Engineering PapersSearch

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Mission Timeline”

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

Performance Analysis of Magnetohydrodynamic Drag Modulation for Actively Controlled Aerocapture at Neptune

While the Ice Giants are a top priority for flagship missions in the NASA’s near-term future, current technologies limit the scientific payload and mission timeline for future Uranian and Neptunian missions due to the need for fuel for orbit insertion maneuvers. Thus, to maximize the scientific potential of future missions, atmospheric aerocapture has been heavily researched. While atmospheric aerocapture simulations have proven enabling for capturing around Neptune, its deep atmospheric pass requires an aeroshell with robust thermal protection systems (TPS). Magnetohydrodynamically-controlled aerocapture serves as a potential solution to the limitations of both fully propulsive orbit insertion and aerodynamically controlled aerocapture. Through NASA Langley’s high-fidelity flight dynamics simulation, the Program to Optimize Simulated Trajectories II, both the aerodynamic-only and magnetohydrodynamic aerocapture methods were simulated and compared for identical missions to Neptune. After applying an optimized numerical predictor-corrector guidance algorithm for both methods, the results showed that magnetohydrodynamics has not only the control authority to successfully capture around Neptune, but also the unique advantage of a shallower atmospheric pass, decreasing the maximum heat load and the required TPS mass.

Danny N. Nguyen

Full Mission Astronaut Radiation Exposure Assessments for Long Duration Lunar Surface Missions

Risk to astronauts due to ionizing radiation exposure is a primary concern for missions beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and will drive mission architecture requirements, mission timelines, and operational practices. Both galactic cosmic ray (GCR) and solar particle event (SPE) environments pose a risk to astronauts for missions beyond LEO. The GCR environment, which is made up of protons and heavier ions covering a broad energy spectrum, is ever present but varies in intensity with the solar cycle, while SPEs are sporadic events, consisting primarily of protons moving outward through the solar system from the sun. The GCR environment is more penetrating and is more difficult to shield than SPE environments, but lacks the intensity to induce acute effects. Large SPEs are rare, but they could result in a lethal dose, if adequate shielding is not provided. For short missions, radiation risk is dominated by the possibility of a large SPE. Longer missions also require planning for large SPEs; adequate shielding must be provided and operational constraints must allow astronauts to move quickly to shielded locations. The dominant risk for longer missions, however, is GCR exposure, which accumulates over time and can lead to late effects such as cancer. SPE exposure, even low level SPE exposure received in heavily shielded locations, will increase this risk. In addition to GCR and SPE environments, the lunar neutron albedo resulting mainly from the interaction of GCRs with regolith will also contribute to astronaut risk. Full mission exposure assessments were performed for proposed long duration lunar surface mission scenarios. In order to accomplish these assessments, radiation shielding models were developed for a proposed lunar habitat and rover. End-to-End mission exposure assessments were performed by first calculating exposure rates for locations in the habitat, rover, and during extra-vehicular activities (EVA). Subsequently, total mission exposures were evaluated for proposed timelines. A number of computational tools and mathematical models, which have been incorporated into NASA's On-Line Tool for the Assessment of Radiation In Space (OLTARIS), were used for this study. These tools include GCR and SPE environment models, human body models, and the HZETRN space radiation transport code, which is used to calculate the transport of the charged particles and neutrons through shielding materials and human tissue. Mission exposure results, assessed in terms of effective dose, are presented for proposed timelines and recommendations are made for improved astronaut shielding and safer operational practice.

Adamczyk, Anne M.

The Ulysses mission

The Ulysses mission to explore the heliosphere within a few astronomical units of the sun over the full range of heliographic latitudes, thereby providing the first characterization of the uncharted third heliospheric dimension, is discussed. The scientific objectives of the mission are reviewed, and the nine flight experiments which make up the spacecraft payload are summarized. The Ulysses trajectory and mission timeline are described, as are the spacecraft itself and the mission operations. The timing of the mission with the solar cycle is discussed.

Marsden, R. G.

Artemis Sustained Translational Acceleration Limits: Human Tolerance Evidence from Apollo to ISS

The designers of the next generation of lunar landers may adopt novel, crew-body orientations outside of our flight history or applied to flight durations and environments outside of our experience. Current sustained translational acceleration requirements in NASA-STD-3001 are applicable only to crewmembers in a seated posture and are thus inadequate to address human tolerance in non-seated configurations. Initial designs for the Apollo Lunar Module (LM) included seats for both commander and pilot; however, these were subsequently removed from the vehicle due to mass constraints and a willingness to accept the unknown risks for short-duration missions given the limited human physiologic data at the time. In the years since Apollo, our evidence base has grown immensely. Initial Artemis mission timelines under consideration will be longer than the longest Apollo mission, by a significant margin, with timeframes more analogous to longer Space Shuttle missions. Given the incidence of postflight orthostatic intolerance following shuttle missions, a significant risk may exist for lander design(s) pursuing a standing crew configuration similar to Apollo LM. New sustained translational acceleration limits developed to address this risk are presented herein. These limits were derived from evaluations of Apollo biomedical and flight profile data during lunar descent and ascent operations, Soyuz and Space Shuttle flight profile and post-landing biomedical data, and analogue bed rest post-exposure data on orthostatic intolerance.

James M. Pattarini

An investigation of the use of temporal decomposition in space mission scheduling

This research involves an examination of techniques for solving scheduling problems in long-duration space missions. The mission timeline is broken up into several time segments, which are then scheduled incrementally. Three methods are presented for identifying the activities that are to be attempted within these segments. The first method is a mathematical model, which is presented primarily to illustrate the structure of the temporal decomposition problem. Since the mathematical model is bound to be computationally prohibitive for realistic problems, two heuristic assignment procedures are also presented. The first heuristic method is based on dispatching rules for activity selection, and the second heuristic assigns performances of a model evenly over timeline segments. These heuristics are tested using a sample Space Station mission and a Spacelab mission. The results are compared with those obtained by scheduling the missions without any problem decomposition. The applicability of this approach to large-scale mission scheduling problems is also discussed.

Bullington, Stanley E.

Operating the Dual-Orbtier GRAIL Mission to Measure the Moon's Gravity

The GRAIL mission is on track to satisfy all prime mission requirements. The performance of the orbiters and payload has been exceptional. Detailed pre-launch operations planning and validation have paid off. Prime mission timeline has been conducted almost exactly as laid out in the mission plan. Flight experience in the prime mission puts the flight team in a good position for completing the challenges of the extended mission where the science payoff is even greater

Moon's interior structure

HelioSwarm: The Swarm is the Observatory

HelioSwarm will transform our understanding of space plasma turbulence by being the first-of-its-kind simultaneous, multiscale observatory comprising multiple spacecraft. HelioSwarm was competitively selected under the Heliophysics Explorers Program 2019 Medium-Class Explorer (MIDEX) Announcement of Opportunity. The central powered-ESPA hub spacecraft is co-orbited by eight SmallSat Node spacecraft, together moving through a High Earth Orbit to obtain data in various solar wind regimes. The mission architecture is that of hub-and-spoke, with the larger hub serving as a communications relay between the nodes and DSN. Mission operations, management, and technical oversight are provided by NASA Ames Research Center; the spacecraft are provided by Northrop Grumman and BCT. The instrument suite includes foreign-contributed instruments and U.S. ones, all under the oversight of University of New Hampshire (which is also the Principal Investigator’s home institution and Science Operations Center). The mission timeline from launch through conclusion of the one-year science mission is provided along with a summarized concept of operations, with particular emphasis on placing the nodes in their proper relative orbit loops to form the geometry needed for science collection at apogee. A brief discussion of how a combination of legacy tools and custom-created swarm analysis tools are used to design the swarm and sort and visualize the collected science data and telemetry in context is provided. Finally, an exploration of the pathfinding nature of HelioSwarm and some implications for future large scientific swarms is offered.

Heliophysics

HelioSwarm: The Swarm is the Observatory

The HelioSwarm Mission will transform our understanding of space plasma turbulence by being the first-of-its-kind simultaneous, multiscale observatory comprising multiple spacecraft. HelioSwarm was competitively selected under the Heliophysics Explorers Program 2019 Medium-Class Explorer (MIDEX) Announcement of Opportunity. The central powered-ESPA Hub spacecraft is co-orbited by eight SmallSat Node spacecraft, together moving through a High Earth Orbit to obtain data in various solar wind regimes. The mission architecture is that of hub-and-spoke, with the larger hub serving as a communications relay between the Nodes and DSN. Mission operations, management, and technical oversight are provided by NASA Ames Research Center; the spacecraft are provided by Northrop Grumman and BCT. The instrument suite includes foreign-contributed instruments and U.S. ones, all under the oversight of University of New Hampshire (which is also the Principal Investigator’s home institution and Science Operations Center). The mission timeline from launch through conclusion of the one-year science mission is provided along with a summarized concept of operations, with particular emphasis on placing the Nodes in their proper relative orbit loops to form the geometry needed for science collection at apogee. A brief discussion of how a combination of legacy tools and custom-created swarm analysis tools are used to design the swarm and sort and visualize the collected science data and telemetry in context is provided. Finally, an exploration of the pathfinding nature of HelioSwarm and some implications for future large scientific swarms is offered.

Heliophysics

Cryogenic Propellant Storage and Transfer Technology Demonstration: Prephase A Government Point-of-Departure Concept Study

The primary purpose of this study was to define a point-of-departure prephase A mission concept for the cryogenic propellant storage and transfer technology demonstration mission to be conducted by the NASA Office of the Chief Technologist (OCT). The mission concept includes identification of the cryogenic propellant management technologies to be demonstrated, definition of a representative mission timeline, and definition of a viable flight system design concept. The resulting mission concept will serve as a point of departure for evaluating alternative mission concepts and synthesizing the results of industry- defined mission concepts developed under the OCT contracted studies

Mulqueen, J. A.

NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO)

Introduction: NASA is preparing to land the first woman and first person of color on the Moon within the next decade, and ensuring the success of these missions will depend on our preparation on the ground in multiple ground-based lunar environment analogs. To achieve this, NASA has used full mission class analogs, of which NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) is the longest continuously running example. Discussion: NEEMO is NASA’s long-standing undersea high-fidelity spaceflight mission analog. It focuses on exploration science, EVA techniques and tools, and maturing ISS IVA flight hardware and operations concepts. NEEMO crews are composed of groups of US and International Partner (IP) astronauts, engineers and scientists who live, work and explore in a challenging environment analogous to the environment experienced currently on ISS and what is expected for future deep space exploration destinations. NEEMO missions are conducted at Aquarius Reef Base (ARB), which includes a shore base in Tavernier, FL, and the world's only undersea research station, the Aquarius habitat, which is located 5.4 miles (9 kilometers) off Key Largo in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. ARB is owned and operated by Florida International University (FIU). Aquarius was selected due to its remote and extreme location and its ability to provide the unique isolation and risk factors that spaceflight presents. NEEMO missions allow for evaluations of end-to-end EVA and Science exploration concepts of operations with a crew that is in situ in a true extreme environment. They also allow for evaluations of flight hardware and ops tools that are either pondered or destined for ISS or Gateway in the near future. NEEMO missions feature flight-like interactions between the crew and a Mission Control Center (MCC )and Science Team, which in turn allows evaluation of mission and science operations decision making and communications techniques. One reason NEEMO missions are of such high fidelity is that so many of the participants are experienced human space flight end operators. The majority of crewmembers are trained astronauts, and many of the MCC operators have credentials as current or former certified ISS MCC operators (e.g., CapCom, EVA Officer, etc.). Mission products are generated daily by the ground team and are modeled on ISS products (but modified as needed). A planning team manages the constantly evolving mission timelines in response to the ever-changing constraints and opportunities. During NEEMO missions, suited EVA crewmembers (using diving helmets) have clear voice communications with each other, the habitat, and the MCC and Science Team back on shore. Each EVA crewmember also sends helmet cam video to the habitat and MCC and Science Teams. Appropriate communications latencies are inserted for the destination being simulated as well. NEEMO missions are made possible by a broad collaboration of participants. Astronauts from all of the ISS partner agencies are eligible for crew assignment. Often the crew includes a NASA scientist, doctor or engineer with a particular skill to contribute. Sometimes crewmembers come from external entities–generally institutes or universities. Objectives come from a wide variety of sources as well, from within NASA, IPs, government agencies, academia, commercial companies and research institutes. A typical NEEMO mission is a collaboration between at least 5 NASA centers. To date, 23 NEEMO missions have been conducted since 2001, and NEEMO 24 is planned for 2022. Conclusion: NEEMO is a high-fidelity mission analog conducted in an extreme subsea environment. It features experienced end-operators in human spaceflight, from the astronaut crewmembers to key personnel staffing Mission Control. Acknowledgments: The authors wish to thank FIU and NASA’s HEO SEI/Strategic Analysis and Exploration Integration and Science Directorate organizations for the continued support that makes the NEEMO Project possible.

M L Reagan

Potential Biofilm Control Strategies for Extended Spaceflight Missions

Biofilms, surface-adherent microbial communities, are associated with microbial fouling and corrosion in terrestrial water-distribution systems. Biofilms are also present in human spaceflight, particularly in the Water Recovery System (WRS) on the International Space Station (ISS). The WRS is comprised of the Urine Processor Assembly (UPA) and the Water Processor Assembly (WPA) which together recycles wastewater from human urine and recovered humidity from the ISS atmosphere. These wastewaters and various process streams are continually inoculated with microorganisms primarily arising from the space crew microbiome. Biofilm-related fouling has been encountered and addressed in spacecraft in low Earth orbit, including ISS and the Russian Mir Space Station. However, planned future missions beyond low Earth orbit to the Moon and Mars present additional challenges, as resupplying spare parts or support materials would be impractical and the mission timeline would be in the order of years in the case of a mission to Mars. In addition, future missions are expected to include a period of dormancy in which the WRS would be unused for an extended duration. The concepts developed in this review arose from a workshop including NASA personnel and representatives with biofilm expertise from a wide range of industrial and academic backgrounds. Here, we address current strategies that are employed on Earth for biofilm control, including antifouling coatings and biocides and mechanisms for mitigating biofilm growth and damage. These ideas are presented in the context of their applicability to spaceflight and identify proposed new topics of biofilm control that need to be addressed in order to facilitate future extended, crewed, spaceflight missions.

Luis Zea

Optical Navigation Simulation and Performance Analysis for Osiris-Rex Proximity Operations

The OSIRIS-REx mission timeline with OpNav milestones is presented in Figure 1. The first three proximity operations (ProxOps) mission phases focus on Navigation. During these phases, OSIRIS-REx approaches Bennu, conducts equatorial and polar flybys in Preliminary Survey, and inserts into the first mission orbit: Orbit A. During these phases, the OpNav techniques evolve from point-source to resolved-body centroiding to landmark tracking.

Jackman, Coralie D.

Life sciences passive GN2 freezer thermal performance test

Thermal performance tests that were conducted on the life sciences passive GN2 freezer project are summarized as well as the improvements to the freezers to improve the thermal performance of the containers. Procedures were developed, based upon these tests, to initially charge the freezers with LN2 and verify that the freezer performance is adequate for the mission duration. Improvements were made to the corvac sample tube to limit the amount of breakage due to thermal expansion of the liquid during freezing. A method of verifying the freezer vacuum insulative integrity was defined as well as a procedure for refurbishment of the internal vacuum level. Freezer modifications were made to ease the reevacuation of the containers. The orientation of the freezer in a 1-G environment, after being charged, had to remain in a vertical position. The LN2 boiloff rate increased significantly in a horizontal position. This resulted in a stowage definition in the spacecraft prior to launch. Functional testing, using the SL-1 mission timeline showed that the freezer will maintain samples in the frozen state for the duration of the mission.

Belshaw, G. W.

Spacecraft Conceptual Design Compared to the Apollo Lunar Lander

Future human exploration of the Moon will require an optimized spacecraft design with each sub-system achieving the required minimum capability and maintaining high reliability. The objective of this study was to trade capability with reliability and minimize mass for the lunar lander spacecraft. The NASA parametric concept for a 3-person vehicle to the lunar surface with a 30% mass margin totaled was considerably heavier than the Apollo 15 Lunar Module "as flown" mass of 16.4 metric tons. The additional mass was attributed to mission requirements and system design choices that were made to meet the realities of modern spaceflight. The parametric tool used to size the current concept, Envision, accounts for primary and secondary mass requirements. For example, adding an astronaut increases the mass requirements for suits, water, food, oxygen, as well as, the increase in volume. The environmental control sub-systems becomes heavier with the increased requirements and more structure was needed to support the additional mass. There was also an increase in propellant usage. For comparison, an "Apollo-like" vehicle was created by removing these additional requirements. Utilizing the Envision parametric mass calculation tool and a quantitative reliability estimation tool designed by Valador Inc., it was determined that with today?s current technology a Lunar Module (LM) with Apollo capability could be built with less mass and similar reliability. The reliability of this new lander was compared to Apollo Lunar Module utilizing the same methodology, adjusting for mission timeline changes as well as component differences. Interestingly, the parametric concept's overall estimated risk for loss of mission (LOM) and loss of crew (LOC) did not significantly improve when compared to Apollo.

Young, C.

VIPER Lunar Rover Agile Mission Systems

Agile development methods, which have gone from outlier to mainstream in software development, are poised to expand into all aspects of space mission development. Modern software development operates on a principle of continuous deployment, where progress is verified not with conventional metrics, but with a continuous build, available to key stakeholders, enabling direct examination of the state of the code base, and assessment of progress through demonstration of capability. Delivery times are measured in weeks, not months. Stakeholders are part of the process on an ongoing basis. The cost of change is comparatively low and requirements, which often are not precisely defined at the start of a project, may be iteratively refined in a series of agile development cycles. Agile methods are compatible with traditional system engineering methods and may be tailored to the space operations environment. The low cost of change and iterative development cycles of agile enable requirements to be defined as outcomes and constraints, with design details to be refined during the development cycle. We are now at a point where agile methods may be extended beyond software, to Mission Systems, including the Mission Operations System and the Ground Data System. For NASA’s VIPER Lunar Rover Mission, scheduled to land at a lunar pole in late 2023, we are developing the Mission System using agile methods. As in agile software, where the measure of progress is working code, in agile mission system development, the measure of capability is what we can demonstrate. Demonstrations over presentations. We demonstrate mission system capability using simulations. The concept of operations, from commanding, to driving the rover, to how we downlink images for evaluation for a near-real time command cycle, will be tested and proven in simulation, years before we begin the traditional simulation cycle for training. “Say it then simulate it.” We develop and refine our designs using simulations, with an emphasis on new components of the system that are not well known early. For example, the required duration of a mission planning cycle for a lunar surface asset such as VIPER, that operates twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, with continuous communications and a unique set of constraints based on the physics of the lunar poles and the line of site to Earth, is a unique problem in mission planning that is unlikely to be solved in a series of meetings. A small number of requirements specifying the outcomes may serve as the jumping off point to an agile development cycle, with demonstration in simulations. We have already demonstrated this process with simulations of rover driver decision time. VIPER is driven using near-real time command and control to waypoints. The driver decision time between waypoints is a fundamental enabling unit of productivity to accomplish the mission timeline. We have validated driver decision time in simulations of rover driving at the lunar South Pole, using the prototype mission tools for driving, command and control. The capability to develop and refine designs using simulations as part of agile Mission System development cycle changes the nature of team interactions, creating a focus on doing, rather than analyzing and documenting. Waterfall development cycles were, in part, a product of the significant cost of change in the early days of spaceflight. When the cost of change is high, it is vital to get your requirements right at the outset, because the system will be built to those specifications, and, when change is expensive, you better get it right early. However, modern technology has greatly lowered the cost of change, enabling iterative, rapid development cycles, in which key operations concepts may be tested and refined during development. Extending agile development to the Mission System for VIPER is a significant step in moving agile development methods for space operations beyond software, to the Mission System.

Agile

Tenets of Lunar EVAs for Artemis III

The purpose of these top level EVA tenets for Artemis III is to capture and promote EVA planning principles which drive decisions before and during the mission that are related to mission timeline, contingencies, and how risks are balanced. The tenets listed below are not shown in a priority order. (Reference Artemis III Mission Planning Summit, Action 27, 3/9/2023).

EVA

Atmospheric science facility pallet-only mode space transportation system payload (feasibility study), Volume 1

The economic and technical feasibility is assessed of employing a pallet-only mode for conducting Atmospheric Magnetospheric Plasmas-in-Space experiments. A baseline design incorporating the experiment and instrument descriptions is developed. The prime instruments are packaged into four pallets in a physical and functional manner compatible with the Space Transportation System capabilities and/or constraints and an orbiter seven-day mission timeline. Operational compatibility is verified between the orbiter/payload and supporting facilities. The development status and the schedule requirements applicable to the Atmospheric Science Facility mission are identified. Conclusions and recommendations are presented and discussed.

Source record

Learning to behave: adaptive behavior for planetary surface rovers

Robotic missions to planetary surfaces are becoming more ambitious and of longer duration. The nominal mission timeline for the MER called Spirit currently on the Martian surface is 90 days, with extensions to 180 days depending on rover health. The upcoming 2009 MSL mission is planned to be 300-500 days and will possibly involve traverses on the order of a kilometer or more.

autonomous robots