Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Data processing and standardization”

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 469 records · Page 26

Culling of redundant data

The inversion of a large data set, with it errors, is demonstrated and the tradeoff curve, or resolving power calculations, are discussed. Consideration is given to inverse problems of the earth, represented in the idealized form of a single scaler function of a single coordinate. The difference between the functional for the real earth and the functional for some model is formulated. A procedure is given for using the linear relationships between the differences in the data and the differences in the model as side conditions. Through a process of diagonalization a model is created that fits the data. The data are culled by accepting only those relative standard errors that are less than 100 percent.

Gilbert, F.↗

Results of the long range position-determining system tests

The long range position-determining system (LRPDS) has been developed by the Corps of Engineers to provide the Field Army with a rapid and accurate positioning capability. The LRPDS consists of an airborne reference position set (RPS), up to 30 ground based positioning sets (PS), and a position computing central (PCC). The PCC calculates the position of each PS based on the range change information provided by each Set. The positions can be relayed back to the PS again via RPS. Each PS unit contains a double oven precise crystal oscillator. The RPS contains a Hewlett-Packard cesium beam standard. Frequency drifts and off-sets of the crystal oscillators are taken in account in the data reduction process. A field test program was initiated in November 1972. A total of 54 flights were made which included six flights for equipment testing and 48 flights utilizing the field test data reduction program. The four general types of PS layouts used were: short range; medium range; long range; tactical configuration. The overall RMS radial error of the unknown positions varied from about 2.3 meters for the short range to about 15 meters for the long range. The corresponding elevation RMS errors vary from about 12 meters to 37 meters.

Rhode, F. W.↗

Signal processing and display for electrochemical data

Two electrochemical electrodes provide signals; apparatus automatically determines reaction end point and displays lag period in time or cell concentration. Apparatus can be used with standard pH reference anode and platinum anode or with redox electrodes.

Young, R. N.↗

LANDSAT non-US standard catalog

The Non-U.S. Standard Catalog lists imagery acquired by LANDSAT 1 and LANDSAT 2 which has been processed and input to the data files during the referenced month. Data, such as data acquired, cloud cover and image quality are given for each scene. The microfilm roll and frame on which the scene may be found is also given.

Source record↗

LANDSAT 2 cumulative non-US standard catalog

The Non-U.S. Standard Catalog lists imagery acquired by LANDSAT 1 and LANDSAT 2 which has been processed and input to the data files during the referred month. Data, such as data acquired, cloud cover and image quality are given for each scene. The microfilm roll and frame on which the scene may be found is also given.

Source record↗

Digital Audio Radio Broadcast Systems Laboratory Testing Nearly Complete

Radio history continues to be made at the NASA Lewis Research Center with the completion of phase one of the digital audio radio (DAR) testing conducted by the Consumer Electronics Group of the Electronic Industries Association. This satellite, satellite/terrestrial, and terrestrial digital technology will open up new audio broadcasting opportunities both domestically and worldwide. It will significantly improve the current quality of amplitude-modulated/frequency-modulated (AM/FM) radio with a new digitally modulated radio signal and will introduce true compact-disc-quality (CD-quality) sound for the first time. Lewis is hosting the laboratory testing of seven proposed digital audio radio systems and modes. Two of the proposed systems operate in two modes each, making a total of nine systems being tested. The nine systems are divided into the following types of transmission: in-band on-channel (IBOC), in-band adjacent-channel (IBAC), and new bands. The laboratory testing was conducted by the Consumer Electronics Group of the Electronic Industries Association. Subjective assessments of the audio recordings for each of the nine systems was conducted by the Communications Research Center in Ottawa, Canada, under contract to the Electronic Industries Association. The Communications Research Center has the only CCIR-qualified (Consultative Committee for International Radio) audio testing facility in North America. The main goals of the U.S. testing process are to (1) provide technical data to the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) so that it can establish a standard for digital audio receivers and transmitters and (2) provide the receiver and transmitter industries with the proper standards upon which to build their equipment. In addition, the data will be forwarded to the International Telecommunications Union to help in the establishment of international standards for digital audio receivers and transmitters, thus allowing U.S. manufacturers to compete in the world market.

Source record↗

A Probabilistic Software System Attribute Acceptance Paradigm for COTS Software Evaluation

Standard software requirement formats are written from top-down perspectives only, that is, from an ideal notion of a client s needs. Despite the exactness of the standard format, software and system errors in designed systems have abounded. Bad and inadequate requirements have resulted in cost overruns, schedule slips and lost profitability. Commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) software components are even more troublesome than designed systems because they are often provided as is and subsequently delivered with unsubstantiated validation of described capabilities. For COTS software, there needs to be a way to express the client s software needs in a consistent and formal manner using software system attributes derived from software quality standards. Additionally, the format needs to be amenable to software evaluation processes that integrate observable evidence garnered from historical data. This paper presents a paradigm that effectively bridges the gap between what a client desires (top-down) and what has been demonstrated (bottom-up) for COTS software evaluation. The paradigm addresses the specification of needs before the software evaluation is performed and can be used to increase the shared understanding between clients and software evaluators about what is required and what is technically possible.

Morris, A. Terry↗

Calibration and Performance of Juno Radio Science Data

Juno Radio Science measures the frequency of X- and Ka-band radio links between the Juno spacecraft and the Earth-based observing stations of NASA’s Deep Space Network (DSN) in order to determine the gravitational field of Jupiter. The received frequency contains information on the gravitational field and is also perturbed by the propagation environment, including Earth troposphere and ionosphere, electrons in the solar plasma, electrons in the Io Plasma Torus around Jupiter, and instrumental effects on both the spacecraft and the ground electronics. Each of these effects must be calibrated out of the data to ensure an accurate estimation of the Jupiter gravitational field. This work discusses the data processing, calibration, and performance of the frequency measurements. The precision of the frequency measurements average 1.1 mHz (1σ standard deviation at 60 second integration time), or 5.3 microns/sec in units of velocity. The remaining noise sources are primarily from residual troposphere and charged particles. Further improvement could be made in future radio science experiments with the addition of a cross-link and stiffer ground antennas.

Buccino, Dustin R↗

Calibration and Performance of Juno Radio Science Data

Juno Radio Science measures the frequency of X- and Ka-band radio links between the Juno spacecraft and the Earth-based observing stations of NASA’s Deep Space Network (DSN) in order to determine the gravitational field of Jupiter. The received frequency contains information on the gravitational field and is also perturbed by the propagation environment, including Earth troposphere and ionosphere, electrons in the solar plasma, electrons in the Io Plasma Torus around Jupiter, and instrumental effects on both the spacecraft and the ground electronics. Each of these effects must be calibrated out of the data to ensure an accurate estimation of the Jupiter gravitational field. This work discusses the data processing, calibration, and performance of the frequency measurements. The precision of the frequency measurements average 1.1 mHz (1σ standard deviation at 60 second integration time), or 5.3 microns/sec in units of velocity. The remaining noise sources are primarily from residual troposphere and charged particles. Further improvement could be made in future radio science experiments with the addition of a cross-link and stiffer ground antennas.

Oudrhiri, Kamal↗

Recommendations on the Use of Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) Parts for NASA Missions - Phase II

This assessment had two Phases. Phase I captured NASA Centers’ current practices for commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) parts 1 used in spaceflight systems and ground support equipment (available at https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20205011579) [ref. 1]. The Phase II report provides guidance for selecting and using COTS parts in NASA missions. The approaches proposed in this report differ from current agency practices. This top-level executive summary touches on these new approaches for using COTS parts but does not provide the detailed information that is critical in understanding the rationale behind these new approaches. Readers will need to read the entire report to gain full understanding and effectively use the recommendations herein. NASA’s historical approach to selecting and applying parts has been to define certain parts, primarily specific classes of military specification (MIL-SPEC) parts, as “standard”, leaving all others, including COTS parts, as nonstandard. Standard parts typically are used without further testing (“use-as-is”). Nonstandard parts are subjected to initial screening and subsequent lot acceptance testing of representative samples from each procured lot per MIL-SPEC or similar requirements. Decades later, top-tier commercial part manufacturers have evolved significant manufacturing, statistical control, and technological improvements that can now provide parts as reliable or more reliable than MIL-SPEC parts, when used within their datasheet limits. Concurrently, the space science and exploration community’s needs demand technological advances unavailable with MIL-SPEC parts. This ongoing change necessitates using COTS parts for space missions. Properly selected COTS parts in appropriate applications can offer performance and supply availability advantages compared to MIL-SPEC parts. Their utility and demonstrated reliability result from large volumes and automated production and testing processes. However, careful review and a thorough understanding of their specifications (i.e., datasheet limitations) is needed, and verifying that manufacturer specifications and reliability meet space hardware application needs are necessary. This report recommends MIL-SPEC screening and non-radiation-related lot acceptance testing be reduced or eliminated in cases where evidence of sufficient quality and reliability exists for COTS parts. The extent of NASA's insight into COTS manufacturers and the amount and nature of the needed evidence will differ by mission and will likely be driven by a mission's resources and associated risk posture. To facilitate this goal, two new terminologies have been defined and described: “Industry Leading Parts Manufacturer (ILPM)” and “Established COTS parts.” An ILPM is a COTS manufacturer that produces high quality and reliable parts. Some parts produced by ILPMs, defined as Established COTS parts, do not need any additional MIL-SPEC or NASA screening and lot acceptance testing to be used in space applications. This report provides guidance for selecting, procuring, and applying COTS parts and for performing part-, board-, and system-level COTS parts verification. The recommendation to select Established COTS parts from ILPMs will assure those COTS parts will have comparable quality to corresponding MIL-SPEC parts. Selecting, applying, and verifying Established COTS parts from ILPMs requires a holistic team approach, engaging parts engineers, circuit designers, quality, reliability, and systems engineers, procurement specialists, radiation specialists, avionics leads, and program/project managers. A mission-specific approach tailored to a project’s Mission, Environment, Applications and Lifetime (MEAL) [ref. 2] requirements should be developed and approved by program/project managers. Any associated risks should be clearly identified, quantified, mitigated, and/or accepted. Different approaches are recommended according to program/project Risk Classes A, B, C, and D [ref. 3] and human-rated missions [ref. 4]: 1. Recommend Classes A and B and human-rated missions consider a “MIL-SPEC parts- based design” approach. ”MIL-SPEC parts-based design” approach is one in which most parts are MIL-SPEC parts and Established COTS parts from ILPMs are used only when an equivalent MIL-SPEC part does not meet functional or size, weight, and power (SWaP) or performance requirements, or is not available. 2. Recommend Classes D and Sub-D missions consider a “System of COTS” approach. “System of COTS” approach is one which most parts are Established COTS parts from ILPMs. 3. Recommend Class C missions determine which approach is the best for their projects; that is, use either a “MIL-SPEC parts-based design” approach, “System of COTS” approach, or a combined approach utilizing elements of both. This report intends to provide guidance in using COTS parts for NASA missions with risk classifications of A through D and human-rated missions; but it does not address the costs of using COTS parts. Costs of using COTS parts in different NASA mission classes can vary significantly even if the same parts are used in different risk postures, due to differing verification levels needed. The guidance does not distinguish between critical or non-critical systems, and a given project will need to apply the appropriate guidance based on their risk posture. The intended audience of this report are NASA personnel and commercial practitioners who support NASA’s spaceflight missions, including spaceflight program or project managers, parts engineers, parts manufacturers, radiation engineers, avionics engineers, system engineers, circuit design engineers, reliability engineers, safety and mission assurance (SMA) personnel, and parts procurement specialists. The NEPP Program will perform a pathfinder study to explore implementing the guidance in this NESC report. An ILPM verification process is not the same as conventional vendor qualification processes performed according to military standards and specifications. This NESC report intends to provide guidance in utilizing available parts data from ILPM manufacturers for parts assurance assessments needed for NASA missions. The report also captured the current practices from DoD and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in Section 10. Note each DoD and FAA report was provided by the corresponding agencies regarding their practices, which are independent from the NESC recommendations in the report.

Commercial-Off-The-Shelf↗

Multi-disciplinary optimization of aeroservoelastic systems

Efficient analytical and computational tools for simultaneous optimal design of the structural and control components of aeroservoelastic systems are presented. The optimization objective is to achieve aircraft performance requirements and sufficient flutter and control stability margins with a minimal weight penalty and without violating the design constraints. Analytical sensitivity derivatives facilitate an efficient optimization process which allows a relatively large number of design variables. Standard finite element and unsteady aerodynamic routines are used to construct a modal data base. Minimum State aerodynamic approximations and dynamic residualization methods are used to construct a high accuracy, low order aeroservoelastic model. Sensitivity derivatives of flutter dynamic pressure, control stability margins and control effectiveness with respect to structural and control design variables are presented. The performance requirements are utilized by equality constraints which affect the sensitivity derivatives. A gradient-based optimization algorithm is used to minimize an overall cost function. A realistic numerical example of a composite wing with four controls is used to demonstrate the modeling technique, the optimization process, and their accuracy and efficiency.

Karpel, Mordechay↗

Multidisciplinary optimization of aeroservoelastic systems using reduced-size models

Efficient analytical and computational tools for simultaneous optimal design of the structural and control components of aeroservoelastic systems are presented. The optimization objective is to achieve aircraft performance requirements and sufficient flutter and control stability margins with a minimal weight penalty and without violating the design constraints. Analytical sensitivity derivatives facilitate an efficient optimization process which allows a relatively large number of design variables. Standard finite element and unsteady aerodynamic routines are used to construct a modal data base. Minimum State aerodynamic approximations and dynamic residualization methods are used to construct a high accuracy, low order aeroservoelastic model. Sensitivity derivatives of flutter dynamic pressure, control stability margins and control effectiveness with respect to structural and control design variables are presented. The performance requirements are utilized by equality constraints which affect the sensitivity derivatives. A gradient-based optimization algorithm is used to minimize an overall cost function. A realistic numerical example of a composite wing with four controls is used to demonstrate the modeling technique, the optimization process, and their accuracy and efficiency.

Karpel, Mordechay↗

Parameter Sensitivity Study of the Wall Interference Correction System (WICS)

An off-line version of the Wall Interference Correction System (WICS) has been implemented for the "NASA Langley National Transonic Facility. The correction capability is currently restricted to corrections for solid wall interference in the model pitch plane for Mach numbers, less than 0.45 due to a limitation in tunnel calibration data. A study to assess output sensitivity to the aerodynamic parameters of Reynolds number and Mach number was conducted on this code to further ensure quality during the correction process. In addition, this paper includes all investigation into possible correction due to a semispan test technique using a non metric standoff and all improvement to the standard data rejection algorithm.

Walker, Eric L.↗

Land and Atmosphere Near-Real-Time Capability for Earth Observing System

The past decade has seen a rapid increase in availability and usage of near-real-time data from satellite sensors. The EOSDIS (Earth Observing System Data and Information System) was not originally designed to provide data with sufficiently low latency to satisfy the requirements for near-real-time users. The EOS (Earth Observing System) instruments aboard the Terra, Aqua and Aura satellites make global measurements daily, which are processed into higher-level 'standard' products within 8-40 hours of observation and then made available to users, primarily earth science researchers. However, applications users, operational agencies, and even researchers desire EOS products in near-real-time to support research and applications, including numerical weather and climate prediction and forecasting, monitoring of natural hazards, ecological/invasive species, agriculture, air quality, disaster relief and homeland security. These users often need data much sooner than routine science processing allows, usually within 3 hours, and are willing to trade science product quality for timely access. While Direct Broadcast provides more timely access to data, it does not provide global coverage. In 2002, a joint initiative between NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration), NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), and the DOD (Department of Defense) was undertaken to provide data from EOS instruments in near-real-time. The NRTPE (Near Real Time Processing Effort) provided products within 3 hours of observation on a best-effort basis. As the popularity of these near-real-time products and applications grew, multiple near-real-time systems began to spring up such as the Rapid Response System. In recognizing the dependence of customers on this data and the need for highly reliable and timely data access, NASA's Earth Science Division sponsored the Earth Science Data and Information System Project (ESDIS)-led development of a new near-real-time system called LANCE (Land, Atmosphere Near-Real-Time Capability for EOS) in 2009. LANCE consists of special processing elements, co-located with selected EOSDIS data centers and processing facilities. A primary goal of LANCE is to bring multiple near-real-time systems under one umbrella, offering commonality in data access, quality control, and latency. LANCE now processes and distributes data from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS), Atmospheric Infrared Sounder (AIRS), Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer Earth Observing System (AMSR-E), Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS) and Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI) instruments within 3 hours of satellite observation. The Rapid Response System and the Fire Information for Resource Management System (FIRMS) capabilities will be incorporated into LANCE in 2011. LANCE maintains a central website to facilitate easy access to data and user services. LANCE products are extensively tested and compared with science products before being made available to users. Each element also plans to implement redundant network, power and server infrastructure to ensure high availability of data and services. Through the user registration system, users are informed of any data outages and when new products or services will be available for access. Building on a significant investment by NASA in developing science algorithms and products, LANCE creates products that have a demonstrated utility for applications requiring near-real-time data. From lower level data products such as calibrated geolocated radiances to higher-level products such as sea ice extent, snow cover, and cloud cover, users have integrated LANCE data into forecast models and decision support systems. The table above shows the current near-real-time product categories by instrument. The ESDIS Project continues to improve the LANCE system and use the experience gained through practice to seek adjustments to improve the quality and performance of the system. For example, anGC-compliant Web Map Service (WMS) will be added shortly that will allow users to download geo-referenced MODIS images for arbitrary bounding boxes. Further, an OGC-compliant Web Coverage Service (WCS) will be added later this year that will expedite user access to arbitrary data subsets or re-formatted products. AIRS images are now served through WMS and available in multiple formats (PNG, GeoTIFF, KMZ). NASA has established a LANCE User Working Group to steer the development of the system and create a forum for sharing ideas and experiences that are expected to further improve the LANCE capabilities. The LANCE system has proved a success by satisfying the growing needs of the applications and operational communities for land and atmosphere data in near-real-time. NASA's Earth Sciences Division was able to leverage existing science research capabilities to provide the near-real-time community with products and imagery that support monitoring of disasters in a timely manner.

Murphy, Kevin J.↗

The NASA Spacecraft Transponding Modem

A new deep space transponder is being developed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory for NASA. The Spacecraft Transponding Modem (STM) implements the standard transponder functions and the channel service functions that have previously resided in spacecraft Command/Data Subsystems. The STM uses custom ASICs, MMICs, and MCMs to reduce the active device parts count to 70, mass to I kg, and volume to 524 cc. The first STMs will be flown on missions launching in the 2003 time frame. The STM tracks an X-band uplink signal and provides both X-band and Ka-band downlinks, either coherent or non-coherent with the uplink. A NASA standard Command Detector Unit is integrated into the STM, along with a codeblock processor and a hardware command decoder. The decoded command codeblocks are output to the spacecraft command/data subsystem. Virtual Channel 0 (VC-0) (hardware) commands are processed and output as critical controller (CRC) commands. Downlink telemetry is received from the spacecraft data subsystem as telemetry frames. The STM provides the following downlink coding options: the standard CCSDS (7-1/2) convolutional coding, ReedSolomon coding with interleave depths one and five, (15-1/6) convolutional coding, and Turbo coding with rates 1/3 and 1/6. The downlink symbol rates can be linearly ramped to match the G/T curve of the receiving station, providing up to a 1 dB increase in data return. Data rates range from 5 bits per second (bps) to 24 Mbps, with three modulation modes provided: modulated subcarrier (3 different frequencies provided), biphase-L modulated direct on carrier, and Offset QPSK. Also, the capability to generate one of four non-harmonically related telemetry beacon tones is provided, to allow for a simple spacecraft status monitoring scheme for cruise phases of missions. Three ranging modes are provided: standard turn around ranging, regenerative pseudo-noise (PN) ranging, and Differential One-way Ranging (DOR) tones. The regenerative ranging provides the capability of increasing the ground received ranging SNR by up to 30 dB. Two different avionics interfaces to the command/data subsystem's data bus are provided: a MIL STD 1553B bus or an industry standard PCI interface. Digital interfaces provide the capability to control antenna selection (e.g., switching between high gain and low gain antennas) and antenna pointing (for future steered Ka-band antennas).

Berner, Jeff B.↗

Applying Registry Services to Spaceflight Technologies to Aid in the Assignment of Assigned Numbers to Disparate Systems and Their Technologies to Further Enable Interoperability

To date very little effort has been made to provide interoperability between various space agency projects. To effectively get to the Moon and beyond systems must interoperate. To provide interoperability, standardization and registries of various technologies will be required. These registries will be created as they relate to space flight. With the new NASA Moon/Mars initiative a requirement to standardize and control the naming conventions of very disparate systems and technologies are emerging. The need to provide numbering to the many processes, schemas, vehicles, robots, space suits and technologies (e.g. versions), to name a few, in the highly complex Constellation Initiative is imperative. The number of corporations, developer personnel, system interfaces, people interfaces will require standardization and registries on a scale not currently envisioned. It would only take one exception (stove piped system development) to weaken, if not, destroy interoperability. To start, a standardized registry process must be defined that allows many differing engineers, organizations and operators the ability to easily access disparate registry information across numerous technological and scientific disciplines. Once registries are standardized the need to provide registry support in terms of setup and operations, resolution of conflicts between registries and other issues will need to be addressed. Registries should not be confused with repositories. No end user data is "stored" in a registry nor is it a configuration control system. Once a registry standard is created and approved, the technologies that should be registered must be identified and prioritized. In this paper, we will identify and define a registry process that is compatible with the Constellation Initiative and other non related space activities and organizations. We will then identify and define the various technologies that should use a registry to provide interoperability. The first set of technologies will be those that are currently in need of expansion namely the assignment of satellite designations and the process which controls assignments. Second, we will analyze the technologies currently standardized under the Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) banner. Third, we will analyze the current CCSDS working group and birds of a feather activities to ascertain registry requirements. Lastly, we will identify technologies that are either currently under the auspices of another

Bradford, Robert N.↗

Applying Registry Services to Spaceflight Technologies to Aid in the Assignment of Assigned Numbers to Disparate Systems and their Technologies to Further Enable Interoperability

To date very little effort has been made to provide interoperability between various space agency projects. To effectively get to the Moon and beyond systems must interoperate. To provide interoperability, standardization and registries of various technologies will be required. These registries will be created as they relate to space flight. With the new NASA Moon/Mars initiative, a requirement to standardize and control the naming conventions of very disparate systems and technologies is emerging. The need to provide numbering to the many processes, schemas, vehicles, robots, space suits and technologies (e.g. versions), to name a few, in the highly complex Constellation initiative is imperative. The number of corporations, developer personnel, system interfaces, people interfaces will require standardization and registries on a scale not currently envisioned. It would only take one exception (stove piped system development) to weaken, if not, destroy interoperability. To start, a standardized registry process must be defined that allows many differing engineers, organizations and operators the ability to easily access disparate registry information across numerous technological and scientific disciplines. Once registries are standardized the need to provide registry support in terms of setup and operations, resolution of conflicts between registries and other issues will need to be addressed. Registries should not be confused with repositories. No end user data is "stored" in a registry nor is it a configuration control system. Once a registry standard is created and approved, the technologies that should be registered must be identified and prioritized. In this paper, we will identify and define a registry process that is compatible with the Constellation initiative and other non related space activities and organizations. We will then identify and define the various technologies that should use a registry to provide interoperability. The first set of technologies will be those that are currently in need of expansion namely the assignment of satellite designations and the process which controls assignments. Second, we will analyze the technologies currently standardized under the Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) banner. Third, we will analyze the current CCSDS working group and Birds of a Feather (BoF) activities to ascertain registry requirements. Lastly, we will identify technologies that are either currently under the auspices of another standards body or technologies that are currently not standardized. For activities one through three, we will provide the analysis by either discipline or technology with rationale, identification and brief description of requirements and precedence. For activity four, we will provide a list of current standards bodies e.g. IETF and a list of potential candidates.

Bradford, Robert N.↗

Packet telemetry - A possible standard protocol for spacecraft data handling

Packetized telemetry-handling offers an opportunity to standardize major portions of the spacecraft-to-ground interface for future NASA missions. An end-to-end packet transport protocol is proposed which enables delivery of telemetry data from a remote space sensor to a ground-based user with virtually no project-unique intermediate processing. This paper reviews the possibility of creating a single telemetry format standard for both deep-space and near-earth missions. The proposed standard addresses the greatest NASA problem of the coming decade - cost - by allowing telemetry streams from many inflight spacecraft to be handled on the ground by common, simple, multimission processing elements.

Greenberg, E.↗