Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “human 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.

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

At least 343 records · Page 19
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2018

Space Technology Innovation

There is a series of experiments and projects that have been done to support space missions, which we are now utilizing in our daily lives. The advancement of science and technology moves at a fast speed, and many of those technology advancements were thanks to the need that space missions required to make them happen. This presentation will provide information about some of those technologies developed in the international space station, in robotic missions to the moon and mars, and in earth simulations. We will touch on satellite applications, planetary defense from asteroids and meteorites, lunar structures, analog missions, and human systems integration. Similarly, we will touch on some microgravity countermeasures, such as artificial gravity, telemedicine, crew autonomy for scheduling their own activities, within others. During the presentation of each topic, we will provide suggestions on how students and young professionals can get involved to work on similar projects and in this manner be able to contribute to the scientific and technological space research.

Space science↗
NASA NTRS2018

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

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

Gernhardt, Michael L.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Trusted Autonomy for Space Flight Systems

NASA has long supported research on intelligent control technologies that could allow space systems to operate autonomously or with reduced human supervision. Proposed uses range from automated control of entire space vehicles to mobile robots that assist or substitute for astronauts to vehicle systems such as life support that interact with other systems in complex ways and require constant vigilance. The potential for pervasive use of such technology to extend the kinds of missions that are possible in practice is well understood, as is its potential to radically improve the robustness, safety and productivity of diverse mission systems. Despite its acknowledged potential, intelligent control capabilities are rarely used in space flight systems. Perhaps the most famous example of intelligent control on a spacecraft is the Remote Agent system flown on the Deep Space One mission (1998 - 2001). However, even in this case, the role of the intelligent control element, originally intended to have full control of the spacecraft for the duration of the mission, was reduced to having partial control for a two-week non-critical period. Even this level of mission acceptance was exceptional. In most cases, mission managers consider intelligent control systems an unacceptable source of risk and elect not to fly them. Overall, the technology is not trusted. From the standpoint of those who need to decide whether to incorporate this technology, lack of trust is easy to understand. Intelligent high-level control means allowing software io make decisions that are too complex for conventional software. The decision-making behavior of these systems is often hard to understand and inspect, and thus hard to evaluate. Moreover, such software is typically designed and implemented either as a research product or custom-built for a particular mission. In the former case, software quality is unlikely to be adequate for flight qualification and the functionality provided by the system is likely driven largely by the need to publish innovative work. In the latter case, the mission represents the first use of the system, a risky proposition even for relatively simple software.

Freed, Michael↗
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 NTRS2006

The NASA Space Communications Data Networking Architecture

The NASA Space Communications Architecture Working Group (SCAWG) has recently been developing an integrated agency-wide space communications architecture in order to provide the necessary communication and navigation capabilities to support NASA's new Exploration and Science Programs. A critical element of the space communications architecture is the end-to-end Data Networking Architecture, which must provide a wide range of services required for missions ranging from planetary rovers to human spaceflight, and from sub-orbital space to deep space. Requirements for a higher degree of user autonomy and interoperability between a variety of elements must be accommodated within an architecture that necessarily features minimum operational complexity. The architecture must also be scalable and evolvable to meet mission needs for the next 25 years. This paper will describe the recommended NASA Data Networking Architecture, present some of the rationale for the recommendations, and will illustrate an application of the architecture to example NASA missions.

Israel, David J.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Method and associated apparatus for capturing, servicing and de-orbiting earth satellites using robotics

This invention is a method and supporting apparatus for autonomously capturing, servicing and de-orbiting a free-flying spacecraft, such as a satellite, using robotics. The capture of the spacecraft includes the steps of optically seeking and ranging the satellite using LIDAR; and matching tumble rates, rendezvousing and berthing with the satellite. Servicing of the spacecraft may be done using supervised autonomy, which is allowing a robot to execute a sequence of instructions without intervention from a remote human-occupied location. These instructions may be packaged at the remote station in a script and uplinked to the robot for execution upon remote command giving authority to proceed. Alternately, the instructions may be generated by Artificial Intelligence (AI) logic onboard the robot. In either case, the remote operator maintains the ability to abort an instruction or script at any time, as well as the ability to intervene using manual override to teleoperate the robot.In one embodiment, a vehicle used for carrying out the method of this invention comprises an ejection module, which includes the robot, and a de-orbit module. Once servicing is completed by the robot, the ejection module separates from the de-orbit module, leaving the de-orbit module attached to the satellite for de-orbiting the same at a future time. Upon separation, the ejection module can either de-orbit itself or rendezvous with another satellite for servicing. The ability to de-orbit a spacecraft further allows the opportunity to direct the landing of the spent satellite in a safe location away from population centers, such as the ocean.

Cepollina, Frank J.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Method and associated apparatus for capturing, servicing, and de-orbiting earth satellites using robotics

This invention is a method and supporting apparatus for autonomously capturing, servicing and de-orbiting a free-flying spacecraft, such as a satellite, using robotics. The capture of the spacecraft includes the steps of optically seeking and ranging the satellite using LIDAR; and matching tumble rates, rendezvousing and berthing with the satellite. Servicing of the spacecraft may be done using supervised autonomy, which is allowing a robot to execute a sequence of instructions without intervention from a remote human-occupied location. These instructions may be packaged at the remote station in a script and uplinked to the robot for execution upon remote command giving authority to proceed. Alternately, the instructions may be generated by Artificial Intelligence (AI) logic onboard the robot. In either case, the remote operator maintains the ability to abort an instruction or script at any time, as well as the ability to intervene using manual override to teleoperate the robot.In one embodiment, a vehicle used for carrying out the method of this invention comprises an ejection module, which includes the robot, and a de-orbit module. Once servicing is completed by the robot, the ejection module separates from the de-orbit module, leaving the de-orbit module attached to the satellite for de-orbiting the same at a future time. Upon separation, the ejection module can either de-orbit itself or rendezvous with another satellite for servicing. The ability to de-orbit a spacecraft further allows the opportunity to direct the landing of the spent satellite in a safe location away from population centers, such as the ocean.

Cepollina, Frank J.↗
NASA NTRS2008

Method and associated apparatus for capturing, servicing and de-orbiting earth satellites using robotics

This invention is a method and supporting apparatus for autonomously capturing, servicing and de-orbiting a free-flying spacecraft, such as a satellite, using robotics. The capture of the spacecraft includes the steps of optically seeking and ranging the satellite using LIDAR; and matching tumble rates, rendezvousing and berthing with the satellite. Servicing of the spacecraft may be done using supervised autonomy, which is allowing a robot to execute a sequence of instructions without intervention from a remote human-occupied location. These instructions may be packaged at the remote station in a script and uplinked to the robot for execution upon remote command giving authority to proceed. Alternately, the instructions may be generated by Artificial Intelligence (AI) logic onboard the robot. In either case, the remote operator maintains the ability to abort an instruction or script at any time, as well as the ability to intervene using manual override to teleoperate the robot.In one embodiment, a vehicle used for carrying out the method of this invention comprises an ejection module, which includes the robot, and a de-orbit module. Once servicing is completed by the robot, the ejection module separates from the de-orbit module, leaving the de-orbit module attached to the satellite for de-orbiting the same at a future time. Upon separation, the ejection module can either de-orbit itself or rendezvous with another satellite for servicing. The ability to de-orbit a spacecraft further allows the opportunity to direct the landing of the spent satellite in a safe location away from population centers, such as the ocean.

Cepollina, Frank J.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Method and associated apparatus for capturing, servicing, and de-orbiting earth satellites using robotics

This invention is a method and supporting apparatus for autonomously capturing, servicing and de-orbiting a free-flying spacecraft, such as a satellite, using robotics. The capture of the spacecraft includes the steps of optically seeking and ranging the satellite using LIDAR, and matching tumble rates, rendezvousing and berthing with the satellite. Servicing of the spacecraft may be done using supervised autonomy, which is allowing a robot to execute a sequence of instructions without intervention from a remote human-occupied location. These instructions may be packaged at the remote station in a script and uplinked to the robot for execution upon remote command giving authority to proceed. Alternately, the instructions may be generated by Artificial Intelligence (AI) logic onboard the robot. In either case, the remote operator maintains the ability to abort an instruction or script at any time as well as the ability to intervene using manual override to teleoperate the robot.

Cepollina, Frank J.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Method and associated apparatus for capturing, servicing, and de-orbiting earth satellites using robotics

This invention is a method and supporting apparatus for autonomously capturing, servicing and de-orbiting a free-flying spacecraft, such as a satellite, using robotics. The capture of the spacecraft includes the steps of optically seeking and ranging the satellite using LIDAR; and matching tumble rates, rendezvousing and berthing with the satellite. Servicing of the spacecraft may be done using supervised autonomy, which is allowing a robot to execute a sequence of instructions without intervention from a remote human-occupied location. These instructions may be packaged at the remote station in a script and uplinked to the robot for execution upon remote command giving authority to proceed. Alternately, the instructions may be generated by Artificial Intelligence (AI) logic onboard the robot. In either case, the remote operator maintains the ability to abort an instruction or script at any time, as well as the ability to intervene using manual override to teleoperate the robot.In one embodiment, a vehicle used for carrying out the method of this invention comprises an ejection module, which includes the robot, and a de-orbit module. Once servicing is completed by the robot, the ejection module separates from the de-orbit module, leaving the de-orbit module attached to the satellite for de-orbiting the same at a future time. Upon separation, the ejection module can either de-orbit itself or rendezvous with another satellite for servicing. The ability to de-orbit a spacecraft further allows the opportunity to direct the landing of the spent satellite in a safe location away from population centers, such as the ocean.

Cepollina, Frank J.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Surface Systems Capability Gaps for Enabling NASA’s Sustainable Lunar Operations

This paper discusses the NASA Ground, Test, and Surface Systems Taxonomy (TX-13) related capability gaps, including details of architecture, technology, engineering, and policy gaps for enabling sustainable lunar surface operations and subsequent Mars missions. Architecture gaps include standardized architectures and interfaces, multi-element systems engineering and integration, design for supportability, and nuclear payload processing and launch approach. Technology gaps, primarily focused on uncrewed surface operations, include automated/autonomous cryogenic loading, transfer, servicing, and storage of commodities; health determination and fault management; automated/autonomous planning and scheduling; automated/autonomous inspection, maintenance and repair; logistics management and reliability; launch and landing site preparation; commodity management; and advanced umbilicals and dust tolerant interfaces. Engineering gaps include high-purity propellant production for ground and surface applications and large-scale xenon servicing capabilities. The policy gap includes nuclear propulsion acceptance testing and qualification approach. Strategically identifying human/automation roles and tasks and infusing automation and autonomy practices early in a system’s lifecycle is essential for achieving the mission objectives for a sustainable human lunar presence, improving performance and mission effectiveness, reducing operations costs and reliance on humans to perform tasks, and accommodating ground communication delays.

Surface Systems↗
NASA NTRS2022

Automation & Autonomy Standards and Guidelines for Space Vehicles

The NASA Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) requested HRP conduct a survey of industry and government standards and guidelines for the interaction of automation/autonomy with humans. Guidance for verification testing of human-automation designs was also requested. A rapid response was requested so that the deliverables could be provided as part of a future NASA solicitation for automated systems for HLS. The project began with a broad review and analysis of prior NASA work in this area, as well as external standards related to human interaction with automation/autonomy. The team reviewed approximately 200 documents, and interviewed multiple industry and government subject matter experts (SMEs). “Gold standard” documents were selected for focus and key categories were identified. A cross-walk of standards was created, and common standards and guidelines were selected and rephrased (where necessary) to be information-rich, concise, and usable. Verification guidelines and examples were also developed. The final report includes an introduction to automation and autonomy, selected standards and guidelines, verification method guidance, and research gaps. In addition to the report, the team delivered a list of candidate standards for autonomous vehicles, as well as a list of candidate standards for a future NASA-STD-3001 update on automation/autonomy. The presentation will describe the rapid response project approach and methods, examples of standards and guidelines identified and delivered to OCHMO, and research needed to develop additional automation/autonomy design guidance where gaps currently exist.

automation↗
NASA NTRS2011

Technology Development to Support Human Health and Performance in Exploration Beyond Low Earth Orbit

In the course of defining the level of risks and mitigating the risks for exploration missions beyond low Earth orbit, NASA s Human Research Program (HRP) has identified the need for technology development in several areas. Long duration missions increase the risk of serious medical conditions due to limited options for return to Earth; no resupply; highly limited mass, power, volume; and communication delays. New space flight compatible medical capabilities required include: diagnostic imaging, oxygen concentrator, ventilator, laboratory analysis (saliva, blood, urine), kidney stone diagnosis & treatment, IV solution preparation and delivery. Maintenance of behavioral health in such an isolated, confined and extreme environment requires new sensory stimulation (e.g., virtual reality) technology. Unobtrusive monitoring of behavioral health and treatment methods are also required. Prolonged exposure to weightlessness deconditions bone, muscle, and the cardiovascular system. Novel exercise equipment or artificial gravity are necessary to prevent deconditioning. Monitoring of the degree of deconditioning is required to ensure that countermeasures are effective. New technologies are required in all the habitable volumes (e.g., suit, capsule, habitat, exploration vehicle, lander) to provide an adequate food system, and to meet human environmental standards for air, water, and surface contamination. Communication delays require the crew to be more autonomous. Onboard decision support tools that assist crew with real-time detection and diagnosis of vehicle and habitat operational anomalies will enable greater autonomy. Multi-use shield systems are required to provide shielding from solar particle events. The HRP is pursuing the development of these technologies in laboratories, flight analog environments and the ISS so that the human health and performance risks will be acceptable with the available resources.

Kundrot, C.E.↗
NASA NTRS2017

CARACaS multi-agent maritime autonomy for unmanned surface vehicles in the Swarm II harbor patrol demonstration

This paper describes new autonomy technology that enabled a team of unmanned surface vehicles (USVs) to execute cooperative behaviors in the USV Swarm II harbor patrol demonstration and provides a description of autonomy performance in the event. The new developments extend the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory’s CARACaS (Control Architecture for Robotic Agent Command and Sensing) autonomy architecture, which pro- vides foundational software infrastructure, core executive functions, and several default robotic technology mod- ules. In Swarm II, CARACaS demonstrated higher levels of autonomy and more complex cooperation than previous on-water exercises, using full-sized vehicles and real-world sensing and communication. The core au- tonomous behaviors to support the harbor patrol scenario included Patrol, Track, Inspect, and Trail, providing the capability of finding all vessels entering the patrol area, keeping track of them, inspecting them to infer intent, and trailing suspect vessels. Significantly, CARACaS assumed responsibility for not only executing tasks safely and efficiently but also recognizing what tasks needed to be accomplished, given the current state of the world. Since the heterogeneous USV teams shared world model that evolved, such as due to (dis)appearance of vessels in the area or a change in health or availability of a USV, CARACaS replanned to generate and reallocate the new task list. Thus, human intervention was never required in the loop to task USVs during mission execution, though a supervisory role was supported in the autonomy system for mission monitoring and exception handling. Finally, CARACaS also ensured the USVs avoided hazards and obeyed the applicable rules of the road, using its local motion planning modules.

Sandoval, Michael↗
NASA NTRS1998

Analytic Verification of Flight Software

In the realm of space exploration, the biggest obstacle to widespread application of autonomy in flight software is not technical feasibility; it is doubt about its trustworthiness as a replacement for human-in-the-loop decision-making.

model↗
NASA NTRS2005

Situation Awareness of Onboard System Autonomy

We have developed intelligent agent software for onboard system autonomy. Our approach is to provide control agents that automate crew and vehicle systems, and operations assistants that aid humans in working with these autonomous systems. We use the 3 Tier control architecture to develop the control agent software that automates system reconfiguration and routine fault management. We use the Distributed Collaboration and Interaction (DCI) System to develop the operations assistants that provide human services, including situation summarization, event notification, activity management, and support for manual commanding of autonomous system. In this paper we describe how the operations assistants aid situation awareness of the autonomous control agents. We also describe our evaluation of the DCI System to support control engineers during a ground test at Johnson Space Center (JSC) of the Post Processing System (PPS) for regenerative water recovery.

Schreckenghost, Debra↗
NASA NTRS2020

State of the Profession Considerations: NASA Langley Research Center Capabilities / Technologies for Autonomous In-Space Assembly and Modular Persistent Assets

Successfully implementing OSAM into next generation revolutionary observatories requires integrating expertise and technologies in modular space structures, assembly operations, autonomy, and modeling/simulation. LaRC OSAM technologies/capabilities have been presented to inform the Planetary Science and Astrobiology Decadal Survey community of the robust and mature existing capability to support an OSAM based architecture for their next observatory. LaRC Structures and Assembly capabilities enable; a modular telescope architecture, high-performance structural modules, and robotic assembly techniques. LaRC Autonomy capabilities ensure that the robotic assembly will be accomplished in a safe and robust manner and only require humans in a supervisory role. The LaRC toolbox of Modeling and Simulation capabilities that is calibrated using module-level ground testing, will ensure that the performance of the fully assembled observatory, a very large zero-g system that will never be assembled/tested in a gravity environment, meets all performance requirements when it enters into service. Integrating all three LaRC capabilities and including embedded metrology, will enable servicing, repair, instrument upgrades (and/or replacement) while ensuring a very long lifetime for the observatory and providing a return-on-investment that is substantially greater than the initial cost. Further confidence will be achieved as OSAM technologies are validated in a new LaRC OSAM laboratory that allows large-scale collaborative testing of modular hardware, simulation software and algorithms, and autonomous agents.

Large space structures↗