Engineering Papers⌕ Search

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.

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

At least 541 records · Page 30
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2014

Cost Analysis In A Multi-Mission Operations Environment

Spacecraft control centers have evolved from dedicated, single-mission or single missiontype 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 multimission 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 serviceoriented, multi-mission control centers to streamline or refine their cost analysis process.

Newhouse, M.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Factors Contributing to Unsuccessful Re-Proposed Missions

JPL often re-proposes unselected missions after technology advancement and mission concept development. Feedback given as major and minor weaknesses and strengths in prior rounds are addressed in later versions of proposals. This feedback provides insight into the factors that affect perceptions of risk and value. My research involved an in-depth case study of an original mission, Mission-A, and the re-proposed mission, Mission-B, after a multi-year technology development effort.In 2002, Mission-A was rated as Category III, with above average science merit (top score) and High Risk. To reduce risk, NASA invested technology development funds. In 2006 the re-formulated Mission-A mission, renamed Mission-B, was rated Category IV, good to very good science, and Medium Risk. While the risk rating improved from Mission-A to Mission-B, the overall results were worse.

risk↗
NASA NTRS2013

The Gravity Recovery and Interior Laboratory Mission

The Gravity Recovery and Interior Laboratory (GRAIL) mission, launched in September 2011, successfully completed its Primary Science Mission in June 2012 and is currently in Extended Mission operations. Competitively selected under a NASA Announcement of Opportunity in December 2007, GRAIL is a Discovery Program mission subject to a mandatory project cost cap. The purpose of the mission is to precisely map the gravitational field of the Moon to reveal its internal structure from crust to core, determine its thermal evolution, and extend this knowledge to other planets. The mission uses twin spacecraft flying in tandem to provide the gravity map. The GRAIL Flight System, consisting of the spacecraft and payload, was developed based on significant heritage from previous missions such an experimental U.S. Air Force satellite, the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO) mission, and the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) mission. The Mission Operations System (MOS) was based on high-heritage multimission operations developed by NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory and Lockheed Martin. Both the Flight System and MOS were adapted to meet the unique challenges posed by the GRAIL mission design. This paper summarizes the implementation challenges and accomplishments of getting GRAIL ready for launch. It also discusses the in-flight challenges and experiences of operating two spacecraft, and mission results.

GRAIL↗
NASA NTRS2016

Utilizing the ISS Mission as a Testbed to Develop Cognitive Communications Systems

The ISS provides an excellent opportunity for pioneering artificial intelligence software to meet the challenges of real-time communications (comm) link management. This opportunity empowers the ISS Program to forge a testbed for developing cognitive communications systems for the benefit of the ISS mission, manned Low Earth Orbit (LEO) science programs and future planetary exploration programs. In November, 1998, the Flight Operations Directorate (FOD) started the ISS Antenna Manager (IAM) project to develop a single processor supporting multiple comm satellite tracking for two different antenna systems. Further, the processor was developed to be highly adaptable as it supported the ISS mission through all assembly stages. The ISS mission mandated communications specialists with complete knowledge of when the ISS was about to lose or gain comm link service. The current specialty mandated cognizance of large sun-tracking solar arrays and thermal management panels in addition to the highly-dynamic satellite service schedules and rise/set tables. This mission requirement makes the ISS the ideal communications management analogue for future LEO space station and long-duration planetary exploration missions. Future missions, with their precision-pointed, dynamic, laser-based comm links, require complete autonomy for managing high-data rate communications systems. Development of cognitive communications management systems that permit any crew member or payload science specialist, regardless of experience level, to control communications is one of the greater benefits the ISS can offer new space exploration programs. The IAM project met a new mission requirement never previously levied against US space-born communications systems management: process and display the orientation of large solar arrays and thermal control panels based on real-time joint angle telemetry. However, IAM leaves the actual communications availability assessment to human judgement, which introduces unwanted variability because each specialist has a different core of experience with comm link performance. Because the ISS utilizes two different frequency bands, dynamic structure can be occasionally translucent at one frequency while it can completely interdict service at the other frequency. The impact of articulating structure on the comm link can depend on its orientation at the time it impinges on the link. It can become easy for a human specialist to cross-associate experience at one frequency with experience at the other frequency. Additionally, the specialist's experience is incremental, occurring one nine-hour shift at a time. Only the IAM processor experiences the complete 24x7x365 communications link performance for both communications links but, it has no "learning capability." If the IAM processor could be endowed with a cognitive ability to remember past structure-induced comm link outages, based on its knowledge of the ISS position, attitude, communications gear, array joint angles and tracking accuracy, it could convey such experience to the human operator. It could also use its learned communications link behaviors to accurately convey the availability of future communications sessions. Further, the tool could remember how accurately or inaccurately it predicted availability and correct future predictions based on past performance. The IAM tool could learn frequency-specific impacts due to spacecraft structures and pass that information along as "experience." Such development would provide a single artificial intelligence processor that could provide two different experience bases. If it also "knew" the satellite service schedule, it could distinguish structure blockage from schedule or planet blockage and then quickly switch to another satellite. Alternatively, just as a human operator could judge, a cognizant comm system based on the IAM model could "know" that the blockage is not going to last very long and continue tracking a comm satellite, waiting for it to track away from structure. Ultimately, once this capability was fully developed and tested in the Mission Control Center, it could be transferred on-orbit to support development of operations concepts that include more advanced cognitive communications systems. Future applications of this capability are easily foreseen because even more dynamic satellite constellations with more nodes and greater capability are coming. Currently, the ISS fully employs its high-data-rate return link for harvesting payload science. In the coming months, it will double that data rate and is forecast to fully utilize that capability. Already there is talk of an upgrade that quadruples the current data rate allocated to ISS payload science before the end of its mission and laser comm links have already been tested from the ISS. Every data rate upgrade mandates more complicated and sensitive communications equipment which implies greater expertise invested in the human operator. Future on-orbit cognizant comm systems will be needed to meet greater performance demands aboard larger, far more complicated spacecraft. In the LEO environment, the old-style one-satellite-per-spacecraft operations concept will give way to a new concept of a single customer spacecraft simultaneously using multiple comm satellites. Much more highly-dynamic manned LEO missions with decades of crew members potentially increase the demand for communications link performance. A cognizant on-board communications system will meet advanced communications demands from future LEO missions and future planetary missions. The ISS has fledgling components of future exploration programs, both LEO and planetary. Further, the Flight Operations Directorate, through the IAM project, has already begun to develop a communications management system that attempts to solve advanced problems ideally represented by dynamic structure impacting scheduled satellite service. With an earnest project to integrate artificial intelligence into the IAM processor, the ISS Program could develop a cognizant communications system that could be adapted and transferred to future on-orbit avionics designs.

Jackson, Dan↗
NASA NTRS2019

Small-Satellite Mission Failure Rates

The purpose of this report is to determine the failure rate of small-satellite missions launched between the years 2000 and 2016. This analysis considers the rates of both partial and total mission failure, as well as the failures attributable to failure of the launch vehicle. This study observed that between the years of 2000 to 2016, 41.3% of all small satellites launched failed or partially failed. Of these small satellite missions, 24.2% were total mission failures, another 11% were partial mission failures, and 6.1% were launch vehicle failures. The small satellite failure data reveals an increase in the failure rate as the yearly launch rate has increased. The period 2000 to 2008 averaged 15 launches per year, during which 28.6% of the small satellite missions failed or partially failed. The period from 2009 to 2016 averaged 48 launches per year, during which 42.6% of the small satellite missions failed or partially failed. The launch vehicle failure rate for both periods was the same at around 6.1%. The implication is that for modern small satellite missions, almost one out of every two small satellite missions will result in either a total or a partial mission failure. Counting the partial mission successes as “successful missions” reduces the failure rate, but only to 38.2% for the period 2009 to 2016.

Small Satellite↗
NASA NTRS2019

Operations of the Optical Communications Demonstration for the Orion EM-2 Mission

The GSFC implementation of an Optical Communication System to demonstrate an operational optical communication link for Orion EM-2. It will serve as a base for providing an operational optical communications capability for future Orion missions. GSFC plans to maintain a development path for the optical communication flight terminal to allow commercialization and implementation on future Orion missions. The Orion optical module part of the optical communications flight terminal and its control electronics have a common architecture with the ILLUMA-T optical terminal provided by GSFC for use on the ISS. The plan is to flow data from Orion through the Optical Communication Fight Terminal to the Optical Communication Ground Terminal and reverse. NASA's Orion spacecraft is an exploratory vehicle designed for longer-duration flights beyond the Moon. Following Orion's Exploration Mission-1 (EM-1), during which the spacecraft will travel beyond the Moon, enter a distant retrograde orbit around the Moon and return to Earth unmanned, Exploration Mission-2 (EM-2) will see a crewed spacecraft complete a slightly different flight path. First crewed test flight of the Orion spacecraft, currently targeting a June 30, 2022 launch. The mission involves: One revolution in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) parking orbit to verify basic Orion systems functionality and deploy solar arrays. A single 42-hour Highly Elliptical Orbit (HEO) intermediate checkout orbit allows characterization of the Orion vehicle system performance prior to committing to a cis-lunar flight. Trans Lunar Injection (TLI) burn using Orion Service Module (SM) main engine, which sends Orion on a lunar flyby and free return. Skip reentry at lunar return velocities to splashdown off the coast of San Diego. Total mission duration is approximately 10 days. EM-2 is the first crewed mission of the Orion Spacecraft that crew brings more video up/downloads, file transfers, and real-time chats with family back home and high-rate communications enables live HD streaming for Crew conferences, Public Affairs Office (PAO) events, and significant mission events. Also still collecting vehicle data on numerous Orion subsystems via Development Flight Instrumentation (DFI) allows large data volume returns sooner for DFI and future science payloads, as opposed to waiting for end-of-mission. O2O is a demonstration of operational utility system tested as a Developmental Test Objective (DTO) and not required to meet mission requirements/success/ Flight Test Objectives (FTO). EM-2 architecture is as close to future mission operational architecture as possible.Orion subsystems (video, DFI, etc.) expected to generate ~250 GB of data in the first 24 hours of flight. Total data generated over the mission estimated to be more than 400 GBUsing S-Band alone, Orion limited to ~ 6GB of data downlink per day. Because of this limitation, Orion is planning to limit live video downlinks on EM-1 in order to downlink high priority fileswith 1 hour/day of Optical Communication, Orion could downlink ~6x more data per day (~ 36GB/day).The optical communication system is capable of multiple data rates up to at least 80 Mbps downlink for the transfer of Orion data to Earth while Orion is operating in the lunar vicinity.

Optical Communication↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Space Launch System Payload Stage Capability for Ultra-High Characteristic Energy Missions

The Space Launch System (SLS) vehicle is NASA’s cornerstone capability for a new era of human and robotic exploration of deep space. The unrivalled performance of SLS provides the capability to launch the first woman and next man to walk on the lunar surface and to support development of a sustained human presence in cislunar space, and ultimately human missions to Mars. As an evolvable capability with unique launch performance, the opportunities enabled by SLS also include game-changing benefits for science missions, including probes to the outer solar system and beyond. For the last two years, the SLS Program has worked with the Interstellar Probe team at the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory(APL) to provide data that describe how SLS could support a mission that would break through the boundary of the heliosphere and into pristine interstellar space only a decade after launch, enabling earlier science return and greatly increasing spacecraft life in the interstellar medium. In record-breaking time, the ISP as launched on SLS may answer questions raised by the extended mission of NASA’s Voyager spacecraft. While SLS and its efficient Exploration Upper Stage (EUS) offer benefits for exploration of the outer planets, adding one or more additional stages to this architecture makes it even more capable for missions beyond our solar system, offering more realistically appealing flight times that would allow the mission scientists to reap the rewards of exploration. During the time the SLS Program has been working with the Interstellar Probe team, it has identified an expedited path to the Block 2 capability planned for the Interstellar Probe mission, and further matured performance numbers for diverse multi-stage configurations using a combination of commercially available liquid hydrogen (LH2)/liquid oxygen (LOX) upper stages and solid motor kick stages. That work has demonstrated the SLS payload stage capability provides significant benefits and opens trade space for multiple missions in consideration during planning for the next Planetary Science and Astrobiology Decadal Survey. This presentation details the significant benefits SLS can provides for very high characteristic (C3) energy missions by coupling the capabilities of SLS to current commercial rocket propulsion stage systems. These capabilities are explored specifically in the context of an Interstellar Probe architecture in which a small, capable science probe, coupled with carefully tailored mission design trajectories, could be used to explore the outer solar system and the interstellar medium. The presentation will also address the operational logistics of integrating such a mission, explaining the options available for “non-standard” SLS payloads, including processing those with radioisotope power generators or additional propulsion stages. An SLS system overview and capabilities will be presented, along with vehicle configuration and orbit performance capability studies, explaining how SLS is enabling for a variety of high-energy science mission profiles, including launching an exploratory probe bound for interstellar space only a decade after launch.

Rob Stough↗
NASA NTRS2021

Comparison of Health and Performance Risk for Accelerated Mars Mission Scenarios

This document details the results for a quantitative estimate of the difference in human health and performance risk that crews would face for two hypothetical variations on Mars mission scenarios: an Accelerated Mars Mission (AMM) and a Standard Mars Mission(SMM).NASA goals for Mars mission concepts, duration, and tasks have varied over the years. While neither of the cases considered here are likely to accurately represent the initial mission to Mars, the exercise of evaluating significant differences in mission duration from an astronaut health perspective can provide bounding insight to the level of risk that is likely to be encountered in an eventual Mars mission. Medical Probabilistic Risk Assessment using the Integrated Medical Model (IMM)(1–3)and the NASA Space Radiation Cancer Risk Model (NSCR)(4,5) are used here to help mission planners gain the best insight currently available into the expected magnitude of impacts to astronaut health when undertaking a Mars mission. These impacts occur both in-mission as well as in the long-term health of the astronauts post-mission. These evaluations are currently the best available modeling estimates to characterize and bound the health risks in a proposed mission domain where humans have no experience.

Erik Antonsen↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Thermal Protection System to Enable Ice Giant Aerocapture Mission for Delivering Both an Orbiter and an In Situ Probe

The Ice Giants have been identified as high priority science destinations in the last Decadal Survey [1] and could benefit from aerocapture as the primary method for orbit insertion [2]. A mass-efficient aerocapture system will enable the delivery of an orbiter along with an atmospheric probe (for in situ measurements to anchor global data collected by the orbiter) and possibly a lander at Triton [3]. Aerocapture could be executed either using low L/D rigid aeroshell with lift modulation (LMA) [4] or using deployable aeroshell using drag modulation (DMA) [3]. Nearly two decades ago, a NASA-funded team performed Neptune-Triton aerocapture studies with a mid-L/D lifting configuration [5] for achieving orbit using LMA. This study showed aerocapture challenges. Due to very high peak entry conditions combined with very high heat-load, a suite of TPS materials was required and this suite was deemed problematic from a qualification perspective, due test facility limitations. In the past 20 years, progress made in GN&C for lift-guided entry missions such as MSL, Orion EFT1, Mars 2020 and the upcoming Artemis missions, and the expertise in blunt body aerodynamics at large scale (~ 5m) has led the EDL community to conclude that aerocapture is a “go do” engineering activity and most technologies are in hand to propose missions with aerocapture [6] [7]. Aerocapture using DMA, currently in development, is an option for Ice Giant Missions. While DMA is simpler in some sense, due to ballistic entry and no need for lift-guided maneuvering, it has challenges and it’s maturity is lower. LMA and DMA both require one or more ablative Thermal Protection System (TPS) materials for the rigid aeroshell element. The ablative TPS needs to be robust and mass efficient due to the high heat loads and size of the rigid aeroshell. Currently, there are capable ablative thermal protection materials, e.g., Heatshield for Extreme Entry Environments Technology (HEEET), 3-D woven Mid-Density Carbon- Phenolic (3MDCP), and PICA (Phenolic-Impregnated Carbon Ablator) that are mature, i.e., at TRL 6 or higher. NASA also invested in Conformal PICA that was matured to TRL 5. Our goal is to evaluate the applicability of high TRL TPS and consider other design options. We first establish bounding aerocapture trajectories for a wide range of arrival conditions and the associated aerothermal environment. Based on the environments, we then determine the predicted TPS mass for the aeroshell [4]. In this presentation, we will outline the process by which we establish bounding aerocapture trajectories for hyperbolic excess velocities ranging from 27 km/s to 35 km/s, which are shown to be a range of velocities that can reduce the trip time from ~14 years to 8 years. The above velocity range translates to ~12 km/s to ~24 km/s arrival velocities at the planetary entry interface [2]. The velocity reduction required to achieve orbit ranges between ~2.5 km/s to 9.5 km/s for both Neptune and Triton. Propulsive insertion alone, due to the amount of fuel required to achieve the required velocity reduction, limits the science returned [2]. We establish the bounding aerocapture trajectories for a low L/D (~ 0.4) configuration for three different ballistic coefficients. The ballistic coefficient range is determined from three different aeroshell diameters of 3m, 4m and 5m and with an entry system mass of 2200 kg. With the above range of design parameters, we then determine conservative/bounding estimates of aerothermal environments by using a combination of CFD simulations and stagnation point heating estimates [7]. This engineering approach allows us to first assess the TPS need vs. TPS capability and determine the applicability of existing TPS. Once an applicable suite of TPS is determined, the TPS thickness and mass are computed. We show that the TPS mass fraction can be as low as 5% to as high as 20%, depending on total trip time reduction and other design parameters for a range of TPS. This is a large range for TPS mass fraction. We show PICA and HEEET can indeed enable aerocapture missions, but the missions incur a mass penalty. TPS mass savings, can be further reduced with the use of conformal PICA. Advancing the development of Conformal PICA to make it robust across the entire aerothermal environment (peak heat-flux, pressure and shear) range will result in TPS mass fractions of < 10% for Ice Giant aerocapture missions such as the Neptune-Triton mission. Aerocapture allows for not only shortening the trip time but enables larger mass to be placed in orbit. Furthermore, probes deployed from orbit will benefit in reduced entry environments allowing for a lower risk TPS implementation as compared to mission designs where the probe is released prior to orbit insertion. One of the challenges for the Ice Giant community is to ensure mission designs that maximize science and allow flexibility in the placement of the entry probe. The traditional approach to release the probe ahead of the orbiter may not optimize returned science. In this presentation, we will make the case for mature TPS such as HEEET and PICA. While these materials can enable aerocapture missions, completing the development of conformal PICA and extending Conformal PICA to be more robust, will have significant impact to TPS mass efficiency and significantly enhance science return for future Gas- and Ice-Giant missions.

E Venkatapathy↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Artemis Lunar Mission Availability & Design

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Artemis Program is leading international spaceexploration in a return to human lunar missions. The mission design underpinning this program is a critical aspect inthe integration of the multiple vehicles, processes, and capabilities to execute the most demanding human spaceflightmissions to date. Frequently mission design is characterized solely by its trajectory and the associated delta-velocityto achieve the end-to-end mission on a single day of flight. However, in practical terms for spaceflight missions,actual performance must characterize the translation delta-velocity demand, integrated power and thermal, crew dayoperations, commodities limitations, launch vehicle opportunities, and numerous additional factors across numerouslaunch day dependent variables. These factors together provide a unified set of mission design constraints that mustall be met in order to execute a fully integrated mission. The frequency of achieving all of the mission designconstraints is thus characterized as mission availability. The mission availability reflects the number of opportunitiesin any given period (month, year, etc.) for which an end-to-end mission could be launched. Ensuring adequatemission availability for the Artemis Program is necessary to support long term viability and sustainability of humanlunar exploration. This paper will characterize the driving factors in the Artemis mission availability includingvehicle specific effects from the Space Launch System (SLS), Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle, Gateway, HumanLanding System (HLS) and other contributing projects. This analysis will also summarize the relevant factors thatfuture vehicles and projects should consider for the integration and expansion of exploration capabilities with theArtemis Program.

Nujoud Fahoum Merancy↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

From NASA's EOS to ESO: Advancing Applications of the Future Atmosphere Observing (AOS) Mission

The NASA Earth System Observatory (ESO) Atmosphere Observing System (AOS) is being designed to explore the fundamental questions of how interconnections between aerosols, clouds and precipitation impact our weather and climate, addressing real-world challenges to benefit society. A fundamental component of the AOS mission is ensuring that applications for economic and societal benefit are considered to the greatest extent possible in mission design. As a result, the AOS Applications Impact Team (AIT) was formed to address this objective. The overarching goal of the AIT is to help improve capacity for transitioning science to applications to make it possible to more quickly and effectively inform decisions that will directly benefit society. We seek to maximize AOS benefit to impact decisions through early engagement in the mission development phase in order to prepare stakeholders to apply observations as soon as AOS mission data become available. A critical component of preparing future users of AOS mission data is building on the successes of applications of NASA’s existing Earth Observing System (EOS), A-Train, and sub-orbital campaigns with the goal of advancing current mission applications activities and preparing for innovative AOS mission observations. NASA’s GPM mission forms a framework to enhance AOS precipitation applications while AOS health and air quality applications benefit from the heritage of CALIPSO and MODIS. Additionally, AOS will likely benefit from current and future missions such as TROPICS, MAIA, TEMPO, and PACE which launch before AOS. Additionally, current sub-orbital field campaigns, such as NASA IMPACTS and ACTIVATE, provide rich data sources to highlight future AOS capabilities. Engaging with existing missions and sub-orbital field campaigns helps to identify and understand data needs, gaps, and opportunities for current and future stakeholders, determine what data products are of highest value and use, and connect stakeholders with current mission data that can serve as AOS proxy data, among others. In this presentation, we provide an overview of AOS AIT activities, initiatives, and the AOS Applications Seminar Series to highlight how existing EOS, A-Train, and sub-orbital missions can play a critical role in advancing AOS applications prior to launch.

Emily B. Berndt↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Real-Time Science Decisioning During High Tempo-High Intensity Mission Operations and the Role of Analogs

Introduction: NASA’s VIPER mission presents a unique operational paradigm within the history of robotic spaceflight. The proximity of the Moon to the Earth and the terrain elements (surface characteristics, light/shadow dynamics, communication links) of the lunar South Polar landing site create unprecedented operational conditions between these two planetary bodies. Apollo era lunar science and exploration included humans in situ to operate instruments and assimilate observational inputs in real-time. Previous lunar orbital missions have worked to operational timescales, e.g., decisional timelines and communication exchanges, that were weeks in length. Mars rover missions have worked to operational timescales, e.g., decisional timelines and communication exchanges between Mars and Earth, that were hours, days, and weeks in length. In the case of the VIPER mission, our operational decisioning for rover driving and instrument commanding will be compressed to minute-scale timeframes. These operational conditions directly impact the manner and speed with which the VIPER Science Team (VST) is required to synthesize and analyze data and produce timely science-driven decisions throughout surface mission operations. The VST shall provide mission enhancing scientific input to guide rover traverse planning and drill site confirmation and selection throughout surface operations. Further, the VST input will be of vital importance to the mission’s ability to maximize science return and to meet broader NASA objectives for future lunar in-situ resource utilization (ISRU)and exploration activities. The VST co-located in the Mission Science Center (MSC) will be responsive to the tactical operational cadence of the Mission Operations Center (MOC) and will provide further strategic and Long-Term Planning (LTP) guidance to the mission. The VIPER Science Operations & Integration(SO&I)team has developed an architecture that is focused on the infusion of science-decisioning into the operational framework and execution cadence of VIPER. NASA analog research has played a significant role in the construction of the VIPER science operations systems. As an example, the SO&I team has led analog missions that have focused on bringing together expertise in the sciences (natural, applied and social) and in operations in service of learning how to build and hold together interdisciplinary work environments and what tools are needed to support high tempo, high intensity integrated decisioning. These experiences have provided an essential foundation of knowledge to the VIPER team. Those analogs that specifically influenced the VIPER science operations construct were identified through a process of comparative analysis to prioritize those that offered relevance in whole or in part, and those that did not. The analog research output that provided extensibility to the VIPER science operations architecture included remote teams of humans and robots in cooperation (synchronous and asynchronous) with simulated earthbound systems, engineering and science teams, and the integrated assembly of tools that supported scientific analysis and data synthesis and provided infrastructure for the remote testing framework. Analogs which included real-time data monitoring, synthesis, visualization and access in a democratized and operationalized manner were of particular interest to the development of the VIPER MSC toolset both in terms of the technology and the processes used to develop the supporting infrastructure. We anticipate that each subsequent mission to the lunar south pole, whether with robots or humans, will be able to optimize science and exploration return by evolving strategies to infuse real-time collaborative science-decisioning. Furthermore, these efforts will result in a foundation for science operations development in support of human-robotic exploration of deep space and Mars. NASA analogs can continue to provide the opportunity to prepare, test and iterate on the operational concepts and tools that will support these ever-expanding space exploration efforts. Our presentation will include an overview of the VIPER Science Operations & Integration development process and specifics on what aspects of analog research have had a significant impact on our work systems.

D S S Lim↗
DOE OSTI2016

Assembly, Test and Launch Operations for a Nuclear-enabled NASA Mission: Considerations that are Specific to Use of a Nuclear Payload

For more than five decades, Radioisotope Power Systems (RPS) have played a critical role in the exploration of space, enabling missions of scientific discovery to destinations across the solar system by providing electrical power to explore remote, challenging and extreme environments. In particular, RPS enable deep space missions where increased heliocentric distances reduce the ability of solar power to adequately meet spacecraft and instruments power requirements. Some previous notable missions that were enabled by RPS include Nimbus III, the Apollo Surface Experiments, the Pioneers 10 and 11, the Viking Mars Landers, Galileo, Ulysses, Cassini, New Horizons and Curiosity. The current operating set of missions that are enabled by RPS are Voyagers 1 and 2, Cassini, New Horizons, and Curiosity. The Multi-Mission Radioisotope Thermal Generator (MMRTG) is the current RPS used for missions. An enhanced version of this generator outfitted with higher efficiency thermoelectrics is under development for potential use in the future. Other previously deployed power systems include the Multi-hundred Watt Radisotope Thermo-electric Generator (MHW RTG) and the General Purpose Heat Source Radisotope Thermo-electric Generator (GPHS RTG). The common thread for all of these power systems is that they are fueled with Pu-238. The use of this unique isotope involves additional planning activities and requires specific actions when the devices are delivered to Kennedy Space Center (KSC), launch site, and incorporated into the assembly, test and launch operations (ATLO) process to ensure mission success, met safety and security challenges. It has been forecasted that the use of a nuclear reactor system is on the horizon. This system could be used for either specifically powering S/C propulsion system or for surface power use once the mission arrived at its destina-tion. Since a nuclear-fission-based system has never been handled or integrated into a spacecraft at KSC, this nuclear reactor system would potentially require further challenges that must be accounted for in the ATLO process. This paper will explain ATLO considerations for the recent RTG-enabled launches that have occurred and planned in the near future (Mars 2020 NASA mission). It will also describe where further challenges that need to be met for the placement of a nuclear reactor (either for propulsion or transportation for surface power use) onto a space mission. Specifically, the following topics will be addressed: • Approach for nuclear safety planning for nuclear material use and its transportation to launch site • Planning for security posture for nuclear materials at launch site • Preparation for transportation of the nuclear power system from the fueling/testing location to the launch site • Preparation of documentation and procedures for nuclear material use at launch site • Planning for coordination between power system and space mission groups • Planning for appropriate staffing and scheduling of operations

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗
NASA NTRS1998

Human Mars Missions: Cost Driven Architecture Assessments

This report investigates various methods of reducing the cost in space transportation systems for human Mars missions. The reference mission for this task is a mission currently under study at NASA. called the Mars Design Reference Mission, characterized by In-Situ propellant production at Mars. This study mainly consists of comparative evaluations to the reference mission with a view to selecting strategies that would reduce the cost of the Mars program as a whole. One of the objectives is to understand the implications of certain Mars architectures, mission modes, vehicle configurations, and potentials for vehicle reusability. The evaluations start with year 2011-2014 conjunction missions which were characterized by their abort-to-the-surface mission abort philosophy. Variations within this mission architecture, as well as outside the set to other architectures (not predicated on an abort to surface philosophy) were evaluated. Specific emphasis has been placed on identifying and assessing overall mission risk. Impacts that Mars mission vehicles might place upon the Space Station, if it were to be used as an assembly or operations base, were also discussed. Because of the short duration of this study only on a few propulsion elements were addressed (nuclear thermal, cryogenic oxygen-hydrogen, cryogenic oxygen-methane, and aerocapture). Primary ground rules and assumptions were taken from NASA material used in Marshall Space Flight Center's own assessment done in 1997.

Interplanetary Mission↗
NASA NTRS2014

A CubeSat Asteroid Mission: Design Study and Trade-Offs

There is considerable interest in expanding the applicability of cubesat spacecraft into lightweight, low cost missions beyond Low Earth Orbit. A conceptual design was done for a 6-U cubesat for a technology demonstration to demonstrate use of electric propulsion systems on a small satellite platform. The candidate objective was a mission to be launched on the SLS test launch EM-1 to visit a Near-Earth asteroid. Both asteroid fly-by and asteroid rendezvous missions were analyzed. Propulsion systems analyzed included cold-gas thruster systems, Hall and ion thrusters, incorporating either Xenon or Iodine propellant, and an electrospray thruster. The mission takes advantage of the ability of the SLS launch to place it into an initial trajectory of C3=0. Targeting asteroids that fly close to earth minimizes the propulsion required for fly-by/rendezvous. Due to mass constraints, high specific impulse is required, and volume constraints mean the propellant density was also of great importance to the ability to achieve the required deltaV. This improves the relative usefulness of the electrospray salt, with higher propellant density. In order to minimize high pressure tanks and volatiles, the salt electrospray and iodine ion propulsion systems were the optimum designs for the fly-by and rendezvous missions respectively combined with a thruster gimbal and wheel system For the candidate fly-by mission, with a mission deltaV of about 400 m/s, the mission objectives could be accomplished with a 800s electrospray propulsion system, incorporating a propellant-less cathode and a bellows salt tank. This propulsion system is planned for demonstration on 2015 LEO and 2016 GEO DARPA flights. For the rendezvous mission, at a ΔV of 2000 m/s, the mission could be accomplished with a 50W miniature ion propulsion system running iodine propellant. This propulsion system is not yet demonstrated in space. The conceptual design shows that an asteroid mission is possible using a cubesat platform with high-efficiency electric propulsion.

cubesat↗
DOE OSTI2019

Towards Automated Cyber Mission Modelling

Large-scale enterprises execute a full range of missions to satisfy objectives. Healthy enterprises should acquire and maintain mission awareness, which requires reasoning over mission models that identify the structure and character of missions along with their related cyber resources. Models are typically constructed by subject matter experts using a time- and labour-intensive manual process. This paper describes a novel framework comprising high-level processes that model mission essential functions and mission threads as well as recognize active instances. This framework enables data-driven, semi-automated modelling to construct accurate, timely mission representations necessary for mission assurance and mission mapping.

mission modelling, mission awareness, mission assu↗
NASA NTRS1984

Analysis of heliographic missions complementary to ISPM

Five concepts were formulated, analyzed, and compared for satisfying heliographic science mission objectives both with and without a concurrent International Solar Polar Mission (ISPM) Spacecraft. Key astrodynamic constraints and performance factors are known from literature for the Lagrange point mission and the sun-synchronous earth orbit mission, but are set forth in this paper for the three solar orbiting missions concepts considered. Any of these five missions should be doable at modest cost since no strong cost drivers were encountered in the analyses. The mission to be flown depends on mission capability to meet science measurement needs more than on strong economic factors. Each mission offers special advantages for particular measurement emphasis. Based on selected qualitative mission discriminators, an overall 'best mission' was selected and described in some detail.

Driver, J. M.↗
NASA NTRS1987

A preliminary study of Mars rover/sample return missions

The Solar System Exploration Committee (SSEC) of the NASA Advisory Council recommends that a Mars Sample Return mission be undertaken before the year 2000. Comprehensive studies of a Mars Sample Return mission have been ongoing since 1984. The initial focus of these studies was an integrated mission concept with the surface rover and sample return vehicle elements delivered to Mars on a single launch and landed together. This approach, to be carried out as a unilateral U.S. initiative, is still a high priority goal in an Augmented Program of exploration, as the SSEC recommendation clearly states. With this background of a well-understood mission concept, NASA decided to focus its 1986 study effort on a potential opportunity not previously examined; namely, a Mars Rover/Sample Return (MRSR) mission which would involve a significant aspect of international cooperation. As envisioned, responsibility for the various mission operations and hardware elements would be divided in a logical manner with clearly defined and acceptable interfaces. The U.S. and its international partner would carry out separately launched but coordinated missions with the overall goal of accomplishing in situ science and returning several kilograms of surface samples from Mars. Important considerations for implementation of such a plan are minimum technology transfer, maximum sharing of scientific results, and independent credibility of each mission role. Under the guidance and oversight of a Mars Exploration Strategy Advisory Group organized by NASA, a study team was formed in the fall of 1986 to develop a preliminary definition of a flight-separable, cooperative mission. The selected concept assumes that the U.S. would undertake the rover mission with its sample collection operations and our international partner would return the samples to Earth. Although the inverse of these roles is also possible, this study report focuses on the rover functions of MRSR because rover operations have not been studied in as much detail as the sample return functions of the mission.

Source record↗