SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Missions”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 487 records · Page 27

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2014

Calculation of Operations Efficiency Factors for Mars Surface Missions

The duration of a mission--and subsequently, the minimum spacecraft lifetime--is a key component in designing the capabilities of a spacecraft during mission formulation. However, determining the duration is not simply a function of how long it will take the spacecraft to execute the activities needed to achieve mission objectives. Instead, the effects of the interaction between the spacecraft and ground operators must also be taken into account. This paper describes a method, using "operations efficiency factors", to account for these effects for Mars surface missions. Typically, this level of analysis has not been performed until much later in the mission development cycle, and has not been able to influence mission or spacecraft design. Further, the notion of moving to sustainable operations during Prime Mission--and the effect that change would have on operations productivity and mission objective choices--has not been encountered until the most recent rover missions (MSL, the (now-cancelled) joint NASA-ESA 2018 Mars rover, and the proposed rover for Mars 2020). Since MSL had a single control center and sun-synchronous relay assets (like MER), estimates of productivity derived from MER prime and extended missions were used. However, Mars 2018's anticipated complexity (there would have been control centers in California and Italy, and a non-sun-synchronous relay asset) required the development of an explicit model of operations efficiency that could handle these complexities. In the case of the proposed Mars 2018 mission, the model was employed to assess the mission return of competing operations concepts, and as an input to component lifetime requirements. In this paper we provide examples of how to calculate the operations efficiency factor for a given operational configuration, and how to apply the factors to surface mission scenarios. This model can be applied to future missions to enable early effective trades between operations design, science mission planning, and spacecraft design.

Laubach, Sharon↗

NASA NTRS2017

A New Architecture for Visualization: Open Mission Control Technologies

Open Mission Control Technologies (MCT) is a new architecture for visualisation of mission data. Driven by requirements for new mission capabilities, including distributed mission operations, access to data anywhere, customization by users, synthesis of multiple data sources, and flexibility for multi-mission adaptation, Open MCT provides users with an integrated customizable environment. Developed at NASAs Ames Research Center (ARC), in collaboration with NASAs Advanced Multimission Operations System (AMMOS) and NASAs Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), Open MCT is getting its first mission use on the Jason 3 Mission, and is also available in the testbed for the Mars 2020 Rover and for development use for NASAs Resource Prospector Lunar Rover. The open source nature of the project provides for use outside of space missions, including open source contributions from a community of users. The defining features of Open MCT for mission users are data integration, end user composition and multiple views. Data integration provides access to mission data across domains in one place, making data such as activities, timelines, telemetry, imagery, event timers and procedures available in one place, without application switching. End user composition provides users with layouts, which act as a canvas to assemble visualisations. Multiple views provide the capability to view the same data in different ways, with live switching of data views in place. Open MCT is browser based, and works on the desktop as well as tablets and phones, providing access to data anywhere. An early use case for mobile data access took place on the Resource Prospector (RP) Mission Distributed Operations Test, in which rover engineers in the field were able to view telemetry on their phones. We envision this capability providing decision support to on console operators from off duty personnel. The plug-in architecture also allows for adaptation for different mission capabilities. Different data types and capabilities may be added or removed using plugins. An API provides a means to write new capabilities and to create data adaptors. Data plugins exist for mission data sources for NASA missions. Adaptors have been written by international and commercial users. Open MCT is open source. Open source enables collaborative development across organizations and also makes the product available outside of the space community, providing a potential source of usage and ideas to drive product design and development. The combination of open source with an Apache 2 license, and distribution on GitHub, has enabled an active community of users and contributors. The spectrum of users for Open MCT is, to our knowledge, unprecedented for mission software. In addition to our NASA users, we have, through open source, had users and inquires on projects ranging from Internet of Things, to radio hobbyists, to farming projects. We have an active community of contributors, enabling a flow of ideas inside and outside of the space community.

Trimble, Jay↗

NASA NTRS2022

NASA Utilization of Space Nuclear Systems for Robotic and Human Exploration Missions: Response to EO 13972: Promoting Small Nuclear Reactors for National Defense and Space Exploration

Space Nuclear Systems (SNS) technology development offers a wide range of capabilities to support NASA’s current and future missions. Executive Order (EO) 13972, “Promoting Small Modular Reactors for National Defense and Space Exploration” [1], issued 5 January 2021, directs NASA to define requirements for NASA utilization of nuclear energy systems for human and robotic exploration missions through 2040 and analyze the costs and benefits of such requirements.” Although it is premature to define requirements and cost for future exploration missions that have not yet been formulated, this report describes planned objectives and missions by 2040 that are enabled or enhanced by nuclear systems while taking into account a number of unique considerations for nuclear energy in the space environment. Nuclear energy systems are enabling for space missions and critical capabilities where conventional forms of energy production are impractical or impossible due to mass constraints, mission duration, or distance from the Sun. Space nuclear technologies available or in development for use by 2040 utilize radioisotope decay or nuclear fission and fall into three categories: heat, power, and propulsion. Current applications utilize radioisotope power systems that provide consistent and reliable performance in the sub-kilowatt power range. More advanced SNS can enable new mission objectives where high energy density solutions are critical, or where access to solar solutions is prohibitive. Higher power radioisotope and fission systems are under development within NASA for a wide variety of human exploration and science mission applications. Planned missions designed to use radioisotope systems include Dragonfly, a rotorcraft that will explore the surface of Titan, and Persephone, a mission concept for a Pluto orbiter. Nuclear fission systems have the key advantage of providing significantly higher power, lower mass solutions from tens to even thousands of kilowatts. Fission power is enabling to a sustained human presence on the Moon and developing a robust lunar economy. Fission propulsion is enabling for missions within and beyond cis-lunar space. This report examines NASA-envisioned mission applications and associated performance needs for SNS over the next twenty years leading to 2040 along with the unique technical considerations posed by space nuclear technology development. This includes engineering and operational logistics for ground handling, thermal management, survival of the space environment, operational safety, power requirements, and service longevity. Safety to the public, the NASA work force, and agency assets remains a top priority for NASA and particular attention is given to this aspect in the design, hardware assembly, ground operation, launch, and mission operation of an SNS. NASA relies on the Department of Energy as nuclear authority and its legacy of rigorous safety procedures as standards for ground development, test, transportation, and launch site operation. The principal concern is preventing unintended radiological release to the public or environment. Radioisotope system experience has established processes, including ground operation, transportation, and launch, that are considered directly applicable to emerging fission systems; however, fission systems have unique design needs that impact the safety and performance requirements. High efficiency power conversion from both fission and radioisotope systems requires high operating temperatures necessitating both passive and active thermal management to maintain safe and nominal operating conditions. Effective cooling and waste heat rejection have special considerations for space applications, whether in zero-g or reduced gravity. Fluid and heat transfer within the reactor system is not anticipated to be impacted by reduced or zero-g environments. Cryogenic working fluids and propellant supplies utilized in some space nuclear applications will need low mass, high capacity cryocoolers to meet the long-term storage and near zero-boiloff needs. Integrated, high power density SNS capable of being packaged in a single vehicle is a key consideration for NASA. Due to concerns for complexity and reliability, in space reactor assembly and reactor refueling are not current design considerations. Expanding into a new era for space exploration depends on mass-efficient, high-energy solutions to power deep-space vehicles, operate in harsh environments, and increase mission flexibility. NASA nuclear technology investments are targeting power for surface operations and propulsion for fast-transit, deep-space missions, all with the ability to reliably operate without the need for repair or refueling. NASA’s goals, enabled by nuclear technologies, provide for exciting advances in scientific objectives and human exploration, ushering in a new space age that enables a human presence on bodies beyond our Earth.

nuclear↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Developing Mission Segment-Specific Clinical Data for Impact

Space exploration missions represent a significant future objective for NASA’s human spaceflight operations for the near and long term. By operating missions during longer periods and over further distances, NASA’s mission planning models, hardware systems, and medical capabilities will be stretched beyond their original design constraints. The necessity of medical training and medical supply manifesting for such missions is likely to become incredibly intricate as trade-space analysis is performed over varying mission profiles. For this purpose, IMPACT was created to extend and improve the Integrated Medical Model (IMM) which is used for International Space Station (ISS) medical predications and consists of a probabilistic risk assessment tool that simulates missions to calculate risks given the constraints on crew complement, mission duration and activity (such as Extravehicular Activities), power, communication, mass, volume, and evacuation consideration as well as to predict mission outcomes. Currently, the medical evidence used to support IMPACT remains static, addressing risks of a medical condition and the impacts of the condition during spaceflight only, but is only calculated for a small number of mission parameters. Extended missions will consist of new and varied living environments, changing gravitational loads, and dynamic working requirements. Medical risks are not typically constant but will change depending upon the physical and physiological environment of the body during all phases of a mission. Risks are likely to shift during different mission segments, and understanding how components of a mission profile change risks will assist mission planners to increase chances for mission success.

Christopher Zahner↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Gateway Program Safety and Mission Assurance Integration - the Future of Safe Deep Space Human Exploration

As a foundational element of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Artemis Campaign, the Gateway is an incrementally built cislunar spacecraft that will serve as a platform for deep space human exploration, science, and technology demonstration. The Gateway will be a unifying catalyst for international partners around the world to establish sustained deep space scientific investigations, lunar surface access, and missions to Mars. As human exploration moves farther away from Earth, spacecraft designs must prioritize and optimize mass and volume allocations, while minimizing human and spacecraft risk. To accomplish this objective, the Gateway Program Safety and Mission Assurance functions develop, implement, and ensure compliance with requirements, in concert with the accurate characterization and transparent communication of residual hazard risks, for integrated safety, reliability and maintainability and quality assurance. Safety and Mission Assurance was a key contributor during Gateway program pre-formulation and formulation activities where safety and reliability analysis was embedded in the Gateway Systems Engineering and Integration team. During these early program stages, a preliminary Gateway Integrated Hazard Analysis and Preliminary Gateway Probabilistic Risk Assessment assisted in Gateway architectural and operational definition as part of a risk-informed design process. As the deep space architecture has matured, the integrated Safety and Mission Assurance analyses have matured, new safety review processes have been developed, and requirements have been refined to ensure compliance with integrated safety and mission assurance objectives. The Gateway Program is currently concluding the preliminary design review informed milestone, where the primary objectives included: - Ensured completeness and consistency of the preliminary design, including the meeting of all requirements within appropriate margins and acceptable risk posture. - Identification of any major issues moving forward to the Critical Design phase. At this milestone, Safety and Mission Assurance provided numerous products, including Gateway Top Risks and Risk Mitigation Plans, updated integrated hazard analyses, updated probabilistic risk assessment, Crew Survival Analysis Report, and updated Safety and Mission Assurance Requirements and Plans. These products provide a many-faceted perspective on the inherent risk and available mitigations involved in flying the current proposed vehicle design and anticipated stack configurations. In addition, Safety and Mission Assurance identified top technical, process and workforce concerns to be addressed as the program progresses toward the critical design phase. This paper will detail the evolution of the Gateway Program Safety and Mission Assurance integration functions, provide its current status and lessons learned for future human spaceflight programs. Throughout this paper the key tenets of the Gateway Program Safety and Mission Assurance will be discussed: - Application of a risk-informed approach to identify and mitigate areas of highest risk. - Leverage of valuable processes and lessons learned from earlier spaceflight programs. - Development of Safety and Mission Assurance products to inform design risk trades. - Utilization of common Safety and Mission Assurance practices to identify safety risks for multiple perspectives: top-down, bottom-up, and across lines of integration. - Approval of safety hazards at the appropriate level of authority, keeping most deliberation closest to design expertise and elevating risks of greatest concern for program-level consideration. - Championing of Safety and Mission Assurance processes and forums to foster a pervasive safety culture that is transparent, inclusive, and collaborative between all partners. These tenets have allowed the Gateway Safety and Mission Assurance function to play a key role in optimized vehicle design evolution, and early identification and mitigation of Gateway program and Artemis mission risk.

Helen Vaccaro↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling Logistics and Supportability for Crewed Missions Beyond Low Earth Orbit

NASA’s future missions aim to establish a sustained human presence on the lunar surface and send humans to Mars. These missions will send crews farther from home than previous missions, limiting the opportunities for resupply missions. Additionally, the use of multiple launches and reusable elements will increase mission and campaign complexity. Logistics and supportability analysis evaluates the link between mission and system characteristics and key metrics such as logistics and spares mass and volume, crew time, and risk. As missions become increasingly complex and crews are logistically isolated for longer periods of time, logistics and supportability will become more powerful drivers of risk and cost and, therefore, more important considerations during system and mission development. When logistics and supportability are considered from the beginning of system and mission development, opportunities arise to create more efficient, lower-risk systems. Design choices made without detailed consideration of logistics and supportability have the potential to result in greater risks and increased costs as all options may not have been analyzed. This paper provides an overview of a methodology used for space mission logistics and supportability analysis, including key metrics, assumptions, and required inputs. Example applications of this methodology to explore the impacts of system architecture, dormancy, and synergies between lunar and Mars missions are also presented. Conducting these holistic analyses enables informed decision-making for mission planning and system design, which can help mitigate the risk of loss of mission, vehicle, or crew. Using the knowledge of historical missions, experiences gained on the lunar surface, and logistics and supportability analyses, NASA can examine and optimize supportability characteristics for safer and more effective operations for future lunar and Mars missions.

Supportability↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling Logistics and Supportability for Crewed Missions Beyond Low Earth Orbit

Supportability↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

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↗

NASA NTRS2000

Solar Sail Trajectories for Solar Polar and Heliopause Missions

Over the last several years, interest in a more vigorous space exploration program has renewed interest in the use of solar sails for the more demanding space missions. Solar sail is eminently suited for some of the higher energy missions since no fuel is consumed and the only criteria is that of the total time required to perform a particular mission. Although solar sail missions to planets and small bodies have been examined previously, and reported in the literature' classes of space missions with no well defined target body have received little attention. These Space Physics missions include some with extremely high energy requirements. Not only are these missions difficult, if not impractical, to accomplish with conventional chemical propulsion spacecraft, but they are also difficult to perform in the near future using projected electric-propulsion systems. Solar sail trajectories for two of the high energy Space Physics missions, a Solar Polar mission and a Heliopause mission, are examined in this paper. The object of the Solar Polar mission is to place 'a payload into a short period orbit around the Sun at a 90 degree inclination to either the ecliptic plane or the equatorial plane of the sun. A forerunner for this type of mission was the Ulysses spacecraft which used a gravity assist of Jupiter to place the spacecraft into a 90 degree inclination orbit around the Sun with a perihelion distance of around .55 AU. The orbital period for the Ulysses mission was around 5 years however, and future Solar Polar missions require many observational passes over the pole of the Sun each year thus implying a significantly shorter orbit period than that for Ulysses.

Sauer, Carl G., Jr.↗

NASA NTRS1994

(abstract) A Low-Cost Mission to 2060 Chiron Based on the Pluto Fast Flyby

The Pluto Fast Flyby-based mission to Chiron described in this paper is a low cost, scientifically rewarding, focused mission in the outer solar system. The proposed mission will make a flyby of 2060 Chiron, an active 'comet' with over 10(sup 4) times the mass of Halley, and an eccentric, Saturn-crossing orbit which ranges from 8.5 to 19 AU. This mission concept achieves the flyby 4.2 years after launch on a direct trajectory from Earth, is independent of Jupiter launch windows, and fits within Discovery cost guidelines. This mission offers the scientific opportunity to examine a class of object left unsampled by the trail-blazing Mariners, Pioneers, Voyagers, and missions to Halley. Spacecraft reconnaissance of Chiron addresses unique objectives relating to cometary science, other small bodies, the structure of quasi-bound atmospheres on modest-sized bodies, and the origin of primitive bodies and the giant planets. Owing to Chiron's large size (180<D<370 km), unique nature, and unusual orbit, this mission is likely to draw significant public interest. As described by COMPLEX, the SSEC, and later the SSES, flybys are the appropriate scale missions for initial reconnaissance missions. Carrying three sophisticated instruments, the proposed flyby will return critical data about Chiron's size, shape, polar obliquity, atmosphere, surface morphology, surface composition, internal structure, surface activity (including the nature of Chiron's outbursts), and origin. Engineering analysis indicates that the spacecraft is capable of navigating to and encountering Chiron at close approach distances of less than 5 000 km, well inside the 50 000 to 150 000 km coma, and perhaps within the collisional chemistry zone of the coma. The low cost of the proposed Chiron mission is based on the opportunity to use the planned Pluto Flyby spare spacecraft and a Proton Expendable Launch Vehicle (ELV) (the pluto spacecraft is being designed to be compatible with a Proton launch). Backup launch opportunities on Delta II and Atlas ELVs are available. The Pluto Fast Flyby mission plans to develop a low cost ($150M), lightweight (<150 kg) outer planet spacecraft which is well suited to flyby reconnaissance in the outer solar system. This Chiron flyby mission is designed to leverage SSED's Pluto spacecraft investment into a scientifically valuable successor mission within the Discovery cost cap. Taking advantage of the spare spacecraft, we estimate the Discovery Chiron intercept mission can be launched for less than $100 M. We believe this makes a highly attractive proposal, which maintains US presence and leadership in the study of the outer solar system, and enables the first-time exploration of a wholly new class of planetary target, an outer solar system planetesimal.

2060 Chiron planetesimal flyby Pluto Fast Flyby sp↗

NASA NTRS2002

INTEGRITY - Integrated Human Exploration Mission Simulation Facility

It is proposed to develop a high-fidelity ground facility to carry out long-duration human exploration mission simulations. These would not be merely computer simulations - they would in fact comprise a series of actual missions that just happen to stay on earth. These missions would include all elements of an actual mission, using actual technologies that would be used for the real mission. These missions would also include such elements as extravehicular activities, robotic systems, telepresence and teleoperation, surface drilling technology-all using a simulated planetary landscape. A sequence of missions would be defined that get progressively longer and more robust, perhaps a series of five or six missions over a span of 10 to 15 years ranging in duration from 180 days up to 1000 days. This high-fidelity ground facility would operate hand-in-hand with a host of other terrestrial analog sites such as the Antarctic, Haughton Crater, and the Arizona desert. Of course, all of these analog mission simulations will be conducted here on earth in 1-g, and NASA will still need the Shuttle and ISS to carry out all the microgravity and hypogravity science experiments and technology validations. The proposed missions would have sufficient definition such that definitive requirements could be derived from them to serve as direction for all the program elements of the mission. Additionally, specific milestones would be established for the "launch" date of each mission so that R&D programs would have both good requirements and solid milestones from which to .build their implementation plans. Mission aspects that could not be directly incorporated into the ground facility would be simulated via software. New management techniques would be developed for evaluation in this ground test facility program. These new techniques would have embedded metrics which would allow them to be continuously evaluated and adjusted so that by the time the sequence of missions is completed, the best management techniques will have been developed, implemented, and validated. A trained cadre of managers experienced with a large, complex program would then be available.

Henninger, Donald L.↗

NASA NTRS2012

NASA's Lunar Polar Ice Prospector, RESOLVE: Mission Rehearsal in Apollo Valley

After the completion of the Apollo Program, space agencies didn't visit the moon for many years. But then in the 90's, the Clementine and Lunar Prospector missions returned and showed evidence of water ice at the poles. Then in 2009 the Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite indisputably showed that the Cabeus crater contained water ice and other useful volatiles. Furthermore, instruments aboard the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) show evidence that the water ice may also be present in areas that receive several days of continuous sunlight each month. However, before we can factor this resource into our mission designs, we must understand the distribution and quantity of ice or other volatiles at the poles and whether it can be reasonably harvested for use as propellant or mission consumables. NASA, in partnership with the Canadian Space Agency (CSA), has been developing a payload to answer these questions. The payload is named RESOLVE. RESOLVE is on a development path that will deliver a tested flight design by the end of 2014. The team has developed a Design Reference Mission using LRO data that has RESOLVE landing near Cabeus Crater in May of2016. One of the toughest obstacles for RESOLVE's solar powered mission is its tight timeline. RESOLVE must be able to complete its objectives in the 5-7 days of available sunlight. The RESOLVE team must be able to work around obstacles to the mission timeline in real time. They can't afford to take a day off to replan as other planetary missions have done. To insure that this mission can be executed as planned, a prototype version of RESOLVE was developed this year and tested at a lunar analog site on Hawaii, known as Apollo Valley, which was once used to train the Apollo astronauts. The RESOLVE team planned the mission with the same type of orbital imagery that would be available from LRO. The simulation team prepositioned a Lander in Apollo Valley with RESOLVE on top mounted on its CSA rover. Then the mission simulation began as the operations team's consoles came alive with data and images. They executed the mission just like the real mission with lunar communications delays and limited bandwidth and a realistic remote mission control room. This paper will describe the RESOLVE payload in detail and describe the results of the mission simulation in Hawaii.

Larson, William E.↗

NASA NTRS2014

Mars Sample Return Using Commercial Capabilities: Mission Architecture Overview

Mars Sample Return (MSR) is the highest priority science mission for the next decade as recommended by the recent Decadal Survey of Planetary Science. This paper presents an overview of a feasibility study for an MSR mission. The objective of the study was to determine whether emerging commercial capabilities can be used to reduce the number of mission systems and launches required to return the samples, with the goal of reducing mission cost. We report the feasibility of a complete and closed MSR mission design using the following scenario that covers three synodic launch opportunities, beginning with the 2022 opportunity: A Falcon Heavy injects a SpaceX Red Dragon capsule and trunk onto a Trans Mars Injection (TMI) trajectory. The capsule is modified to carry all the hardware needed to return samples collected on Mars including a Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV), an Earth Return Vehicle (ERV), and hardware to transfer a sample collected in a previously landed rover mission to the ERV. The Red Dragon descends to land on the surface of Mars using Super Sonic Retro Propulsion (SSRP). After previously collected samples are transferred to the ERV, the single-stage MAV launches the ERV from the surface of Mars. The MAV uses a storable liquid bi-propellant propulsion system to deliver the ERV to a Mars phasing orbit. After a brief phasing period, the ERV, which also uses a storable bi-propellant system, performs a Trans Earth Injection (TEI) burn. Upon arrival at Earth, the ERV performs Earth and lunar swing-bys and is placed into a lunar trailing circular orbit - an Earth orbit, at lunar distance. A later mission, using Dragon and launched by a Falcon Heavy, performs a rendezvous with the ERV in the lunar trailing orbit, retrieves the sample container and breaks the chain of contact with Mars by transferring the sample into a sterile and secure container. With the sample contained, the retrieving spacecraft makes a controlled Earth re-entry preventing any unintended release of pristine martian materials into the Earth's biosphere. The analysis methods employed standard and specialized aerospace engineering tools. Mission system elements were analyzed with either direct techniques or by using parametric mass estimating relationships (MERs). The architecture was iterated until overall mission convergence was achieved on at least one path. Subsystems analyzed in this study include support structures, power system, nose fairing, thermal insulation, actuation devices, MAV exhaust venting, and GN&C. Best practice application of loads, mass growth contingencies, and resource margins were used. For Falcon Heavy capabilities and Dragon subsystems we utilized publically available data from SpaceX, published analyses from other sources, as well as our own engineering and aerodynamic estimates. Earth Launch mass is under 11 mt, which is within the estimated capability of a Falcon Heavy, with margin. Total entry masses between 7 and 10 mt were considered with closure occurring between 9 and 10 mt. Propellant mass fractions for each major phase of the EDL - Entry, Terminal Descent, and Hazard Avoidance - have been derived. An assessment of the effect of the entry conditions on the thermal protection system (TPS), currently in use for Dragon missions, shows no significant stressors. A useful payload mass of 2.0 mt is provided and includes mass growth allowances for the MAV, the ERV, and mission unique equipment. We also report options for the MAV and ERV, including propulsion systems, crewed versus robotic retrieval mission, as well as direct Earth entry. International planetary protection policies as well as verifiable means of compliance will have a large impact on any MSR mission design. We identify areas within our architecture where such impacts occur. We also describe preliminary compliance measures that will be the subject of future work. This work shows that emerging commercial capabilities as well as new methodologies can be used to efficiently support an important planetary science objective. The work also has applications for human exploration missions that use propulsive EDL techniques

Red Dragon↗

NASA NTRS2014

Cost Analysis in a Multi-Mission Operations Environment

Spacecraft control centers have evolved from dedicated, single-mission or single mission-type support to multi-mission, service-oriented support for operating a variety of mission types. At the same time, available money for projects is shrinking and competition for new missions is increasing. These factors drive the need for an accurate and flexible model to support estimating service costs for new or extended missions; the cost model in turn drives the need for an accurate and efficient approach to service cost analysis. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Huntsville Operations Support Center (HOSC) at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) provides operations services to a variety of customers around the world. HOSC customers range from launch vehicle test flights; to International Space Station (ISS) payloads; to small, short duration missions; and has included long duration flagship missions. The HOSC recently completed a detailed analysis of service costs as part of the development of a complete service cost model. The cost analysis process required the team to address a number of issues. One of the primary issues involves the difficulty of reverse engineering individual mission costs in a highly efficient multi-mission environment, along with a related issue of the value of detailed metrics or data to the cost model versus the cost of obtaining accurate data. Another concern is the difficulty of balancing costs between missions of different types and size and extrapolating costs to different mission types. The cost analysis also had to address issues relating to providing shared, cloud-like services in a government environment, and then assigning an uncertainty or risk factor to cost estimates that are based on current technology, but will be executed using future technology. Finally the cost analysis needed to consider how to validate the resulting cost models taking into account the non-homogeneous nature of the available cost data and the decreasing flight rate. This paper presents the issues encountered during the HOSC cost analysis process, and the associated lessons learned. These lessons can be used when planning for a new multi-mission operations center or in the transformation from a dedicated control center to multi-center operations, as an aid in defining processes that support future cost analysis and estimation. The lessons can also be used by mature service-oriented, multi-mission control centers to streamline or refine their cost analysis process.

Felton, Larry↗

NASA NTRS2014

Implementation Options for the PROPEL Electrodynamic Tether Demonstration Mission

The PROPEL ("Propulsion using Electrodynamics") flight demonstration mission concept will demonstrate the use of an electrodynamic tether (EDT) for generating thrust, which will allow the propulsion system to overcome the limitations of the rocket equation. The mission concept has been developed by a team of government, industry, and academia partners led by NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). PROPEL is being designed for versatility of the EDT system with multiple end users in mind and to be flexible with respect to platform. Previously, we reported on a comprehensive mission design for PROPEL with a mission duration of six months or longer with multiple mission goals including demonstration of significant boost, deboost, inclination change, and drag make-up activities. To explore a range of possible configurations, primarily driven by cost considerations, other mission concept designs have been pursued. In partnership with the NASA's Office of Chief Technologist (OCT) Game Changing Program, NASA MSFC Leadership, and the MSFC Advanced Concepts Office, a mission concept design was developed for a near-term EDT propulsion flight validation mission. The Electrodynamic Tether Propulsion Study (ETPS) defined an EDT propulsion system capable of very large delta-V for use on future missions developed by NASA, DoD, and commercial customers. To demonstrate the feasibility of an ETPS, the study focused on a space demonstration mission concept design with configuration of a pair of tethered satellite busses, one of which is the Japanese H-II Transfer Vehicle (HTV). The HTV would fly its standard ISS resupply mission. When resupply mission is complete, the ISS reconfigures and releases the HTV to perform the EDT experiment at safe orbital altitudes below the ISS. Though the focus of this particular mission concept design addresses a scenario involving the HTV or a similar vehicle, the propulsion system's capability is relevant to a number of applications, as noted above. The ETPS builds on prior work on long-life, failure-resistant, conducting tethers and includes an instrument suite with demonstrated heritage capable of performing necessary diagnostics to measure performance against predictions for a given system size (to be determined) and boost rate. Mission designs in other configurations and launch vehicle options are being developed such that the system can be demonstration should a flight opportunity be identified. We will report on past and ongoing implementation options for PROPEL.

Bilen, Sven G.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Systems Engineering Lessons Learned for Class D Missions

One of NASA's goals within human exploration is to determine how to get humans to Mars safely and to live and work on the Martian surface. To accomplish this goal, several smaller missions act as stepping-stones to the larger end goal. NASA uses these smaller missions to develop new technologies and learn about how to survive outside of Low Earth Orbit for long periods. Additionally, keeping a cadence of these missions allows the team to maintain proficiency in the complex art of bringing spacecraft to fruition. Many of these smaller missions are robotic in nature and have smaller timescales, whereas there are others that involve crew and have longer mission timelines. Given the timelines associated with these various missions, different levels of risk and rigor need to be implemented to be more in line with what is appropriate for the mission. Thus, NASA has four different classifications that range from Class A to Class D based on the mission details. One of these projects is the Resource Prospector (RP) Mission, which is a multi-center and multi-institution collaborative project to search for volatiles in the polar regions of the Moon. The RP mission is classified as a Class D mission and as such, has the opportunity to more tightly manage, and therefore accept, greater levels of risk. The requirements for Class D missions were at the forefront of the design and thus presented unique challenges in vehicle development and systems engineering processes. This paper will discuss the systems engineering process at NASA and how that process is tailored for Class D missions, specifically the RP mission.

Rojdev, Kristina↗

NASA NTRS2018

Trajectory Design Considerations for Exploration Mission 1

Exploration Mission 1 (EM-1) will be the first mission to send an uncrewed Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) to cislunar space in the fall of 2019. EM-1 was originally conceived as a lunar free-return mission, but was later changed to a Distant Retrograde Orbit (DRO) mission as a precursor to the Asteroid Redirect Mission. To understand the required mission performance (i.e., propellant requirement), a series of trajectory optimization runs was conducted using JSC's Copernicus spacecraft trajectory optimization tool. In order for the runs to be done in a timely manner, it was necessary to employ a parallelization approach on a computing cluster using a new trajectory scan tool written in Python. Details of the scan tool are provided and how it is used to perform the scans and post-process the results. Initially, a scan of daily due east launched EM-1 DRO missions in 2018 was made. Valid mission opportunities are ones that do not exceed the useable propellant available to perform the required burns. The initial scan data showed the propellant and delta-V performance patterns for each launch period. As questions were raised from different subsystems (e.g., power, thermal, communications, flight operations, etc.), the mission parameters or data that were of interest to them were added to the scan output data file. The additional data includes: (1) local launch and landing times in relation to sunrise and sunset, (2) length of eclipse periods during the in-space portion of the mission, (3) Earth line of sight from cislunar space, (4) Deep Space Network field of view looking towards cislunar space, and (5) variation of the downrange distance from Earth entry interface to splashdown. Mission design trades can also be performed based on the information that the additional data shows. For example, if the landing is in darkness, but the recovery operations team desires a landing in daylight, then an analysis is performed to determine how to change the mission design to meet this request. Also, subsystems request feasibility of alternate or contingency mission designs, such as adding an Orion main engine checkout burn or Orion completing all of its burns using only its auxiliary thrusters. This paper examines and presents the evolving trade studies that incorporate subsystem feedback and demonstrate the feasibility of these constrained mission trajectory designs and contingencies.

Dawn, Timothy F.↗

NASA NTRS2021

Cislunar Autonomous Positioning System Technology Operations and Navigation Experiment (CAPSTONE) Mission

NASA has partnered with Advanced Space to develop and build the Cislunar Autonomous Positioning System Technology Operations and Navigation Experiment (CAPSTONE) mission which will serve as a pathfinder for Near Rectilinear Halo Orbit (NHRO) operations around the Moon. The NHRO, (Perilune = 3,200 km; Apolune = 70,000 km) will be the intended orbit for the NASA’s Artemis Gateway lunar orbital platform. The CAPSTONE mission will validate simulations and confirm operational planning for Gateway while also validating performance of navigation and station-keeping requirements for the Power and Propulsion Element. Thus, this mission will provide operational experience to NASA, commercial, and international missions for operations in a demanding orbital regime. The baseline for CAPSTONE is to fly a 12U cubesat developed, integrated, and tested by Tyvak Nanosatellite Systems carrying a payload communications system capable of cross-link ranging with the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO), a dedicated payload flight computer for software demonstration, and a camera. The launch, coordinated by NASA Launch Services Program, will be provided by a Rocket Lab launch vehicle utilizing their new Proton upper stage to deploy the CAPSTONE spacecraft into the lunar orbit. The CAPSTONE mission is targeting a launch no earlier than September 23, 2021. Upon launch, the spacecraft will traverse a highly efficient transfer taking approximately three months to enter a primary demonstration phase in an NRHO for six months followed by a twelve month technology enhancement operations phase. The CAPSTONE Project is lead by Advanced Space, LLC of Boulder Colorado. Spacecraft development and mission operations will be conducted by Tyvak Nanosatellite Systems of Irvine, California. Noted objectives for the CAPSTONE mission will be to demonstrate the accessibility of NHROs, validate key operational concepts in the NHRO environment, lay a foundation for commercial support of future lunar operations and accelerate the availability of peer-to-peer navigation capabilities provided by the Cislunar Autonomous Positioning System (CAPS). The CAPSTONE mission is funded through NASA's Small Spacecraft Technology Program (SSTP), which is one of several programs in NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate. SSTP is chartered to develop and demonstrate technologies to enhance and expand the capabilities of small spacecraft with a particular focus on enabling new mission architectures through the use of small spacecraft, expanding the reach of small spacecraft to new destinations, and augmenting future missions with supporting small spacecraft. The launch for the CAPSTONE Mission is provided by Human Exploration & Operations Missions Directorate Advanced Exploration Systems Division. Coordination and Acquisition of the Launch is managed by NASA’s Launch Services Program. The CAPSTONE Mission and project status will be presented.

CAPSTONE↗