Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “mission autonomy”

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 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2002

Robotic Exploration: The Role of Science Autonomy

Historical mission operations have involved: (1) commands transmitted to the craft; (2) execution of commands; (3) return of scientific data; (4) evaluation of these data by scientists; and (5) recommendations for future mission activity by scientists. This cycle is repeated throughout the mission with command opportunities once or twice per day. For a rover, this historical cycle is not amenable to rapid long range traverses or rapid response to any novel or unexpected situations.

Roush, Ted L.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Promoting Astronaut Autonomy in Human Spaceflight Missions

Mission operations will have to adapt for long duration, long distance human spaceflight missions. This change is driven mainly by the significantly different communication availability between Earth and space. As astronauts travel farther from Earth, the one-way communication latency increases; the amount of bandwidth will be limited; and there will be period of long and/or no communication. Currently, ground flight controllers collaborate and cooperate with astronauts in space to accomplish essential operational functions. Astronaut autonomy, i.e., the crew’s ability to work more independently from mission control, will be a key enabler in future exploration missions. Over the last several years, the NASA Ames Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) Group has investigated various ways to promote and support astronaut autonomy in human spaceflight missions. Software prototypes are researched, designed, implemented, and assessed for their ability to enable astronaut autonomy. From integrated Internet of Thing for Space, advanced procedures interfaces, comm-delayed chats, and self-scheduling tools, the HCI Group has explored different aspects of astronaut autonomy. Specifically, the self-scheduling tool Playbook has been evaluated in analog extreme environments and onboard the International Space Station, successfully paving the way for future autonomous astronauts.

crew autonomy↗
NASA NTRS2002

Onboard autonomy on the Three Corner Sat mission

In 2003, the student-built three satellite constellation Three Corner Sat (3CS) Mission will demonstrate onboard autonomy including: science data validation and prioritization, mission re-planning, and robust execution. Future observations will be planned onboard based on the quality of aquired science, available memory and power, and anticipated downlinks. These capabilities will allow 3CS to aquire additional science data if resources are available and to return only the highest quality science data.

Planning scheduling autonomy↗
NASA NTRS2004

Autonomous and Autonomic Systems: A Paradigm for Future Space Exploration Missions

NASA increasingly will rely on autonomous systems concepts, not only in the mission control centers on the ground, but also on spacecraft and on rovers and other assets on extraterrestrial bodies. Automomy enables not only reduced operations costs, But also adaptable goal-driven functionality of mission systems. Space missions lacking autonomy will be unable to achieve the full range of advanced mission objectives, given that human control under dynamic environmental conditions will not be feasible due, in part, to the unavoidably high signal propagation latency and constrained data rates of mission communications links. While autonomy cost-effectively supports accomplishment of mission goals, autonomicity supports survivability of remote mission assets, especially when human tending is not feasible. Autonomic system properties (which ensure self-configuring, self-optimizing self-healing, and self-protecting behavior) conceptually may enable space missions of a higher order into any previously flown. Analysis of two NASA agent-based systems previously prototyped, and of a proposed future mission involving numerous cooperating spacecraft, illustrates how autonomous and autonomic system concepts may be brought to bear on future space missions.

Truszkowski, Walter F.↗
NASA NTRS2001

Mission data system and the future of autonomy at Jet Propulsion Laboratory

Planetary missions require significant levels of autonomy, due to the critical, one-time-only, nature of many mission objectives, and to the long delay times for human intervention. These missions also operate in highly uncertain environments, such as planetary atmospheres or surfaces. Mission Data Systems (MDS) is a project to construct a reusable software architecture for planetary missions, based on identifying the states of the mission.

MDS autonomy↗
NASA NTRS2005

NASA/GSFC Onboard Autonomy For The Swift Mission

This viewgraph presentation reviews the work that NASA Goddard Space Flight Center is currently doing and has been involved in in developing onboard autonomy and automation. Emphasis is given to the work being done for the Swift observatory

Ong, John↗
NASA NTRS2016

Autonomous Closed-Loop Tasking, Acquisition, Processing, and Evaluation for Situational Awareness Feedback

This presentation describes the closed loop satellite autonomy methods used to connect users and the assets on Earth Orbiter- 1 (EO-1) and similar satellites. The base layer is a distributed architecture based on Goddard Mission Services Evolution Concept (GMSEC) thus each asset still under independent control. Situational awareness is provided by a middleware layer through common Application Programmer Interface (API) to GMSEC components developed at GSFC. Users setup their own tasking requests, receive views into immediate past acquisitions in their area of interest, and into future feasibilities for acquisition across all assets. Automated notifications via pubsub feeds are returned to users containing published links to image footprints, algorithm results, and full data sets. Theme-based algorithms are available on-demand for processing.

mission autonomy↗
NASA NTRS1997

Autonomy Enables New Science Missions

The challenge of space flight in NASA's future is to enable smaller, more frequent and intensive space exploration at much lower total cost without substantially decreasing mission reliability, capability, or the scientific return on investment. The most effective way to achieve this goal is to build intelligent capabilities into the spacecraft themselves. Our technological vision for meeting the challenge of returning quality science through limited communication bandwidth will actually put scientists in a more direct link with the spacecraft than they have enjoyed to date. Ultimately, new classes of exploration missions will be enabled.

autonomy↗
NASA NTRS1994

Design of ground segments for small satellites

New concepts must be implemented when designing a Ground Segment (GS) for small satellites to conform to their specific mission characteristics: low cost, one main instrument, spacecraft autonomy, optimized mission return, etc. This paper presents the key cost drivers of such ground segments, the main design features, and the comparison of various design options that can meet the user requirements.

Mace, Guy↗
NASA NTRS2017

Increasing Crew Autonomy for Long Duration Exploration Missions: Self-Scheduling

Over the last three years, we have been investigating the operational concept of crew self-scheduling as a method of increasing crew autonomy for future exploration missions. Through Playbook, a planning and scheduling software tool, we have incrementally increased the ability for Earth analog mission crews to modify their schedules. Playbook allows the crew to add new activities from scratch, add new activities or groups of activities through a Task List, and reschedule or reassign flexible activities. The crew is also able to identify if plan modifications create violations, i.e., plan constraints not being met. This paper summarizes our observations with qualitative evidence from four NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) analog missions that supported self-scheduling as a feasible operational concept.

crew autonomy↗
NASA NTRS2017

Increasing Crew Autonomy for Long Duration Exploration Missions: Self-Scheduling

Over the last three years, we have been investigating the operational concept of crew self-scheduling as a method of increasing crew autonomy for future exploration missions. Through Playbook, a planning and scheduling software tool, we have incrementally increased the ability for Earth analog mission crews to modify their schedules. Playbook allows the crew to add new activities from scratch, add new activities or groups of activities through a Task List, and reschedule or reassign flexible activities. The crew is also able to identify if plan modifications create violations, i.e., plan constraints not being met. This paper summarizes our observations with qualitative evidence from four NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) analog missions that supported self-scheduling as a feasible operational concept.

planning and scheduling↗
NASA NTRS2021

Case Studies in Verifying Spacecraft Autonomy

Spacecraft, operating with a time-to-effect faster than human command response, or with absent or delayed communication, have depended on autonomy. It is likely that this reliance will continue, and increase further in future missions. Spacecraft autonomy is used when operator intervention is not available or feasible, or when dynamic aspects of a spacecraft situation cannot be predicted in advance. This paper provides case studies of several successfully verified autonomous software systems across multiple spacecraft, flight phases (launch, transit, entry and landing, science utilization), and software classifications, and can serve as examples to future missions in methods of successfully assuring spacecraft autonomy.

Johnson, Stephen B.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Benchmark Problem for Autonomous Urban Air Mobility

This paper introduces a Community Benchmark Problem (CBP) for Intelligent Contingency Management (ICM) for Urban Air Mobility (UAM) aircraft. The CBP aims to provide a common framework for measuring and comparing the progress of autonomy solutions for UAM aircraft in handling emergency situations. The paper proposes a methodology for defining and quantifying five measures of complexity that capture the challenges and requirements of ICM for UAM: Mission, Environmental, Autonomy, Decision-Making, and Mission Fault. In addition, it proposes a methodology for defining and quantifying mission risk acceptability with the same goals: Contingency Management, Mission Success, Operational, Mission Redefinition, and Environmental. We describe how to use these measures to track progress of the development of ICM capability, as well as to create scenarios and evaluate the performance of different autonomy solutions.

autonomy↗