this study was not possible. Researchers adapted to this circumstance through the development of remote data collection protocol. Participants were able to view adapted GCS displays using the Microsoft Teams teleconferencing platform and responded to events by using a verbal protocol developed for the experiment. Using this protocol, participants provided instructions for actions to a researcher, referred to as the surrogate, to carry out on their behalf. This presentation describes the experiment design, including special details for remote data collection via a subject-surrogate configuration, and concludes with planned data analysis and results to be presented at a later date.

multi-UAS↗

Localization of Ad-Hoc Lunar Constellations in Communication Failure Modes for Distributed Spacecraft Autonomy

As lunar missions increase in complexity inspired by NASA’s Artemis Program, they will require reliable and sufficient capability of the Position, Navigation, and Timing (PNT) system to support their scientific objectives. In addition, NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) program initiates the proliferation of public and private exploration partnerships using small satellites from commercial and private organizations, expanding traditionally confined low Earth orbit to be used for missions beyond geosynchronous orbit (Zucherman et al., 2022). Therefore, the Lunar PNT system is also required to provide navigation services compatible with the smaller platforms being sent by the public and private sectors, like CubeSats. However, traditional approaches to deep space missions’ navigation based on ground radio facilities have difficulties in providing sufficient support for the increasing number of users and communication at a distance from the Earth (Kaplev et al., 2022). In particular, the existing Lunar navigation technologies such as weak signal global positioning system (GPS) and deep space network (DSN) are not able to ensure operations of the upcoming small-scale Lunar missions due to their limitations in localization performance as well as capacity aspects. Another way to provide Lunar PNT service is to create a dedicated Lunar global navigation satellite system (GNSS) constellation, like GNSS systems on Earth. Space agencies like NASA, ESA, and JAXA are now developing the lunar communications relay and navigation systems (LCRNS) and Lunar navigation satellite systems (LNSS). In their systems, satellites will be deployed in moon orbits to provide the communication, positioning, navigation, and timing (CPNT) service at the lunar south pole region where the Artemis base camp will be expected (Murata et al., 2022). Meanwhile, common challenges considered in lunar PNT research arise from poor geometry of the terrestrial GNSS satellites when seen from the lunar user, highly perturbed lunar orbits, and limitations in power, size, and cost of the equipment on lunar satellites (Iiyama et al., 2023). It is also not clear if there will be enough Lunar users to support the cost and resources this would require as the Low-cost surface missions may not be able to support the large power, mass, and weight requirements that these navigation solutions entail (Niemoeller et al., 2022). As an alternative, existing Lunar science and exploration assets could be used to create a low-cost, autonomous, ad-hoc, and on-demand mission-centric Lunar PNT swarm capable of providing PNT services to these low-cost lunar missions (Hagenau et al., 2021). Introducing the non-dedicated and ad-hoc Lunar navigation constellation gives a way to provide PNT services on-demand. The non-dedicated swarm assets of Lunar constellations are designed to localize themselves with minimal interaction with Earth by adding cooperative autonomous localization to lunar missions, freeing up valuable bandwidth and ground segment resources. An autonomous localization of Lunar constellations is based on the concept of the decentralized PNT system with a distributed extended Kalman filter (DEKF) approach to state estimation for minimal onboard operating costs. In the distributed data processing algorithm, computation is broken down and assigned to each satellite, resulting in a considerably decreased computational amount while maintaining the accuracy of the orbit ephemeris and clock offsets as the result of centralized data processing (Wen et al., 2019). The DEKF requires spacecraft to perform two-way ranging operations with each other to communicate simultaneously, leveraging neighbor two-way intersatellite link (ISL) measurements such as pseudoranges to, and relative velocities between, visible satellites as sensor values (Frank et al., 2021). The Lunar autonomous PNT simulation (LAPS) demonstrated the feasibility of orbital asset localization among ad-hoc Lunar small-sat constellations based on the DEKF in Hagenau et al. (2021) and evaluated the matching algorithm proposed by Frank et al. (2021) in scheduling position estimation updates. In previous papers, all assets and measurements are assumed to be always available without consideration of the impact of intermittent and permanent communication failure. This study presents localization performance with increasing levels of network degradation for swarm assets and users to demonstrate the robustness of the decentralized Lunar PNT service in more realistic scenarios. Main issues arising from communication failure include spacecraft permanent or transient loss, antenna failures, message delays, etc. We tested four possible reasons for network degradation for 7 days in 21 satellites frozen with an altitude of 5500 km, evenly spaced around 3 circular, 40 inclination orbital planes where each spacecraft has two directional antennas. As anchor nodes with an independent estimate of their position are required in the DEKF approach, two ground nodes in each pole and one node in the gateway were implemented in the simulation. First, the most probable failure scenario involves the loss of a single spacecraft due to solar interference and technical malfunctions of the assets. Losing the availability of a single spacecraft means losing the two-way ISL measurement of the asset in the DEKF update. In order to provide the best possible quality of PNT service with limited time and resources, the distributed Lunar constellations must schedule the communication activities. The scheduler leverages mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) for the coordination and scheduling of the desired “as-needed” localization service (Niemoeller et al., 2022). We assume the scheduler has completely excluded the spacecraft information before the DEKF update in the failure scenario. When a random spacecraft has been turned off at a specific time, the robustness of the autonomous Lunar PNT system is evaluated. The simulation results give an 11.5% degradation in median position accuracy compared to the idealized performance excluding the asset loss. Second, a large number of assets may vanish due to major hardware problems or meteor strikes around the moon. A multiple spacecraft loss can degrade the localization performance very fast by losing the communication ability to do cross-plane measurements and in-plane measurements in a 3-plane constellation. When the matching-based scheduler is aware of ISL availability, we investigate a large number of in-plane and cross-plane asset vanishments both in close proximity and equally spaced throughout the orbital plane. According to the simulations, the loss of in-plane measurements gives 40.2% degradation while cross-plane measurements degrade 50.5% of asset localization performance among available assets. Therefore, it is concluded that cross-plane measurements are more important in improving the position estimation accuracy. Third, spacecraft failure information can be lost due to the internal message delay, resulting in the DEKF update scheduler to solve the matching problem with unavailable assets. The DEKF update cycle is comprised of network setup, communication, and computations where a global broadcast network and a 2-way ISL network setup take 6 minutes in total (Frank et al., 2021). Once the broadcast network successfully transmits and receives information, a random spacecraft may lose its availability right before solving the matching problem. This means the matching solution is no longer optimal, resulting in degradation in the localization performance. A numerical assessment shows the matching-based scheduler with knowing failure holds 11.5% of position accuracy degradation, whereas the scheduler without knowing failure gives 34% degraded localization performance without asset loss. Fourth, a transient loss of a single or multiple spacecraft may occur due to their antenna outages. After losing the two-way ISL availability for a few DEKF update cycles, the availability of spacecraft can easily be recovered as their states have been independently updated using measurements from anchor nodes. It is likely that the longer failure will result in worse localization performance. We have tested the transient failure of a random single asset for 30 min in the simulation, which is losing 3 update cycles in the DEKF system. From the simulation results, the position accuracy has been degraded to 4.84% which is better than the degraded localization performance of 11.5% from the permanent loss scenario among available assets. In conclusion, the autonomous Lunar PNT system based on the DEKF approach shows the ability to maintain resilience and robustness in the possible communication failure scenarios, ensuring that localization accuracy is preserved across various network degradation and outages. Future studies on investigating user localization performance near the South Pole and the broadcast network system will be continued in the following months.

Yeji Kim↗

Investigating Low-Altitude Constellations of Ad-Hoc Lunar PNT System for Distributed Spacecraft Autonomy

In this study, we examine a low-altitude Lunar Position, Navigation, and Timing (LPNT) constellations and the localization performance of Centralized Extended Kalman Filter (CEKF) and Decentralized Extended Kalman Filter (DEKF) algorithms. The primary investigation involves a 100-node swarm operating at a 100 km altitude, in contrast to previous studies that examined a 21-node asset in a frozen-orbit at 5,500 km. The autonomous operation of large-scale swarm is based on two-way Inter-Satellite Link (ISL) measurements, which involve pseudoranges and relative velocities among swarm nodes. We perform a numerical assessment of the two filtering approaches, utilizing ‘fully sampled’ measurements from all available assets as well as ‘two ISL’ measurements where each spacecraft is restricted to only two antennas. This research includes an analysis of CEKF under 2-ISL constraints and evaluates the performance of DEKF in a 100-node swarm, which has not been explored in previous studies. In addition, we examine the impact of increasing the sampling frequency for DEKF, showing that the update cycle can be shortened from a 10-minute interval. A novel approach for ‘2-ISL limited’ DEKF will also be introduced, using a matching formulation that exhaustively enumerates all potential matches. This study provides valuable insights into large-scale distributed swarm operations, considering various filter configurations, sampling frequencies, matching strategies, and scalability of CEKF and DEKF for low-altitude LPNT applications. The Lunar PNT technology plays a key role in providing reliable and robust navigation services on the Moon's surface and the South pole, where the primary Lunar missions are planned. To support upcoming Lunar missions, including small satellites from NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services program, the Lunar PNT system must be adaptable to smaller platforms like CubeSats. Driven by the growing involvement of public and private exploration partnerships, the traditional low Earth orbit missions are shifting to beyond geosynchronous orbit [1]. These upcoming missions aim to foster a sustainable and innovative exploration program, in collaboration with commercial and international partners, to facilitate human expansion throughout the solar system and return new knowledge and opportunities to Earth [2]. As part of this trend, there are increasing efforts to utilize science missions in Lunar orbit to develop a non-dedicated and ad-hoc PNT network system. Two traditional approaches, the Deep Space Network (DSN) and the weak signal Global Positioning System (GPS), are established deep-space navigation technologies for missions beyond the geosynchronous orbit. Beginning in 1958, the DSN was developed to communicate with the Explorer 1 spacecraft based on the use of radiometric tracking in spacecraft navigation [3]. The DSN is capable of providing nearly unfettered coverage to spacecraft beyond low-Earth orbit (LEO), however, increased space mission volume has created concerns about future expectations of DSN usage for spacecraft navigation [4]. For cislunar mission applications, the position accuracy using DSN achieves 100 m (3σ) with at least three geometrically diverse ground stations when using radiometric tracking alone [5]. The DSN's dependence on Earth-based ground stations restricts its operational capabilities to periods of Earth visibility. This limitation, coupled with its poor localization performance, renders the DSN unsuitable for future lunar missions that demand continuous tracking and precise positioning. To satisfy the increasing requirements of DSN in Lunar applications, spacecrafts are also required to improve their onboard antenna power and efficiency of the transmission. However, there is an important aggregate cost trade between adding capabilities to every spacecraft and adding to a capacity on the ground that serves multiple spacecraft [6]. A weak GPS system can provide PNT service while the user spacecraft is bound to the Moon, leveraging a single, steerable high gain antenna with the relatively narrow beam which includes all the sources in its field of view [7]. However, the higher the altitude the receiver is above the GPS constellations, the poorer and the weaker are the relative geometry and the received signal powers, respectively, leading to a significant navigation accuracy reduction [8]. The transmitted power becomes weaker with increasing distance from the Earth as well as signals tracked from one of the side lobes of the GPS antenna pattern. As a results, the number of visible satellites and relative geometric condition of the GPS satellites at very high altitude drops dramatically and reduces the navigation solution accuracy. Therefore, the weak GPS system is also not an ideal way to provide PNT service to upcoming Lunar missions when considering its limited geometric condition and the recued navigation accuracy. Another navigation approach on the Moon is being developed, similar to the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) on Earth, aiming to offer navigation service with continuous 24/7 coverage across the entire Lunar surface. For example, lunar communications relay and navigation systems (LCRNS) by NASA and Lunar navigation satellite systems (LNSS) by JAXA are designed to serve as dedicated Position, Navigation, and Timing (PNT) systems for the Moon. However, designing a dedicated LNSS and PNT service involves additional challenges, which are unique to the lunar environment, including limited payload capacity for the CubeSat platform, i.e., the size, weight, and power (SWaP) of the onboard clock, limited lunar ground monitoring stations, and limited financial investment as compared to the legacy Earth-GPS [9]. NASA’s focus on utilizing CubeSat platforms on the Moon leads to an alternative Lunar navigation platform that leverages the existing Lunar science and exploration assets. The small satellites used in Lunar missions can be used to create a low-cost, autonomous, ad-hoc, and on-demand mission-centric Lunar PNT swarm capable of providing PNT services to these low-cost lunar missions [10]. As upcoming Lunar missions will often operate at low-altitude about 30 km to 100 km for scientific observations and mapping purposes, the low-altitude orbital constellations could be employed to create an ad-hoc Lunar PNT system. However, several issues must be addressed, such as the instability of these orbits, which often require maintenance or are only suitable for short-duration missions, operating for fewer than 90 days. Additionally, at an altitude of 100 km, the satellites have a limited period during which they are above the horizon and capable of providing PNT service to users. The implementation of a non-dedicated, ad-hoc Lunar navigation constellation facilitates on-demand PNT services. A preliminary study of ad-hoc Lunar PNT system was conducted using 21 spacecraft in 5,5000 km altitude frozen orbits to test its feasibility and a basic performance of orbital asset localization among ad-hoc Lunar constellations in small satellites format [10]. These swarm assets are designed for autonomous localization with minimal Earth interaction, reducing dependency on bandwidth and ground resources. The design in [10] demonstrated the feasibility of a decentralized PNT approach, specifically employing a DEKF approach for state estimation, which helps minimize onboard operating costs. The DEKF method distributes computation across individual satellites, which lightens the computational load while maintaining accuracy in orbit ephemeris and clock offsets, similar to centralized systems [11]. In a follow-on study [12], each spacecraft was limited to 2 communications antennae, forcing the selection of measurements and scheduling spacecraft activities to perform the measurements. A matching algorithm is implemented to select the best measurements and schedule position estimation updates. The decentralized localization performance is also investigated with increasing levels of network degradation for swarm assets considering the impact of intermittent and permanent communication failure, to demonstrate the robustness and fidelity of the decentralized Lunar PNT service [13]. This study confirmed that the ad-hoc PNT constellations in frozen orbit are highly robust and resilient to communication failures. However, unlike frozen orbit swarm assets, the low-altitude satellites have a limited ground view at an altitude of 100 km, where the ad-hoc Lunar constellation consists of 98 low-altitude satellites, evenly distributed across seven circular polar orbital planes, alongside two satellites in a frozen orbit at an altitude of 5,500 km (Figure 1). Therefore, the number of satellites visible to ground users is significantly limited in low-altitude orbit constellations. As each visibility of a spacecraft remains intact for only a few ticks before it moves out of the field of view, the ground user encounters challenges in maintaining continuous navigation service, resulting in sparse availability and provision of Lunar PNT system. Consequently, service availability is primarily restricted to the Lunar South Pole region (Figure 2). Given these limitations and concerns, the localization performance of low-altitude swarm assets will be assessed in this study. We focus on the investigation of the localization performance of low-altitude swarm assets and ground users near the Lunar South Pole. The overall flow of the Lunar PNT simulation incorporates the DEKF approach of asset localization and the weighted least-squares approach in user localization (Figure 3). The autonomous Lunar PNT simulation is primarily implemented in MATLAB, where the DEKF based on the matching scheduler is implemented with Google’s OR-tools as a model builder and Gurobi optimization tool as a backend solver. The General Mission Analysis Tool (GMAT) is utilized to generate ephemeris data for swarm assets, and accounts for satellite orbital details, mass, and perturbations like solar radiation pressure and drag coefficients. Each ephemeris dataset is produced in the Moon International Celestial Reference Frame (ICRF) inertial coordinate system. For state estimation, the distributed swarm assets rely on two-way Inter-Satellite Link (ISL) measurements, which involve tracking pseudoranges and relative velocities between visible satellites and anchor nodes during each observation. Numerical evaluations of the decentralized localization process are conducted to demonstrate the feasibility of the low-altitude PNT system in providing reliable navigation services. The main approach involves using DEKF and CEKF to localize 100 satellites in low-altitude constellations, where the CEKF is implemented to serve as a baseline for comparing the performance of distributed algorithms. In both cases, we evaluate ‘fully sampled’ measurements from all available assets, and ‘two ISL’ measurements when spacecraft are constrained to have only two antennas. We test four estimation techniques: CEKF fully sampled, CEKF two ISL, DEKF fully sampled, and DEKF two ISL filters. As the DEKF update cycle is comprised of network setup, communication, and computations, a global broadcast network and 2-way ISL network setup will take from 4 to 6 minutes as maximum [12]. In this simulation, the DEKF update cycle is set to 10 minutes, including a 4-minute latency for obtaining and computing the actual measurement updates. We experiment an increased update cycle to demonstrate the feasibility and evaluate the impact on localization performance using various tuning values for measurement noise covariances (Figures 4 and 5). By comparing centralized and decentralized approaches using a matching algorithm, we analyze the influence of cross-correlation factors in the covariance matrix, assuming 100% reliability of all assets and measurements. The increased frequency and the adjustments of tuning parameters reveal distinct error patterns between the two scenarios. The localization accuracy of the swarm assets and ground users is assessed by taking the median error across 100 assets and one ground user (84.9°S, 137.5°E) over 7-day simulation period (Table 1). Since the user localization accuracy is significantly affected by the performance of the swarm assets, it is crucial to maintain high localization accuracy within the swarm. This study will continue to explore decentralized filtering for autonomous LPNT operations, with further investigation of an 'iterative' matching approach which enumerates every valid matching pair, planned for the following month.

Yeji Kim↗

Uncrewed Lunar Surface Operations and Support Activities

Sustained human presence on the surface of the Moon and future missions to Mars require increased independence from surface crews and Earth-based mission control to operate efficiently, safely, and reliably. The time for surface crews to perform tasks will be limited. Extravehicular activities by surface personnel are burdensome and time-consuming, even when a continuous human presence on the surface occurs. Identifying and balancing human/automation roles and tasks and infusing automation and autonomy practices early in a system’s lifecycle will be essential to achieve mission objectives. Among these objectives are attaining a sustained human presence, improving performance and mission effectiveness, reducing operations and maintenance (O&M) costs, and ensuring operations that are robust to communication delays. To achieve these objectives, an operational shift toward increased automation and autonomy with less reliance on humans is needed. Uncrewed lunar surface operations and support activities occur when surface crews are not present or are independent of surface crew timeline activities requiring no surface crew oversight or intervention. These uncrewed surface opportunities can also be planned to minimize crew workload that avoids routine maintenance and support tasks, thus maximizing crew exploration time. Uncrewed preparations such as staging and prepositioning equipment and materials before the crew arrives could improve crew task efficiency. Additional opportunities exist to conduct uncrewed science, exploration, and utilization. Uncrewed surface architecture functions can include science and exploration; habitation; launch and landing support; surface communication and navigation; surface power generation and distribution; human surface mobility; lifting, handling, manipulating; excavation, construction, and site preparation; logistics management; maintenance and repair; surface resource utilization; integrated site operations and shared support services (e.g., site scheduling/prioritization, dust mitigation/contamination control, and surface safety). Early robotic lunar surface campaigns will provide information on the availability of resources, such as oxygen and water, and demonstrate surface-based technologies. After the Artemis III human lunar return mission, a series of landers will deliver surface systems, cargo, supplies, science packages, spare parts, and commodities. A balance of crewed and uncrewed surface operations will enable a sustained lunar surface presence at the South Pole of the Moon at a site that will be known as the Artemis Base Camp (ABC). It is envisioned that base camp operations on and around the Moon will then help prepare for the mission durations and activities needed to support the first human mission to Mars. Before long-duration crew missions to the base camp can occur, the necessary surface infrastructure will be pre-deployed and verified operational. Surface assets will be teleoperated and remotely managed from Earth. Additionally, robotic and short-duration crewed missions to the ABC will ensure the site’s merit to achieve long-term science objectives, availability of usable resources, and that terrain, seasonal variations, and illumination conditions are acceptable. ABC will consist of different areas where specific functions and services are rendered, including: • Launch and Landing Area • Habitation Area • Power Production Area • Resource Areas Launch and Landing Area—The launch and landing area will support associated functions for the arrival and departure of vehicles, such as crewed landing and ascent and uncrewed cargo deliveries and offloading. It will evolve from an unimproved site at the beginning of the exploration campaign to a more sustainable landing and launch area that can support repeated arrivals and departures. Initial uncrewed Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) surface operations may include emplacement of navigation beacons and communication equipment, real-time video and photography of landing/liftoff events, and element repositioning, such as portable utility power (PUP) (applicable for other landed assets at other areas). Site preparations, such as surface leveling, soil compaction, and berm/path construction, may be needed for a more sustainable launch and landing area capable of accommodating vehicles that are increasingly more reusable and reduce the effects of plume surface interactions and ejecta impacts on nearby surface assets. During the ABC missions, cargo and logistics will be delivered to the lunar surface via robotic cargo landers before the crew arrives. These shipments, which can arrive in pressurized logistics carriers, will deliver the logistics necessary to support a crewed mission and include items such as food, water, equipment spares, etc. Providing the capability to retrieve, offload, and transport the logistics closer to the ABC site before the arrival of the crew will increase the overall efficiency of crew operations once they arrive. In the sustained phase of exploration, other supporting services may be needed, such as lander propellant servicing, surface power services, commodity refreshes, and additional inspection, maintenance, and repair capabilities, to sustain a cadence of extended personnel stays and cargo arrivals and departures. Habitation Area—Uncrewed support to surface habitation could involve supporting activation and pre-entry operations of the habitat while the crew is in orbit at the Gateway outpost preparing for a surface landing. Surface Habitat (SH) uncrewed operations may include bringing the cabin environment to a habitable temperature and air mix and activating other critical crew support systems. Potential crop production uncrewed tasks in the SH could also include autonomous watering and tending. Additionally, when the crew departs, the SH enters dormancy for the long period of uncrewed operation. A logistical staging area could also be collocated near the SH. If so, staging operations for crew supplies, waste re-location, and recycling operations may be opportunities for uncrewed operations. Power Production Area—The Fission Surface Power (FSP) element and its supporting distribution equipment provide power to surface elements as needed across the ABC to supplement day-to-day operations and survive lunar nights. Uncrewed support of this power system includes any initial LTV-assisted deployments of cables and other distributed equipment, associated electrical connections, and system testing and activation operations. Robotically performing some inspections, maintenance, or repair tasks on the power distribution equipment could reduce the surface crew workload. Resource Area— Uncrewed resource prospecting, mapping, and characterizing possible resource sites is likely to be time-consuming and represents an opportunity for uncrewed operations between crewed missions. Uncrewed mobile equipment operations will be needed in the extreme environments of permanently shadowed locations where resource extractions occur. As In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) pilot plant operations begin, uncrewed surface support activities with available mobile and portable assets (LTV, PUP, etc.) will better support these operations. Any produced commodities can be stored at a centralized storage location for future use. Also associated with these operations is the use of mobile robotic excavators for resource acquisition and robotic/autonomous regolith processing. The waste tailings generated during excavation and regolith processing would also need to be transported and deposited at a dedicated location. Surface assets will continue operating between crew visits to maintain surface capabilities, conduct lunar surface science, technology demonstrations, and public outreach opportunities. Additionally, certain sustaining tasks that would consume valuable crew time could be performed before crew arrival, or after their departure. This capability may offer more affordable options to construct, activate, test, and maintain a broad set of surface assets. Telerobotically operated human surface mobility systems, such as the LTV and Pressurized Rover (PR), can be utilized for various tasks. Surface environmental conditions pose a distinct challenge for all these activities. Surface illumination and localized shadows are one such factor. Night-survival operations could consist of thermal management, battery pre-charging, and load shedding. Some surface systems may hibernate through the night and then awake and continue nominal operations. Uncrewed mobile assets may use a more adaptive approach to optimize their power and operations; one method is to follow the sunlight. Night-survival operations may be initiated remotely by teleoperation, automated, or accomplished by supervised autonomous operation. The ability to pre-deploy and control remote assets in orbit or on Mars before the arrival of the mission crew is a key capability that can be simulated on the moon. The base camp provides a venue where these advanced operational concepts, technologies, and autonomous methods and techniques, including the incorporation of time delays to simulate Earth-Mars latency can be replicated to help buy down future Mars mission risks. This paper will examine the evolution of uncrewed lunar surface operations and support activities. It will also discuss the lunar surface environmental conditions (thermal, lighting, terrain, topography, communications) along with the challenges they pose on uncrewed surface operations, and the performance of these activities with limited to minimal human interaction and/or teleoperation. Since lunar missions include Mars mission analogs, such investigation provides the framework for future uncrewed Mars mission support.

Mark E Lewis↗