SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “mission autonomy”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 289 records · Page 16

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS1999

Deep Space Control Challenges of the New Millennium

The exploration of deep space presents a variety of significant control challenges. Long communication delays coupled with challenging new science objectives require high levels of system autonomy and increasingly demanding pointing and control capabilities. Historically, missions based on the use of a large single spacecraft have been successful and popular since the early days of NASA. However, these large spacecraft missions are currently being displaced by more frequent and more focused missions based on the use of smaller and less expensive spacecraft designs. This trend drives the need to design smart software and good algorithms which together with the miniaturization of control components will improve performance while replacing the heavier and more expensive hardware used in the past. NASA's future space exploration will also include mission types that have never been attempted before, posing significant challenges to the underlying control system. This includes controlled landing on small bodies (e.g., asteroids and comets), sample return missions (where samples are brought back from other planets), robotic exploration of planetary surfaces (e.g., intelligent rovers), high precision formation flying, and deep space optical interferometry, While the control of planetary spacecraft for traditional flyby and orbiter missions are based on well-understood methodologies, control approaches for many future missions will be fundamentally different. This paradigm shift will require completely new control system development approaches, system architectures, and much greater levels of system autonomy to meet expected performance in the presence of significant environmental disturbances, and plant uncertainties. This paper will trace the motivation for these changes and will layout the approach taken to meet the new challenges. Emerging missions will be used to explain and illustrate the need for these changes.

Bayard, David S.↗

NASA NTRS1992

Requirements and opportunities for satellite autonomy

The requirements for autonomous control of spacecraft functions have been well articulated by a wide selection of US Air Force mission analyses and architecture studies. The opportunities however, to implement these autonomy functions have been limited. An overview of documented requirements is presented to demonstrate the scope of autonomous functions needed, and potential time frames for implementation is derived. The missed opportunities are analyzed to provide lessons learned, and near term opportunities will be reviewed. The current initiatives at the Phillips Laboratory are described in terms of the requirements addressed and the proposed approaches will show program risk reduction for satellite autonomy technology insertion into space operations.

Campbell, W. Spencer↗

NASA NTRS2006

Enhancing Science and Automating Operations using Onboard Autonomy

In this paper, we will describe the evolution of the software from prototype to full time operation onboard Earth Observing One (EO-1). We will quantify the increase in science, decrease in operations cost, and streamlining of operations procedures. Included will be a description of how this software was adapted post-launch to the EO-1 mission, which had very limited computing resources which constrained the autonomy flight software. We will discuss ongoing deployments of this software to the Mars Exploration Rovers and Mars Odyssey Missions as well as a discussion of lessons learned during this project. Finally, we will discuss how the onboard autonomy has been used in conjunction with other satellites and ground sensors to form an autonomous sensor-web to study volcanoes, floods, sea-ice topography, and wild fires. As demonstrated on EO-1, onboard autonomy is a revolutionary advance that will change the operations approach on future NASA missions...

Earth Observing One (EO-1)↗

NASA NTRS2017

Developing a Robust, Interoperable GNSS Space Service Volume (SSV) for the Global Space User Community

For over two decades, researchers, space users, Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) service providers, and international policy makers have been working diligently to expand the space-borne use of the Global Positioning System (GPS) and, most recently, to employ the full complement of GNSS constellations to increase spacecraft navigation performance. Space-borne Positioning, Navigation, and Timing (PNT) applications employing GNSS are now ubiquitous in Low Earth Orbit (LEO). GNSS use in space is quickly expanding into the Space Service Volume (SSV), the signal environment in the volume surrounding the Earth that enables real-time PNT measurements from GNSS systems at altitudes of 3000 km and above. To support the current missions and planned future missions within the SSV, initiatives are being conducted in the United States and internationally to ensure that GNSS signals are available, robust, and yield precise navigation performance. These initiatives include the Interagency Forum for Operational Requirements (IFOR) effort in the United States, to support GPS SSV signal robustness through future design changes, and the United Nations-sponsored International Committee on GNSS (ICG), to coordinate SSV development across all international GNSS constellations and regional augmentations. The results of these efforts have already proven fruitful, enabling new missions through radically improved navigation and timing performance, ensuring quick recovery from trajectory maneuvers, improving space vehicle autonomy and making GNSS signals more resilient from potential disruptions. Missions in the SSV are operational now and have demonstrated outstanding PNT performance characteristics; much better than what was envisioned less than a decade ago. The recent launch of the first in a series of US weather satellites will employ the use of GNSS in the SSV to substantially improve weather prediction and public-safety situational awareness of fast moving events, including hurricanes, flash floods, severe storms, tornados and wildfires. Thus, the benefits of the GNSS expansion and use into the SSV are tremendous, resulting in orders of magnitude return in investment to national governments and extraordinary societal benefits, including lives saved and critical infrastructure and property protected. However, this outstanding success is tempered by dual challenges: that for GPS, the current SSV specifications do not adequately protect SSV future use; and that for GNSS, the capabilities that are currently available are not protected in the future by specifications.

Bauer, Frank H.↗

NASA NTRS2017

Developing a Robust, Interoperable GNSS Space Service Volume (SSV) for the Global Space User Community

Bauer, Frank H.↗

NASA NTRS2017

Scientist-Guided Autonomy for Self-Reliant Rovers

Although Mars rover missions have been highly successful in accomplishing scientific objectives, mission productivity is limited by challenges stemming from the need for commanding ground-based targeted observations under communication constraints imposed by the large distance between Earth and Mars. With an aging fleet of sun-synchronous relay orbiters, the opportunities for regular communication with rovers may become even more limited. In addition to on-board planning, robust navigation, and health assessment, there are strategies to make future rovers more self-reliant by enabling them to perform autonomous scientific characterizations of new areas during periods without an opportunity for ground-based targeted observations. In particular, we have studied how a ”walkabout” strategy, in which an initial high-level characterization of a region is used to informed subsequent passes with specific targeted observations, was used successfully during the investigation of Pahrump Hills by the Mars Science Laboratory. Inspired by this approach, we have identified several capabilities that could allow a rover to autonomously perform some of these initial high-level characterization steps. In this paper, we describe technologies for identifying specific geologic units, regions, or features of interest, identifying areas of contact between two adjacent units, detecting and determining the orientation of layering within rock units, identifying novel and interesting features, and planning observations of regions with different sampling strategies using remote sensing instruments. The observations acquired with these approaches are driven by scientists’ guidance and can provide scientists with data to help inform their decisions about where to make more resource-intensive targeted observations.

Doran, Gary↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Crew Autonomy Through Self-Scheduling: Operational Characterization

NASA’s future long-duration exploration missions (LDEMs) will encounter increasing communication transmission delays as they move farther from Earth-based ground stations. This necessitates a new approach, as crews can no longer rely on real-time support from ground planners and must self-schedule their own operational timelines effectively and efficiently. To enable this transition, our team has developed Playbook, a mission planning and scheduling tool. Our research focuses on quantifying scheduling performance using Playbook to inform the design and development of future features to streamline timeline creation. We also aim to propose standards and guidelines for autonomous crews in LDEMs. In the past year, we have focused on further validating and quantifying the effects of countermeasure aids on self-scheduling performance. There are two software aids in Playbook (self-scheduling platform): Suggested Fixes, which propose an edit to resolve violations within a timeline, and No-Go Zones, which highlight where activities should not be scheduled on a timeline. We have made significant progress in HERA Campaign 7 (C7) data collection, increasing the number of days crew must self-schedule from 4 to 8. As a result, almost 20% of the mission is self-scheduled by the analog astronauts. We have also started data collection on a controlled lab experiment designed to quantify performance effects due to the countermeasures. We expect to present the preliminary results from both efforts. Finally, we have conducted an exploratory analysis of NASA’s HERA Campaign 6 (C6), investigating the mission-level impacts of self-scheduling. We derived basic patterns and descriptive statistics to better characterize crew autonomy through self-scheduling. We also assessed if there are any individual indicators of preference for self-scheduling, such as experience or predilection for autonomy. Preliminary analysis indicates that the HERA C6 crew self-scheduled one out of four flexible activities, indicating unprompted adoption of self-scheduling as a concept of operation for crew autonomy.

analog↗

NASA NTRS2004

Mars Exploration Rover Mission

Two rovers with a sophisticated geological payload have been operating on the surface of Mars since January of 2004. Future missions and their related technology developments will benefit from the lessons learned during these surface operations. The planning cycle was dictated by the communications opportunities and the times of day that the rovers could operate, and the team and tools were tuned to optimize the mission return for that cycle time. The ability to traverse and to approach and perform in situ investigations on targets was limited in speed by the same cycle time, due to required human involvement in the related planning and risk decisions. In addition traverse was limited by the speed of the on-board terrain and hazard assessment, and in situ operations were limited by a lack of autonomy. Different planning cycles and levels of autonomy should be considered for future surface missions, which will result in different approaches to science decision making.

Adler, M.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Who's Got the Bridge? - Towards Safe, Robust Autonomous Operations at NASA Langley's Autonomy Incubator

NASA aeronautics research has made decades of contributions to aviation. Both aircraft and air traffic management (ATM) systems in use today contain NASA-developed and NASA sponsored technologies that improve safety and efficiency. Recent innovations in robotics and autonomy for automobiles and unmanned systems point to a future with increased personal mobility and access to transportation, including aviation. Automation and autonomous operations will transform the way we move people and goods. Achieving this mobility will require safe, robust, reliable operations for both the vehicle and the airspace and challenges to this inevitable future are being addressed now in government labs, universities, and industry. These challenges are the focus of NASA Langley Research Center's Autonomy Incubator whose R&D portfolio includes mission planning, trajectory and path planning, object detection and avoidance, object classification, sensor fusion, controls, machine learning, computer vision, human-machine teaming, geo-containment, open architecture design and development, as well as the test and evaluation environment that will be critical to prove system reliability and support certification. Safe autonomous operations will be enabled via onboard sensing and perception systems in both data-rich and data-deprived environments. Applied autonomy will enable safety, efficiency and unprecedented mobility as people and goods take to the skies tomorrow just as we do on the road today.

Allen, B. Danette↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Exploring Self-Scheduling Strategies and Heuristics in Novice Schedulers

Missions beyond low Earth orbit will require crews to act with greater autonomy. Increasing communication delays will require crews to take on tasks currently supported by Mission Control, including the involved process of scheduling and rescheduling their own complex spaceflight timelines to fit a variety of restrictions and constraints. Astronauts, unlike Mission Control, are not expert planners, however, and determining simple strategies and heuristics that enable them to schedule successfully can increase the range of problems they can solve successfully. In two human-in-the-loop scheduling experiments, we analyzed 1) common strategies among novice schedules, and 2) the development of self-scheduling heuristics. We find that, even when participants are instructed to follow a given strategy, they rapidly develop their own self-scheduling heuristics as they learn to successfully complete the scheduling task. Participants conducting naturally learn to schedule activities with the most constraints first, while participants vary in heuristics in the rescheduling task.

self-scheduling↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Exploring Self-Scheduling Strategies and Heuristics in Novice Schedulers

Missions beyond low Earth orbit will require crews to act with greater autonomy. Increasing communication delays will require crews to take on tasks currently supported by Mission Control, including the involved process of scheduling and rescheduling their own complex spaceflight timelines to fit a variety of restrictions and constraints. Unlike Mission Control, astronauts are not expert planners, and determining strategies and heuristics that enable crews to schedule successfully may increase the range of problems they can solve. In two human-in-the-loop scheduling experiments, we analyzed 1) common strategies among novice schedulers and 2) the development of self-scheduling heuristics. We find that, even when participants are instructed to follow a given strategy, they rapidly develop their own self-scheduling heuristics as they learn to successfully complete the scheduling task. While scheduling, participants naturally learn to arrange activities with the most constraints first, whereas while rescheduling, they display greater variability in their heuristics.

self-scheduling↗

NASA NTRS2015

Designing Interfaces for Astronaut Autonomy in Space

As we move towards human deep space missions, astronauts will no longer be able to say, Houston, we have a problem. The restricted contact with mission control because of the incredible distance from Earth will require astronauts to make autonomous decisions. How will astronauts take on the roles of mission control? This is an area of active research that has far reaching implications for the future of distant spaceflight. Come to this talk to hear how we are using design and user research to come up with innovative solutions for astronauts to effectively explore the Moon, Mars, and beyond.

design↗

NASA NTRS2019

Artificial Intelligence: Powering Human Exploration of the Moon and Mars

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a growing field of computa- tional science techniques designed to mimic functions per- formed by people. Advancements in autonomy will depend on a portfolio of AI technologies. Automated planning and scheduling is a venerable field of study in AI, and is needed for a variety of mission planning functions. Plan execution technology is less well studied, but important for auton- omy and robotics. Specialized forms of automated reason- ing and machine learning are key technologies to enable fault management. Over the past decade, the NASA Au- tonomous Systems and Operations (ASO) project has devel- oped and demonstrated numerous autonomy enabling tech- nologies employing AI techniques. Our work has employed AI in three distinct ways to enable autonomous mission op- erations capabilities. Crew Autonomy gives astronauts tools to assist in the performance of each of these mission oper-ations functions. Vehicle System Management uses AI tech- niques to turn the astronaut's spacecraft into a robot, allow- ing it to operate when astronauts are not present, or to reduce astronaut workload. AI technology also enables Autonomous Robots as crew assistants or proxies when the crew are not present. When these capabilities are used to enable astro- nauts to operate autonomously, they must be integrated with user interfaces, introducing numerous human factors con- siderations; when these capabilities are used to enable vehi- cle system management, they must be integrated with flight software, and run on embedded processors under the control of real-time operating systems.We first describe human spaceflight mission operations capabilities. The remainder of the paper will describe the ASO project, and the development and demonstration per- formed by ASO since 2011. We will describe the AI tech- niques behind each of these demonstrations, which include a variety of symbolic automated reasoning and machine learn- ing based approaches. Finally, we conclude with an assess- ment of future development needs for AI to enable NASA's future Exploration missions.

Mission Operations↗

NASA NTRS1997

Using New Technologies in Support of Future Space Missions

This paper forms a perspective of how new technologies such as onboard autonomy and internet-like protocols will change the look and feel of operations. It analyzes the concept of a lights-out mission operations control center and it's role in future mission support and it describes likely scenarios for evolving from current concepts.

Future Missions Support Technologies↗

NASA NTRS2012

Telerobotics Workstation (TRWS) for Deep Space Habitats

On medium- to long-duration human spaceflight missions, latency in communications from Earth could reduce efficiency or hinder local operations, control, and monitoring of the various mission vehicles and other elements. Regardless of the degree of autonomy of any one particular element, a means of monitoring and controlling the elements in real time based on mission needs would increase efficiency and response times for their operation. Since human crews would be present locally, a local means for monitoring and controlling all the various mission elements is needed, particularly for robotic elements where response to interesting scientific features in the environment might need near- instantaneous manipulation and control. One of the elements proposed for medium- and long-duration human spaceflight missions, the Deep Space Habitat (DSH), is intended to be used as a remote residence and working volume for human crews. The proposed solution for local monitoring and control would be to provide a workstation within the DSH where local crews can operate local vehicles and robotic elements with little to no latency. The Telerobotics Workstation (TRWS) is a multi-display computer workstation mounted in a dedicated location within the DSH that can be adjusted for a variety of configurations as required. From an Intra-Vehicular Activity (IVA) location, the TRWS uses the Robot Application Programming Interface Delegate (RAPID) control environment through the local network to remotely monitor and control vehicles and robotic assets located outside the pressurized volume in the immediate vicinity or at low-latency distances from the habitat. The multiple display area of the TRWS allows the crew to have numerous windows open with live video feeds, control windows, and data browsers, as well as local monitoring and control of the DSH and associated systems.

Mittman, David S.↗

NASA NTRS2012

A Proposed Strategy for the U.S. to Develop and Maintain a Mainstream Capability Suite ("Warehouse") for Automated/Autonomous Rendezvous and Docking in Low Earth Orbit and Beyond

The ability of space assets to rendezvous and dock/capture/berth is a fundamental enabler for numerous classes of NASA fs missions, and is therefore an essential capability for the future of NASA. Mission classes include: ISS crew rotation, crewed exploration beyond low-Earth-orbit (LEO), on-orbit assembly, ISS cargo supply, crewed satellite servicing, robotic satellite servicing / debris mitigation, robotic sample return, and robotic small body (e.g. near-Earth object, NEO) proximity operations. For a variety of reasons to be described, NASA programs requiring Automated/Autonomous Rendezvous and Docking/Capture/Berthing (AR&D) capabilities are currently spending an order-of-magnitude more than necessary and taking twice as long as necessary to achieve their AR&D capability, "reinventing the wheel" for each program, and have fallen behind all of our foreign counterparts in AR&D technology (especially autonomy) in the process. To ensure future missions' reliability and crew safety (when applicable), to achieve the noted cost and schedule savings by eliminate costs of continually "reinventing the wheel ", the NASA AR&D Community of Practice (CoP) recommends NASA develop an AR&D Warehouse, detailed herein, which does not exist today. The term "warehouse" is used herein to refer to a toolbox or capability suite that has pre-integrated selectable supply-chain hardware and reusable software components that are considered ready-to-fly, low-risk, reliable, versatile, scalable, cost-effective, architecture and destination independent, that can be confidently utilized operationally on human spaceflight and robotic vehicles over a variety of mission classes and design reference missions, especially beyond LEO. The CoP also believes that it is imperative that NASA coordinate and integrate all current and proposed technology development activities into a cohesive cross-Agency strategy to produce and utilize this AR&D warehouse. An initial estimate indicates that if NASA strategically coordinates the development of a robust AR&D capability across the Agency, the cost of implementing AR&D on a spacecraft could be reduced from roughly $70M per mission to as low as $7M per mission, and the associated development time could be reduced from 4 years to 2 years, after the warehouse is completely developed. Table 1 shows the clear long-term benefits to the Agency in term of costs and schedules for various missions. (The methods used to arrive at the Table 1 numbers is presented in Appendices A and B.)

Krishnakumar, Kalmanje S.↗

NASA NTRS1998

NASA Center for Integrated Space Microsystems

Develop and maintain a world class, leading edge capability in Advanced Avionic Systems and Advanced Microelectronics Technologies for future highly integrated, miniaturized, autonomous spacecraft systems for deep-space and Earth orbiting missions.

CISM Avionics Microelectronics Miniaturization Aut↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA's Small Spacecraft and Distributed Systems: Development and Demonstration of Technologies Enabling Swarms and New Spacecraft Platforms with AI and Edge Computing

NASA’s Small Spacecraft & Distributed Systems (SSDS) within the Research and Technology Mission Directorate (RTMD) expands U.S. capability to execute unique missions through targeted investment, rapid development, and flight demonstration of small spacecraft technologies applicable to exploration, science and the commercial space sector. SSDS strategically invests in technology development and on-orbit demonstrations executed across NASA, other government agencies, industry, and academia. The program’s University SmallSat Technology Partnerships initiative awards academic researchers with the opportunity to collaborate with NASA to mature innovative technology. Capabilities aligned with RTMD’s technology shortfalls and interests - power, processing, propulsion, sensors, communications, autonomous navigation, architectures, and advanced applications like artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning, and edge computing - are prioritized in SSDS investments. These investments enable distributed, autonomous, and cooperative small spacecraft systems that support swarm missions extending beyond low Earth orbit into cislunar and deep space. This paper highlights representative SSDS flight demonstrations that mature these capabilities to enable a future operational infrastructure needed to support sustained exploration of the Moon and beyond. SSDS’s investment strategy emphasizes rapid development and on-orbit demonstration to validate spacecraft technologies required for swarms and distributed mission architectures. The Starling swarm technology demonstration mission exemplifies this approach by advancing distributed spacecraft autonomy, cooperative operations, and space situational awareness. Extended flight testing and ongoing studies of next generation swarm configurations and on-orbit space traffic monitoring and management continue to inform future swarm designs. DiskSat’s four-spacecraft demonstration mission represents SSDS’s strategic vision to expand the design space for future small spacecraft through its commitment to advance novel platform concepts that can impact how science is performed on orbit. Continuing to invest in future platforms, the notional PY12 concept is a 12-spacecraft swarm hosting neuromorphic processors and is envisioned as an on-orbit testbed for AI, edge computing, and positioning, navigation and timing technologies. SSDS also invests in single-spacecraft technology demonstrations that underpin the success of future swarm missions and accelerate the availability of validated technologies across the small spacecraft ecosystem. Examples of such demonstrations include Pathfinder Technology Demonstrator-3 (PTD-3), which performed high-rate optical communications; PTD-R, which demonstrated a camera capable of simultaneous ultraviolet and short-wave infrared optical sensing; and CAPSTONE, the Cislunar Autonomous Positioning System Technology and Operations Navigation Experiment, which validated autonomous navigation in cislunar space. Collectively, SSDS-funded demonstrations advance capabilities across swarms and illustrate a coordinated investment strategy to mature high-impact technologies required for autonomous, distributed, and cooperative small spacecraft systems for low Earth orbit, cislunar, and deep space applications. Technology demonstrations strengthen SSDS partnerships with industry, academia, and other government agencies, and promote small spacecraft community adoption of capabilities required to close technical gaps for swarm missions.

Jan Stupl↗