Engineering PapersSearch

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “LUNAR COMMUNICATION”

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 37 records · Page 2

Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) Remote Teleoperation Studies Under Four Lunar Communication Latencies

Remotely operating a lunar rover from Earth while subject to an Earth-Moon time delay of multiple seconds could result in a dangerous state where the roving vehicle is either damaged or lost, thereby potentially compromising an entire mission or series of missions. Providing the right capabilities to the remote operator to manage inherent communication latencies will be important for remote driving to be successful. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) conducted two studies to investigate the average speed and number of kilometers per day that an operator on Earth could teleoperate a notional Artemis unpressurized rover with minimal remote operator capabilities under 0- and 4-second communication delays (April 2023 study) and 6- and 8-second delays (August 2023 study). A primary goal of these studies was to understand if an Artemis Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) could cover 6 kilometers (km) in 24 hours when operated remotely. During the April 2023 evaluation, eight test operators used an in-house simulation of the lunar surface South Pole to teleoperate a NASA government reference LTV. Each operator received approximately 30 minutes of remote driving familiarization/training prior to their test run. Operators viewed the surrounding terrain via a single, rover mast-mounted, high-resolution camera with pan/tilt/zoom capabilities; continuous communication was provided throughout all testing. In the August 2023 evaluation, remote operators received approximately 3 hours of familiarization training in each latency, and the simulation environment provided remote operators with an operator-selected rate limiter to enable finer sensitivity in the hand controller and a predictive circle function to better assist operators with predicting the path the vehicle could take. All test operators were able to successfully navigate and drive through six different types of terrain and five planned traverse scenarios using natural lighting under all communication delays. Results for average speeds for each communication delay, computed by averaging the data from all test conditions for that latency and all operators, are shown in the table below. The average speed data was then used to derive the total time needed to cover 6 km, 8 km, and 20 km. Remote operators drove slower and used the brake more frequently when subject to a communication latency as opposed to no communication latency. Subjective workload assessments revealed that while operating in a latency the overall workload significantly increased when compared to a 0-s delay with mental demand, frustration, and performance being the primary contributing factors. Driving strategies in the 0-s delay did not vary significantly among subjects; however, in the 4-s delay condition, three different driving strategies were identified. In the 6-s and 8-s latency conditions the operator’s use of the cruise control to maintain speed was more apparent. Additionally, over the course of the August study, the operator took advantage of the predictive circle indicator on the navigation display and over 95% of the operator’s navigation used the mast camera 180-degree panning function for ground truthing in terms of boulders and craters. Operators started to define more specific parameters in driving strategies for general operations. This consisted of setting the vehicle into a low-speed cruise mode of approximately 1–1.5 kph and noticing driving performance of the vehicle seemed to be much harder at slower speeds 0.4–0.8 kph; however, the vehicle was more responsive at speeds of 2.9–3.6 kph. Regardless of communication delay, operators used both the horizontal translation rails and the vehicle fenders as guides to predict a path for the vehicle through heavily concentrated terrain features. Test operators acknowledged that the teleoperations training for this study was substantially less than what an actual LTV remote operator will ultimately receive. They estimated a minimum of 20 to 100 hours spread across multiple days and weeks (e.g., strategies included immersion training over a 3-day period, to a short 8-week starter program) would be needed to get an operator ~ 60% proficient (i.e., able to complete a subset of remote driving tasks), to a yearlong program for full proficiency in remote driving tasks under all terrain types and natural lighting conditions. Remotely operating a vehicle on another planetary body while subject to communication latency is a complex task. Speed, distance covered, time spent driving, time spent navigating, brake usage and rock contacts are all affected by operator workload, driving strategies, workstation ergonomics and training. These studies provided a “firstlook” answer to a potential system requirement (namely if a remote operator could cover a given distance in a given amount of time); however, considerable general knowledge was gained to begin to understand what it will take to make a successful lunar rover teleoperator.

LTV

Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) Remote Teleoperation Studies Under Four Lunar Communication Latencies

Remotely operating a lunar rover from Earth while subject to an Earth-Moon time delay of multiple seconds could result in a dangerous state where the roving vehicle is either damaged or lost, thereby potentially compromising an entire mission or series of missions. Providing the right capabilities to the remote operator to manage inherent communication latencies will be important for remote driving to be successful. NASA conducted two studies to investigate the average speed and number of kilometers per day that an operator on Earth could teleoperate a notional Artemis unpressurized rover with minimal remote operator capabilities under 0- and 4-second communication delays (April 2023 study) and 6- and 8-second delays (August 2023 study). A primary goal of these studies was to understand if an Artemis Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) could cover 6 kilometers (km) in 24 hours when operated remotely. During the April 2023 evaluation, eight test operators used an in-house simulation of the lunar surface South Pole to teleoperate a NASA government reference LTV. Each operator received approximately 30 minutes of remote driving familiarization/training prior to their test run. Operators viewed the surrounding terrain via a single, rover mast-mounted, high-resolution camera with pan/tilt/zoom capabilities; continuous communication was provided throughout all testing. In the August 2023 evaluation, remote operators received approximately 3 hours of familiarization training in each latency, and the simulation environment provided remote operators with an operator-selected rate limiter to enable finer sensitivity in the hand controller and a predictive circle function to better assist operators with predicting the path the vehicle could take. All test operators were able to successfully navigate and drive through six different types of terrain and five planned traverse scenarios using natural lighting under all communication delays. Results for average speeds for each communication delay, computed by averaging the data from all test conditions for that latency and all operators, are shown in the table below. The average speed data was then used to derive the total time needed to cover 6 km, 8 km, and 20 km (distances relevant to LTV-SYS071 and -029 requirements). Remote operators drove slower and used the brake more frequently when subject to a communication latency as opposed to no communication latency. Subjective workload assessments revealed that while operating in a latency the overall workload significantly increased when compared to a 0-s delay with mental demand, frustration, and performance being the primary contributing factors. Driving strategies in the 0-s delay did not vary significantly among subjects; however, in the 4-s delay condition, three different driving strategies were identified. In the 6-s and 8-s latency conditions the operator’s use of the cruise control to maintain speed was more apparent. Additionally, over the course of the August study, the operator took advantage of the predictive circle indicator on the navigation display and over 95% of the operator’s navigation used the mast camera 180-degree panning function for ground truthing in terms of boulders and craters. Operators started to define more specific parameters in driving strategies for general operations. This consisted of setting the vehicle into a low-speed cruise mode of approximately 11.5 kph and noticing driving performance of the vehicle seemed to be much harder at slower speeds 0.4–0.8 kph; however, the vehicle was more responsive at speeds of 2.9–3.6 kph. Regardless of communication delay, operators used both the horizontal translation rails and the vehicle fenders as guides to predict a path for the vehicle through heavily concentrated terrain features. Test operators acknowledged that the teleoperations training for this study was substantially less than what an actual LTV remote operator will ultimately receive. They estimated a minimum of 20 to 100 hours spread across multiple days and weeks (e.g., strategies included immersion training over a 3-day period, to a short 8-week starter program) would be needed to get an operator ~ 60% proficient (i.e., able to complete a subset of remote driving tasks), to a yearlong program for full proficiency in remote driving tasks under all terrain types and natural lighting conditions. Remotely operating a vehicle on another planetary body while subject to communication latency is a complex task. Speed, distance covered, time spent driving, time spent navigating, brake usage and rock contacts are all affected by operator workload, driving strategies, workstation ergonomics and training. These studies provided a “first-look” answer to a potential system requirement (namely if a remote operator could cover a given distance in a given amount of time); however, considerable general knowledge was gained to begin to understand what it will take to make a successful lunar rover teleoperator.

LTV

Lunar Surface Network Relay Terminal: A Lunar Communications Platform

This paper will discuss the development of a Lunar Surface Relay that will serve as a central terminal for lunar surface wireless communications (e.g., 3GPP, Wi-Fi) for surface assets to transmit and receive data back-and-forth with Earth through lunar orbital relays or direct with Earth. Four variations of a wireless surface terminal were designed with varying concepts of operation to assess mass, power, cost drivers, and trade-offs. The designs entailed one stationary platform and three mobile which provided interesting trade-offs. The terminals are powered for operation with either a radioisotope/battery power system or solar array/battery power system.

WiFi

Spectrally Efficient GaN High-Power Amplifier for Lunar Communications

The paper demonstrates a spectrally efficient Ka-band GaN MMIC based high-power amplifier (HPA) that uses a waveguide 4-port magic-tee as a 2-way power combiner to combine the output from two lower power amplifier circuits. The paper presents for the prototype HPA the measured output power, gain, power added efficiency, error vector magnitude for Offset-QPSK, 8PSK, 16APSK, 32APSK, and 16QAM waveforms, waveform spectrum, and out-of-band spectral regrowth. The HPA is intended for establishing a direct communication link between assets on the lunar surface/orbit and Earth.

Gallium nitride

Design and Implementation of a Lunar Communications Satellite and Server for the 2012 SISO Smackdown

Last year, the Simulation Interoperability Standards Organization (SISO) inaugurated the now annual High Level Architecture (HLA) Smackdown at the Spring Simulation Interoperability Workshop (SIW). A primary objective of the Smackdown event is to provide college students with hands-on experience in the High Level Architecture (HLA). The University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAHuntsville) fielded teams in 2011 and 2012. Both the 2011 and 2012 smackdown scenarios were a lunar resupply mission. The 2012 UAHuntsville fielded four federates: a communications network Federate called Lunar Communications and Navigation Satellite Service (LCANServ) for sending and receiving messages, a Lunar Satellite Constellation (LCANSat) to put in place radios needed by the communications network for Line-Of-Sight communication calculations, and 3D graphical displays of the orbiting satellites and a 3D visualization of the lunar surface activities. This paper concentrates on the first two federates by describing the functions, algorithms, the modular FOM, experiences, lessons learned and recommendations for future Smackdown events.

Bulgatz, Dennis

NASA’s Approach to Lunar Communication and Navigation: Artemis and Beyond

NASA’s Space Communications and Navigation (SCaN) program is developing a support structure of networks, partners, and technologies to provide communication, position, navigation, and timing services at the Moon. In this paper, we describe the progress and status of these diverse efforts and the ways in which they will be used during NASA’s crewed lunar exploration program, Artemis. We provide an update on developments at NASA which are targeted to cislunar space, including the Orion Artemis II Optical Communications System (O2O) demonstration mission, planned Lunar Exploration Ground Sites (LEGS) that will offer a dedicated Direct to Earth (DTE) capability servicing the cislunar region, and a recently released RFP for commercial Lunar Communications Relay and Navigation Services as well as Direct to Earth communications capabilities. We also describe the current status and key role of the LunaNet Interoperability Specification (LNIS), a collaborative standards framework developed by NASA, international partner agencies, and commercial stakeholders. A common thread, weaving these efforts together, is the support of commercial enterprises that can meet the Artemis challenge. Together, these projects and activities will enable safe, robust, and reliable communications and position, navigation, and timing (PNT) services for both crewed and uncrewed missions across cislunar space. SCaN and NASA, with our partners, are helping to build the foundation for a long term, sustainable human presence at the Moon –one that will set the stage for similar efforts at Mars.

LunaNet

Orion Optical Navigation for Loss of Communication Lunar Return Contingencies

The Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) will replace the Space Shuttle and serve as the next-generation spaceship to carry humans back to the Moon for the first time since the Apollo program. For nominal lunar mission operations, the Mission Control Navigation team will utilize radiometric measurements to determine the position and velocity of Orion and uplink state information to support Lunar return. However, in the loss of communications contingency return scenario, Orion must safely return the crew to the Earth's surface. The navigation design solution for this loss of communications scenario is optical navigation consisting of lunar landmark tracking in low lunar orbit and star- horizon angular measurements coupled with apparent planetary diameter for Earth return trajectories. This paper describes the optical measurement errors and the navigation filter that will process those measurements to support navigation for safe crew return.

Getchius, Joel

Ray Tracing Techniques for the Characterization of Lunar Communication Architectures

This paper provides an overview of the computational techniques used to characterize the viability of different lunar architectures and their ability to provide communication services to the lunar surface. This analysis was done with modern ray tracing techniques that allow for the computations to be done on Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) clusters for a high level of parallelism and severe reduction in computation time. The ray tracing computations were done with the GPU platform Compute Unified Device Architecture (CUDA) provided by NVIDIA which utilizes general-purpose computing on graphics processing units (GPGPU). This new method provides the advantage of being able to characterize a much larger portion of the lunar surface due to its computational efficiency as well as providing a more accurate representation of elevation angle limits instead of the typical and often inaccurate elevation angle mask. The Lunar surface can now be characterized with metrics such as contact time, outage time, and received data rate. With these metrics, different proposed Lunar architectures can be rapidly evaluated. This reduction in computation time not only leads to more accurate results but allows these results to be obtained in a time frame that allows for the complete characterization of the trade space. It is expected that these different architecture comparisons will lead to a conclusive determination of the optimal Lunar architecture and will allow for future Lunar missions to operate as close to real time as possible. In addition, this computation method can be used to recreate visibility figures generated by previous methods but with an increased level of accuracy.

Thomas Montano