Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “technology development trajectory”

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 523 records · Page 29
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2017

Future ATM Concepts Evaluation Tool (FACET) Interface Control Document

This Interface Control Document (ICD) documents the airspace adaptation and air traffic inputs of NASA's Future ATM Concepts and Evaluation Tool (FACET). Its intended audience is the project manager, project team, development team, and stakeholders interested in interfacing with the system. FACET equips Air Traffic Management (ATM) researchers and service providers with a way to explore, develop and evaluate advanced air transportation concepts before they are field-tested and eventually deployed. FACET is a flexible software tool that is capable of quickly generating and analyzing thousands of aircraft trajectories. It provides researchers with a simulation environment for preliminary testing of advanced ATM concepts. Using aircraft performance profiles, airspace models, weather data, and flight schedules, the tool models trajectories for the climb, cruise, and descent phases of flight for each type of aircraft. An advanced graphical interface displays traffic patterns in two and three dimensions, under various current and projected conditions for specific airspace regions or over the entire continental United States. The system is able to simulate a full day's dynamic national airspace system (NAS) operations, model system uncertainty, measure the impact of different decision-makers in the NAS, and provide analysis of the results in graphical form, including sector, airport, fix, and airway usage statistics. NASA researchers test and analyze the system-wide impact of new traffic flow management algorithms under anticipated air traffic growth projections on the nation's air traffic system. In addition to modeling the airspace system for NASA research, FACET has also successfully transitioned into a valuable tool for operational use. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) traffic flow managers and commercial airline dispatchers have used FACET technology for real-time operations planning. FACET integrates live air traffic data from FAA radar systems and weather data from the National Weather Service to summarize NAS performance. This information allows system operators to reroute flights around congested airspace and severe weather to maintain safety and minimize delay. FACET also supports the planning and post-operational evaluation of reroute strategies at the national level to maximize system efficiency. For the commercial airline passenger, strategic planning with FACET can result in fewer flight delays and cancellations. The performance capabilities of FACET are largely due to its architecture, which strikes a balance between flexibility and fidelity. FACET is capable of modeling the airspace operations for the continental United States, processing thousands of aircraft on a single computer. FACET was written in Java and C, enabling the portability of its software to a variety of operating systems. In addition, FACET was designed with a modular software architecture to facilitate rapid prototyping of diverse ATM concepts. Several advanced ATM concepts have already been implemented in FACET, including aircraft self-separation, prediction of aircraft demand and sector congestion, system-wide impact assessment of traffic flow management constraints, and wind-optimal routing.

FACET↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Next Generation Exercise Device (NGED): Advancing Exercise Capabilities for Future Space Missions Through Biomechanical Modeling

BACKGROUND As space exploration extends to long-duration missions on the Moon and Mars, maintaining astronaut health and fitness becomes increasingly critical. The Next Generation Exercise Device (NGED), developed and tested by the HumanWorks Lab in NASA Johnson Space Center's (JSC) Software, Robotics, and Simulation Division, aims to address this challenge through innovative approaches. This study presents the development and evaluation of an NGED system, focusing on its adaptability to various mission scenarios, including prospective use in a Lunar Pressurized Rover (LPR). Central to this project is the application of biomechanical modeling to optimize exercise efficacy and safety in microgravity and partial gravity environments. The project is a collaborative effort with the Human Health and Performance group at Johnson Space Center, ensuring a comprehensive approach to astronaut well-being that integrates biomechanical principles with practical exercise solutions. The NGED represents the next generation of exercise capabilities for missions in space, on the Moon and Mars, with a specific focus on applications such as the LPR. METHODS AND RESULTS Data collection for NGED development was conducted with two motor-driven Beyond Power Voltra I [1] systems and a custom test structure to allow placement of the cable-based devices on the ground, at shoulder height, and overhead. The collection was performed in JSC’s Prototype Immersive Technology (PIT) Lab, utilizing an OptiTrack motion capture system and AMTI force platform, to enable detailed biomechanical analysis via OpenSim [2,3]. Motion capture data were collected for three subjects representing different body types and statures. The marker set used was an enhanced version of the full-body Plug-in Gait marker set [4], with additional markers strategically placed for the primary objective of informing exercise volume requirements. Subjects performed a series of 17 exercises, carefully selected to engage various muscle groups, including novel spaceflight exercises such as skiing (ergometer style), lateral pulldowns, wood chops, triceps extensions, and flies, with load variations ranging from 10 to 90 pounds to maintain kinematic form. This comprehensive approach allowed for a thorough evaluation of the NGED's performance across a wide range of motions and loads. The biomechanical modeling and analysis were conducted using a modified OpenSim Full Body Rajagopal Model [4,5] and also scaled to the maximum and minimum anthropometry provided in NASA-STD-3001 [6]. Volumetric convex hulls were generated based on model marker trajectories and aggregated into geometric assemblies. These can be placed in models of vehicle designs to assess fit to protect for exercise as well as to adapt NGED exercise to fit available space. Preliminary findings from the collection indicate that the NGED prototype demonstrates significant adaptability across varying user anthropometrics and exercise types. The device showed consistent performance in load-bearing exercises, with subjects able to perform exercises effectively while maintaining proper biomechanical form. CONCLUSION NGED represents a forward-looking advancement in exercise capabilities for future space missions. In the future, this system can be used to capture valuable metrics (e.g., isometric mid-thigh pull for force output measurements, assessments of postural muscle strength, overall isometric strength). Its versatility in accommodating various exercises and user physiques, coupled with the ability to provide targeted biomechanical loading, makes it a promising approach for maintaining astronaut health during long-duration missions to the Moon and Mars. Future work will focus on refining the NGED based on initial biomechanical findings, leveraging the detailed insights provided by motion capture and analysis techniques. Particular emphasis will be placed on optimizing its use within the confined spaces of a LPR and other space habitats. This work contributes significantly to NASA's goals of supporting human health and performance in deep space exploration, paving the way for sustainable long-term presence beyond Low Earth Orbit through advanced, biomechanically-informed exercise solutions.

C Wang↗
NASA NTRS2017

Characteristics of a high-power ion beam deflection system necessary to deflect the hypothetical asteroid 2017 PD

The July 2027 impact date for the hypothetical asteroid 2017 PDC, that is the subject of an emergency response exercise, leaves just over ten years to implement a deflection approach. The analyses herein allocates four years to the design, fabrication, assembly, test and launch of a notional high-power Ion Beam Deflection (IBD) vehicle to meet a launch readiness date no later than May 2021. Using this launch date along with estimates for the vehicle mass and performance characteristics of the electric propulsion system, low-thrust trajectory analyses indicate a 2.56-year flight time to rendezvous with 2017 PDC. This would leave 3.6 years to execute the actual deflection phase. A 160-kW IBD vehicle could deflect 2017 PDC by at least one Earth radius within this time provided the asteroid’s actual diameter was less than about 140 m and its density was 2 g/cm3 or less. Larger diameters and/or higher densities would require a higher power IBD vehicle, multiple IBD vehicles, or a longer deflection phase. Ion beam deflection is largely independent of the characteristics of the threat object, but its effectiveness, like all deflection approaches, is sensitive to both the asteroid mass and the time available for deflection. The characteristics of IBD, i.e., large standoff distance between the spacecraft and the asteroid surface, as well as ion beam divergence angles of a few degrees, facilitates the possible simultaneous use of multiple IBD vehicles to improve the performance and robustness of the asteroid deflection. The 65-cm diameter, 20-kW NEXIS ion thruster developed in support of the Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter mission concept is particularly well suited for application to a high-power IBD system. It has demonstrated an ion beam divergence angle of approximately 2 degrees and operation at 20 kW for over 2,000 hours. Completion of the development and flight qualification of this technology would significantly reduce the risk and time necessary to respond to the discovery of potentially hazardous asteroid in the size range of 50- to 100-m diameter.

Reeves, David↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Characterization of in-Space Propulsion Trade Space to Support Initial Human Mars Segment

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate has been developing architecture concepts for human missions to Mars in alignment with the agency’s Moon to Mars blueprint objectives. The focus of the Architecture Development Office has been to decompose the blueprint objectives into the characteristics and needs for both lunar and Mars missions and develop functional needs to enable an integrated end-to-end mission architecture. One of the key components of a human Mars mission is the in-space transportation system that delivers crew and cargo to Mars vicinity and return crew safely back to Earth. The Mars Architecture Team has been evaluating four in-space transportation options to satisfy this functional need: 1) Hybrid Nuclear Electric/ Chemical Propulsion, 2) Nuclear Thermal Propulsion, 3) Hybrid Solar Electric/ Chemical Propulsion, and 4) All-Chemical propulsion. To answer the question “which transportation option is best?” decision makers will need to understand the performance characteristics—and limitations—for each architecture in the context of their preferred metric. Each option could be considered “better” than the others, depending on whether the primary selection criteria is fast, cheap, maximum cross-government applicability, maximizes commercial capabilities, and/or any other desired metrics. The Mars Architecture Team has completed considerable analysis on the Hybrid Nuclear Electric/Chemical Propulsion concept over the past three years. The Space Nuclear Propulsion program has also conducted significant work on the Nuclear Thermal Propulsion concept. The Hybrid Solar Electric/Chemical Propulsion concept, derived from technology planned for the Gateway program, was originally configurated for minimum vehicle stack mass (and, hence, minimum Earth-launched mass/cost), leveraging a highly efficient propulsion system on a minimum energy Conjunction Class trajectory. Historically, All-Chemical concepts were considered impractical due to the enormous propellant mass required, even for minimum energy Conjunction Class/long stay mission opportunities. However, considering the emerging commercial heavy-lift capabilities, the concept must be reevaluated across a range of concepts that leverage reusable launch vehicle capabilities to reduce the cost of launching large quantities of transportation elements needed for missions of various duration. This paper aims to provide an overview of the in-space transportation assessment work that is on-going within NASA.

Mars↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Characterization of in-Space Propulsion Trade Space to Support Initial Human Mars Segment

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate has been developing architecture concepts for human missions to Mars in alignment with the agency’s Moon to Mars blueprint objectives. The focus of the Architecture Development Office has been to decompose the blueprint objectives into the characteristics and needs for both lunar and Mars missions and develop functional needs to enable an integrated end-to-end mission architecture. One of the key components of a human Mars mission is the in-space transportation system that delivers crew and cargo to Mars vicinity and return crew safely back to Earth. The Mars Architecture Team has been evaluating four in-space transportation options to satisfy this functional need: 1) Hybrid Nuclear Electric/ Chemical Propulsion, 2) Nuclear Thermal Propulsion, 3) Hybrid Solar Electric/ Chemical Propulsion, and 4) All-Chemical propulsion. To answer the question “which transportation option is best?” decision makers will need to understand the performance characteristics—and limitations—for each architecture in the context of their preferred metric. Each option could be considered “better” than the others, depending on whether the primary selection criteria is fast, cheap, maximum cross-government applicability, maximizes commercial capabilities, and/or any other desired metrics. The Mars Architecture Team has completed considerable analysis on the Hybrid Nuclear Electric/Chemical Propulsion concept over the past three years. The Space Nuclear Propulsion program has also conducted significant work on the Nuclear Thermal Propulsion concept. The Hybrid Solar Electric/Chemical Propulsion concept, derived from technology planned for the Gateway program, was originally configurated for minimum vehicle stack mass (and, hence, minimum Earth-launched mass/cost), leveraging a highly efficient propulsion system on a minimum energy Conjunction Class trajectory. Historically, All-Chemical concepts were considered impractical due to the enormous propellant mass required, even for minimum energy Conjunction Class/long stay mission opportunities. However, considering the emerging commercial heavy-lift capabilities, the concept must be reevaluated across a range of concepts that leverage reusable launch vehicle capabilities to reduce the cost of launching large quantities of transportation elements needed for missions of various duration. This paper aims to provide an overview of the in-space transportation assessment work that is on-going within NASA.

Mars↗
NASA NTRS2010

Z-Pinch Pulsed Plasma Propulsion Technology Development

Fusion-based propulsion can enable fast interplanetary transportation. Magneto-inertial fusion (MIF) is an approach which has been shown to potentially lead to a low cost, small reactor for fusion break even. The Z-Pinch/dense plasma focus method is an MIF concept in which a column of gas is compressed to thermonuclear conditions by an axial current (I approximates 100 MA). Recent advancements in experiments and the theoretical understanding of this concept suggest favorable scaling of fusion power output yield as I(sup 4). This document presents a conceptual design of a Z-Pinch fusion propulsion system and a vehicle for human exploration. The purpose of this study is to apply Z-Pinch fusion principles to the design of a propulsion system for an interplanetary spacecraft. This study took four steps in service of that objective; these steps are identified below. 1. Z-Pinch Modeling and Analysis: There is a wealth of literature characterizing Z-Pinch physics and existing Z-Pinch physics models. In order to be useful in engineering analysis, simplified Z-Pinch fusion thermodynamic models are required to give propulsion engineers the quantity of plasma, plasma temperature, rate of expansion, etc. The study team developed these models in this study. 2. Propulsion Modeling and Analysis: While the Z-Pinch models characterize the fusion process itself, propulsion models calculate the parameters that characterize the propulsion system (thrust, specific impulse, etc.) The study team developed a Z-Pinch propulsion model and used it to determine the best values for pulse rate, amount of propellant per pulse, and mixture ratio of the D-T and liner materials as well as the resulting thrust and specific impulse of the system. 3. Mission Analysis: Several potential missions were studied. Trajectory analysis using data from the propulsion model was used to determine the duration of the propulsion burns, the amount of propellant expended to complete each mission considered. 4. Vehicle Design: To understand the applicability of Z-Pinch propulsion to interplanetary travel, it is necessary to design a concept vehicle that uses it -- the propulsion system significantly impacts the design of the electrical, thermal control, avionics and structural subsystems of a vehicle. The study team developed a conceptual design of an interplanetary vehicle that transports crew and cargo to Mars and back and can be reused for other missions. Several aspects of this vehicle are based on a previous crewed fusion vehicle study -- the Human Outer Planet Exploration (HOPE) Magnetized Target Fusion (MTF) vehicle. Portions of the vehicle design were used outright and others were modified from the MTF design in order to maintain comparability.

Polsgrove, Tara↗
NASA NTRS2014

Wake Vortex Detection: Phased Microphone vs. Linear Infrasonic Array

Sensor technologies can make a significant impact on the detection of aircraft-generated vortices in an air space of interest, typically in the approach or departure corridor. Current state-of-the art sensor technologies do not provide three-dimensional measurements needed for an operational system or even for wake vortex modeling to advance the understanding of vortex behavior. Most wake vortex sensor systems used today have been developed only for research applications and lack the reliability needed for continuous operation. The main challenges for the development of an operational sensor system are reliability, all-weather operation, and spatial coverage. Such a sensor has been sought for a period of last forty years. Acoustic sensors were first proposed and tested by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) early in 1970s for tracking wake vortices but these acoustic sensors suffered from high levels of ambient noise. Over a period of the last fifteen years, there has been renewed interest in studying noise generated by aircraft wake vortices, both numerically and experimentally. The German Aerospace Center (DLR) was the first to propose the application of a phased microphone array for the investigation of the noise sources of wake vortices. The concept was first demonstrated at Berlins Airport Schoenefeld in 2000. A second test was conducted in Tarbes, France, in 2002, where phased microphone arrays were applied to study the wake vortex noise of an Airbus 340. Similarly, microphone phased arrays and other opto-acoustic microphones were evaluated in a field test at the Denver International Airport in 2003. For the Tarbes and Denver tests, the wake trajectories of phased microphone arrays and lidar were compared as these were installed side by side. Due to a built-in pressure equalization vent these microphones were not suitable for capturing acoustic noise below 20 Hz. Our group at NASA Langley Research Center developed and installed an infrasonic array at the Newport News-Williamsburg International Airport early in the year 2013. A pattern of pressure burst, high-coherence intervals, and diminishing-coherence intervals was observed for all takeoff and landing events without exception. The results of a phased microphone vs. linear infrasonic array comparison will be presented.

Shams, Qamar A.↗
NASA NTRS1994

Installed F/A-18 inlet flow calculations at 30 degrees angle-of-attack: A comparative study

NASA Lewis is currently engaged in a research effort as a team member of the High Alpha Technology Program (HATP) within NASA. This program utilizes a specially equipped F/A-18, the High Alpha Research Vehicle (HARV), in an ambitious effort to improve the maneuverability of high-performance military aircraft at low subsonic speed, high angle of attack conditions. The overall objective of the Lewis effort is to develop inlet technology that will ensure efficient airflow delivery to the engine during these maneuvers. One part of the Lewis approach utilizes computational fluid dynamics codes to predict the installed performance of inlets for these highly maneuverable aircraft. Full Navier-Stokes (FNS) calculations on the installed F/A-18 inlet at 30 degrees angle of attack, 0 degrees yaw, and a freestream Mach number of 0.2 have been obtained in this study using an algebraic turbulence model with two grids (original and revised). Results obtained with the original grid were used to determine where further grid refinements and additional geometry were needed. In order to account properly for the external effects, the forebody, leading edge extension (LEX), ramp, and wing were included with inlet geometry. In the original grid, the diverter, LEX slot, and leading edge flap were not included due to insufficient geometry definition, but were included in a revised grid. In addition, a thin-layer Navier-Stokes (TLNS) code is used with the revised grid and the numerical results are compared to those obtained with the FNS code. The TLNS code was used to evaluate the effects on the solution using a code with more recent CFD developments such as upwinding with TVD schemes versus central differencing with artificial dissipation. The calculations are compared to a limited amount of available experimental data. The predicted forebody/fuselage surface static pressures compared well with data of all solutions. The predicted trajectory of the vortex generated under the LEX was different for each solution. These discrepancies are attributed to differences in the grid resolution and turbulence modeling. All solutions predict that this vortex is ingested by the inlet. The predicted inlet total pressure recoveries are lower than data and the distortions are higher than data. The results obtained with the revised grid were significantly improved from the original grid results. The original grid results indicated the ingested vortex migrated to the engine face and caused additional distortions to those already present due to secondary flow development. The revised grid results indicate that the ingested vortex is dissipated along the inlet duct inboard wall. The TLNS results indicate the flow at the engine face was much more distorted than the FNS results and is attributed to the pole boundary condition introducing numerical distortions into the flow field.

Smith, C. Frederic↗
NASA NTRS2003

Analysis of Near Simultaneous Jimsphere and AMPS High Resolution Wind Profiles

The high-resolution wind profile of the Automated Meteorological Profiling System (HRAMPS) is the proposed replacement for the Jimsphere measurement system used to support NASA Shuttle launches from the Eastern Test Range (ETR). Samples of twenty-six ETR near simultaneous Jimsphere and HRAMPS wind profiles were obtained for Shuttle program HRAMPS certification studies. Shuttle systems engineering certification is to ensure that spacecraft and launch vehicle systems performance and safety evaluations for each launch (derived from flight simulations with Jimsphere wind profile data bases) retain their validity when HRAMPS profiles are used on day-of-launch (DOL) in trajectory and loads simulations to support the commit-to-launch decision. This paper describes a statistical analysis of the near simultaneous profiles. In principle the differences between a Jimsphere profile and an HRAMPS profile should be attributed to tracking technology (radar versus GPS tracking of a Jimsphere flight element) and the method for derivation of wind vectors from the raw tracking data. In reality, it is not technically feasible to track the same Jimsphere balloon with the two systems. The aluminized Mylar surface of the standard Jimsphere flight element facilitates radar tracking, but it interferes with HRAMPS during simultaneous tracking. Suspending a radar reflector from an HRAMPS flight element (Jimsphere without aluminized coating) does not produce satisfactory Jimsphere profiles because of intermittent radar returns. Thus, differences between the Jimsphere and HRAMPS profiles are also attributed to differences in the trajectories of separate flight elements. Because of small sample size and a test period limited to one winter season, test measurements during extreme high winds aloft could not have been expected and did not occur. It is during the highest winds that the largest differences between Jimsphere and HRAMPS would occur because the distance between flight elements would be larger. Jimsphere radar tracking noise increases as a function of balloon displacement downrange. The Jimsphere data processing compensates for tracking signal/noise degradation by increasing the smoothing interval. The Jimsphere wind profile effective resolution is a function of downrange distance and altitude, whereas the effective resolution of the HRAMPS should be independent of those variables. The procedure used for editing Jimsphere spikes in Shuttle DOL profiles was not implemented for the Jimsphere profile measurements during the AMPS field tests. For this analysis a code was developed that essentially mimics DOL Jimsphere spike editing. Jimsphere profiles have somewhat more noise in the wavelength range less than 200m defined as the noise floor. No differences between Jimsphere and HRAMPS wind profile pairs have been found that would support denial of HRAMPS certification for application in Shuttle DOL applications. The reliability of the HRAMPS system, which is an important certification issue, is not addressed in this study.

Adelfang, S. I.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Space transfer vehicle concepts and requirements. Volume 1: Executive summary

The objectives of the Space Transfer Vehicle (STV) Concepts and Requirements studies were to provide sensitivity data on usage, economics, and technology associated with new space transportation systems. The study was structured to utilize data on the emerging launch vehicles, the latest mission scenarios, and Space Exploration Initiative (SEI) payload manifesting and schedules, to define a flexible, high performance, cost effective, evolutionary space transportation system for NASA. Initial activities were to support the MSFC effort in the preparation of inputs to the 90 Day Report to the National Space Council (NSC). With the results of this study establishing a point-of-departure for continuing the STV studies in 1990, additional options and mission architectures were defined. The continuing studies will update and expand the parametrics, assess new cargo and manned ETO vehicles, determine impacts on the redefined Phase 0 Space Station Freedom, and to develop a design that encompasses adequate configuration flexibility to ensure compliance with on-going NASA study recommendations with major system disconnects. In terms of general requirements, the objectives of the STV system and its mission profiles will address crew safety and mission success through a failure-tolerant and forgiving design approach. These objectives were addressed through the following: engine-out capability for all mission phases; built-in-test for vehicle health monitoring to allow testing of all critical functions such as, verification of lunar landing and ascent engines before initiating the landing sequence; critical subsystems will have multiple strings for redundancy plus adequate supplies of onboard spares for removal and replacement of failed items; crew radiation protection; and trajectories that optimize lunar and Mars performance and flyby abort capabilities.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2024

Looking to the Future: A Call to Action for Advanced GNC Algorithm Verification and Validation

Future space systems will rely on autonomous Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC) functions to efficiently manage safe and precise self-directed operations in uncertain complex environments. Fundamentally, the GNC system plays a key role in mission performance and safety because it computes the ideal trajectory (Guidance), determines the actual trajectory (Navigation), and executes the ideal trajectory (Control) of a vehicle’s position and attitude. Our current GNC systems are highly automated and already have a high degree of complexity. As missions become more ambitious, GNC systems for launch vehicles and space platforms (e.g., spacecraft, probes, and landers) will require higher levels of performance and autonomous operation than previously encountered, for example, this includes GNC for optimizing aerodynamic and/or propulsion performance during planetary entry. This GNC Verification and Validation (V&V) paper highlights concerns with what undoubtedly will be a trend towards increased complexity as fully autonomous GNC systems are developed for future space missions. Clearly, complex GNC systems pose challenges in the prelaunch V&V phase, which is a relatively expensive part of a mission’s life cycle. Essentially the V&V phase is focused on checking that the system effectively meets all the design and operational requirements for the mission. The authors of this paper (i.e., the Inter-Agency Working Group of GNC subject matter experts) focused on this fundamental question over the past few years: Will the GNC engineering community of practice be sufficiently prepared to perform the necessary V&V on evolving GNC architectures that are driven by very demanding requirements for autonomy, resiliency, reconfigurability, adaptability, and mission cost-benefit balance? It is the viewpoint of our Inter-Agency team that the GNC V&V approaches and processes needed to address the next generation of complex GNC systems, which likely will employ various forms of modern GNC technology, are not currently established to the level the community will need in the future. While researchers and practitioners have made some progress in developing new GNC V&V methods for modern GNC systems, a good deal of work remains to be done to codify such methods in a comprehensive and systematic manner. Thus, the Inter-Agency team’s partner organizations [the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the European Space Agency (ESA), the National Centre for Space Studies (CNES), the German Aerospace Center (DLR), the French Aerospace Lab (ONERA), and ISAE-SUPAERO] have conducted preliminary investigations into advancing GNC V&V techniques, which resulted in the identification of the need for education, new V&V tools, and benchmark problems for the GNC community. The necessary proactive steps to be taken to meet the challenges and fill the gaps in GNC V&V are summarized in this paper. The first steps include identifying advanced analysis tools, developing a GNC V&V roadmap, and expanding education and training programs for GNC practitioners. This paper is a call to action and proposes a comprehensive set of recommended actions for all our stakeholders: space agencies, researchers, and industry.

Samir Bennani↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Management of Operations under Visual Flight Rules in UTM for Disaster Response Missions

The disaster response domain has experienced an increased focus in recent years due to the rise in number and scale of events, lessons learned from past experience, and emerging technologies that make possible a more coordinated and effective response. As part of this focus, JAXA and NASA have been collaborating on the integration of manned and unmanned aircraft in support of disaster response operations through integrated testing of their respective mission planning and optimization system (Disaster Relief Aircraft Information Sharing Network, or D-NET) and an automated UAS traffic management system (e.g., UTM). In 2018, JAXA and NASA jointly participated in a large-scale disaster drill in Japan where the integration of systems was successfully demonstrated through real-time data exchanges, visualization, and decision making as part of the coordinated airspace management of a manned helicopter in VFR conditions and unmanned small UAS operating in common areas. This work details a flight test consisting of two flights that were conducted December 2019 near the Chofu Aerodrome in Tokyo, which focused on the evaluation of pilots operating under Visual Flight Rules (VFR) communicating through D-NET and sharing intent and position information within UTM. This work contributes to defining the necessary requirements for digital coordination between manned and unmanned operations. UTM requires the use of operation volumes, which are spatial and temporal volumes that encompass UAS flight trajectories and account for technical performance errors and deviations due to disturbances (e.g., wind). A series of flights, representing different missions, used landmark-based operation volumes and conformance of the aircraft to those operation volumes were tracked within UTM. Experienced disaster response helicopter pilots provided insight on the development of the operation plans and their usability during disaster response operations. Results from the flight test supported the suggested benefits of using landmarks for planning and positional awareness and highlighted the need for future research in advanced visualization capabilities to support operations that consider both system constraints and flight deck/airspace management interaction.

disaster response↗
NASA NTRS2018

NASA: 60 Years and Counting...

Sputnik launched on 4 Oct 1057. On July 29, 1958, Eisenhower signed the National Aeronautics and Space Act, the creation of NASA. The Soviets launched the first human into orbit, Yuri Gagarin, on April 12, 1961. On 5 May 1961, Alan Shepard's Freedom 7 Mercury capsule lifted off at 9:34 a.m. from Launch Complex 5 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, and flew a suborbital trajectory lasting 15 minutes and 22 seconds, America's first man in space. On 25 May 1961, Kennedy delivered a speech to a joint session of Congress. In that speech, he stated "I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth." The rest, as they say, is history. Project Mercury, the first U.S. program to put humans in space, made 25 flights, six of which carried astronauts between 1961 and 1963. The Gemini program primarily tested equipment and mission procedures and trained astronauts and ground crews for future Apollo missions to the Moon. Exactly eight years, one month and 26 days after President Kennedy challenged Americans to reach for the Moon, Project Apollo landed the first humans on the lunar surface and returned them safely to Earth. In 1973, Skylab expeditions paved the way for the International Space Station. Over 30 years, NASA's space shuttle fleet, ”Columbia, Challenger, Discovery, Atlantis and Endeavour,” flew 135 missions and carried 355 different people to space. The space shuttle carried people into orbit repeatedly; launched, recovered and repaired satellites; conducted cutting-edge research; and built the largest structure in space, the International Space Station. Tragically, NASA lost two crews of seven in the 1986 Challenger accident and the 2003 Columbia accident. The International Space Station is a model for global cooperation and scientific advancements that is enabling growth of private industry in low-Earth orbit and development of new technologies to advance human space exploration. Built between 1998 and 2011, the space station has housed humans continuously since Nov. 2, 2000. NASA has contracted with commercial companies SpaceX, Orbital ATK, and Sierra Nevada Corporation to deliver science investigations, cargo, and supplies to the crews living in space, and soon Boeing and SpaceX will transport astronauts to and from the station. Today, NASA is working on many fronts to advance man's presence in space. NASA's Exploration Campaign will establish U.S. preeminence in cislunar space through the operations and the deployment of a U.S.-led Lunar Orbital Platform-Gateway (LOPG). Together with the Orion and SLS Programs, the LOPG is central to advancing and sustaining human space exploration goals, and is the unifying single stepping off point for human cislunar operations, lunar surface access and missions to Mars. As one might expect, EMC for all this activity is challenging, to say the least. In the next half-hour or so, I will talk about some of those challenges and how the different programs are meeting them.

Scully, Bob↗
NASA NTRS2019

Common Probe Design Study and Follow-On Activities

The Common Probe Study was funded by the NASA's Planetary Science Division in the Science Mission Directorate in 2018 to investigate the feasibility of a common aeroshell design for atmospheric probe missions at Venus, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune. The study involved 4 NASA Centers: Ames Research Center, Goddard Space Flight Center, Langley Research Center, and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. The common aeroshell design that was studied was a 400 kg, 1.5 m diameter, 45-degree sphere cone shape with a high density heatshield material (Heatshield for Extreme Entry Environments Technology, or HEEET) and a parachute system to extract the descent vehicle. This size of aeroshell could accommodate a descent vehicle of 0.75 m diameter, which could encompass both Tier 1 and Tier 2 science instruments at each of the 5 destinations. Study methodology: First, a notional payload of instruments for each destination was defined based on the top priority measurements indicated by the Planetary Science Decadal Survey. Steep and shallow entry flight path angles (EFPA) were defined for each planet based on qualification and operational g-load limits for current, state-of-the-art instruments. Interplanetary trajectories were then identified that bounded the EFPA range.Next, 3-DoF simulations for entry trajectories were run using the entry state vectors from the interplanetary trajectories. Conical ribbon parachutes were sized based on heatshield separation dynamics. Aero-heating correlations were used to generate stagnation point convective and radiative heat flux profiles. High fidelity thermal response models for various TPS materials were used to size stagnation point thicknesses, with margins based on previous studies. Backshell TPS masses were assumed based on scaled heat fluxes from the heatshield and also from previous mission concepts.Based on these analyses, we have found that the common design is applicable for atmospheric probe missions for 4 out of the 5 destinations. Because of the unique gravity well for Jupiter, the entry environments are more severe resulting in heat loads an order of magnitude higher than for the other destinations.The next step is to determine what follow-on activities NASA should engage in. A questionnaire for the atmospheric probe community has been developed, with a focus on what size of aeroshell should be further analyzed (smaller or same diameter), and what incentives would make using such an aeroshell, if assembled and available, desirable to mission proposers.Preliminary results from this questionnaire will be presented.

Hwang, Helen H.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Fusion-Enabled Pluto Orbiter and Lander

Direct Fusion Drive (DFD) is a unique fusion engine concept based on the Princeton Field-Reversed Configuration (PFRC) fusion reactor conceived by Dr. Sam Cohen of the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory. DFD would enable the Pluto orbiter and lander context mission and more broadly enable true "rapid transit" to outer-planet and near interstellar space. The truly game-changing levels of thrust and power in a modestly sized package could integrate with our current launch infrastructure while radically expanding the science capability of these missions. Our Phase I was our first funded work on the DFD, with previous work at PSS occurring only under internal R&D. We established the feasibility of our Pluto mission trajectories using straight-line and planar models, including a departure spiral from Earth and insertion at Pluto. We developed our first thrust and specific impulse model using the results of the UEDGE multi-fluid code. Our specific power model was improved. During this Phase II effort, we continued our efforts to increase the fidelity of the designs for the RF, magnet, and shielding subsystems. Dedicated thrust augmentation experiments were run on the PFRC experiment, using a supersonic gas puffing valve. For the first time, we analyzed the design of a closed-loop operation mode and estimated the hardware that would be required for a dual-mode engine. In an exciting new development, we have invented a new thermophotovoltaic thermal conversion method that has the potential to have efficiencies of a Brayton or Stirling system. Our report presents details of these analyses. Our roadmap to bringing DFD to flight predicts that with sufficient support, a first flight unit could be built by 2040. We anticipate that three machine generations are required before this point: a ~1 T PFRC-3 machine hitting new plasma temperature and density levels, a ~5 T PFRC-4 machine with first demonstration of D-3He fusion, and a flight. (The current experiment, PFRC-2, is limited to about 0.1 T). In order to achieve a flight in 2035-2040, the TRL of the supporting systems must be increased in parallel, including low mass radiators, cryogenic propellant storage, and large (>100 kW) thermal conversion systems. Fortunately, many of these systems are dual-use and are required for other technologies including fission systems, so DFD would contribute to and benefit from those programs. This NIAC support and the results of our work have led to multiple follow-on contracts. We won two NASA STTRs focused on DFD subsystems, one on the RF system and one on the superconducting magnets, and our magnet STTR is now midway through a Phase II. We will be receiving a superconducting test magnet for experiments at PPPL this summer. In addition, we won an ARPA-E OPEN grant; this is the first time that OPEN has included fusion technologies, and we are part of a cohort of three alternative fusion companies now supported directly by DOE. We are very optimistic that if we are able to meet our experimental milestones in the next 12-18 months, we will be competitive for additional DOE grants to build PFRC-3.

Propulsion↗
NASA NTRS2014

MARGInS: Model-Based Analysis of Realizable Goals in Systems

Under NASAs Constellation effort, the Exploration Technology Development Program funded research toward a system validation capability that applied machine learning and test-case generation techniques to the analysis of black-box system behavior. The behavior analysis capability scaled to spaces of hundreds of input parameters and tens of thousands of test cases. Aerospace systems at the vehicle level, especially those systems which contain some level of autonomy, are best described by hybrid and non-linear mathematics. Even simplified models of such systems need parameter dimensionalities in the hundreds or thousands of parameters in order to capture sufficient fidelity. The System Safety Assessments (such as those described in the SAE ARP 4761A Safety Assessment Process guidelines) for these systems are prone to errorinteractions between the vehicles subsystems are complex, and can display emergent behaviors. NASA captured this new analysis in the Model-based Analysis of Realizable Goals in Systems (MARGInS) tool and applied it to the Pad Abort 1 (PA-1) simulation as part of the independent validation and verification cycle before the PA-1 flight test in May of 2010. MARGInS evaluated the adherence of the high-fidelity simulation to its requirements, and deter- mined the margins to failure from the expected nominal input conditions. Following the PA-1 test, the capabilities within the MARGInS framework have been extended with sophisticated statistical and white-box test case generation techniques and applied to other NASA missions. The frame- work now includes a critical factors analysis that was applied to NASAs Orion simulation and design. NASAs Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) leveraged the existing MARGInS framework for work on aviation safety for civil transport vehicles and for research on autonomy issues. The NASA ARMD effort created a time series output prediction capability that has been used to characterize trajectories for a plane with an adaptive control system, and a safety boundary detection capability that has been applied to an air traffic control concept of operation for the Federal Aviation Administration. The statistical and machine- learning based techniques within MARGInS have been successfully combined with concolic execution to improve the coverage of a critical unit by driving system-level inputs. The use case driving the concolic execution and MARGInS integration was inspired by the Air France 447 disaster in which the loss of a critical functionality (the airspeed calculation from the pitot tubes) led to loss of the entire plane with the people aboard. To illustrate capabilities and limitations, we will highlight the analyses for the applications listed above. We will then discuss the future plans for MARGInS and its interfaces with other tools.

Validation↗
NASA NTRS2019

Airspace Technology Demonstration 2 (ATD-2) Phase 2 Technology Description Document (TDD)

This Technology Description Document (TDD) provides an overview of the technology for the Phase 1 Baseline and Phase 2 Fused demonstrations of the Integrated Arrival, Departure, and Surface (IADS) prototype system of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Airspace Technology Demonstration 2 (ATD-2) project, which has been demonstrated since October of 2017 at Charlotte Douglas International Airport (CLT). Development, integration, and field demonstration of relevant technologies of the IADS system directly address recommendations made by the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) Integration Working Group (NIWG) on Surface and Data Sharing and the Surface Collaborative Decision Making (Surface CDM) concept of operations developed jointly by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and aviation industry partners. NASA has been developing the IADS traffic management system under the ATD-2 project in coordination with the FAA, flight operators, CLT airport operators, and the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA). The primary goal of ATD-2 is to improve the predictability and operational efficiency of the air traffic system in metroplex environments, through the enhancement, development, and integration of the nation’s most advanced and sophisticated arrival, departure, and surface prediction, scheduling, and management systems. The ATD-2 project is a 5-year research activity beginning in 2015 and extending through 2020. The Phase 1 Baseline IADS capability resulting from the ATD-2 research has been demonstrated at the CLT airport since the beginning of October 2017. Phase 1 provided data exchange and integration with the initial demonstration of the integrated system of strategic and tactical scheduling, collaborative tactical surface metering, tactical departure scheduling to an en route meter point and overhead stream insertion, initial integration of a TFDM SWIM prototype feed, and an early implementation prototype of a Terminal Flight Data Manager (TFDM) Electronic Flight Data (EFD) system. The strategic surface scheduling element of the capability is consistent with the Surface CDM Concept of Operations published in 2014 by the FAA Surface Operations Directorate.1 The Phase 2 Fused IADS system provided substantial updates to baseline IADS Demonstration capability. Improvements were made to the IADS modeler; tactical surface scheduling, and metering; tactical departure scheduling for overhead stream insertion; Electronic Flight Data (EFD) and the integration with the FAA Advanced Electronic Flight Strip (AEFS); RTC/RMTC, and departure trajectories. New capabilities included a TFDM SWIM prototype feed and delivery of IADS data via the TFDM Terminal Publication (TTP) service of the FAA’s SWIM system; strategic surface scheduling and metering as well as fusion with tactical surface metering; integration and ingestion of data from TTP-connected Mobile App and texting industry for General Aviation (GA) flights; and expansion of airspace deployments to include adjacent Center automation, in particular interface with the Atlanta Center (ZTL) arrival metering TBFM system to evaluate pre-scheduling of flights. Improvements in Data Analysis and System Health (DASH) monitoring and updates were completed as well.

Talebi, Ehsan↗
NASA NTRS2015

Benefits Assessment for Single-Airport Tactical Runway Configuration Management Tool (TRCM)

The System-Oriented Runway Management (SORM) concept was developed as part of the Airspace Systems Program (ASP) Concepts and Technology Development (CTD) Project, and is composed of two basic capabilities: Runway Configuration Management (RCM), and Combined Arrival/Departure Runway Scheduling (CADRS). RCM is the process of designating active runways, monitoring the active runway configuration for suitability given existing factors, and predicting future configuration changes; CADRS is the process of distributing arrivals and departures across active runways based on local airport and National Airspace System (NAS) goals. The central component in the SORM concept is a tool for taking into account all the various factors and producing a recommendation for what would be the optimal runway configuration, runway use strategy, and aircraft sequence, considering as many of the relevant factors required in making this type of decision, and user preferences, if feasible. Three separate tools were initially envisioned for this research area, corresponding to the time scale in which they would operate: Strategic RCM (SRCM), with a planning horizon on the order of several hours, Tactical RCM (TRCM), with a planning horizon on the order of 90 minutes, and CADRS, with a planning horizon on the order of 15-30 minutes[1]. Algorithm development was initiated in all three of these areas, but the most fully developed to date is the TRCM algorithm. Earlier studies took a high-level approach to benefits, estimating aggregate benefits across most of the major airports in the National Airspace Systems (NAS), for both RCM and CADRS [2]. Other studies estimated the benefit of RCM and CADRS using various methods of re-sequencing arrivals to reduce delays3,4, or better balancing of arrival fixes5,6. Additional studies looked at different methods for performing the optimization involved in selecting the best Runway Configuration Plan (RCP) to use7-10. Most of these previous studies were high-level or generic in nature (not focusing on specific airports), and benefits were aggregated for the entire NAS, with relatively low fidelity simulation of SORM functions and aircraft trajectories. For SORM research, a more detailed benefits assessment of RCM and CADRS for specific airports or metroplexes is needed.

Oseguera-Lohr, Rosa↗