Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “system-level”

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 559 records · Page 31
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2022

Run Time Assurance for Electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing Aircraft

NASA is conducting research to demonstrate and evaluate the application of Run Time Assurance (RTA) as a means to assure safety in Electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing (eVTOL) aircraft with highly automated or autonomous flight capability supervised by a single onboard pilot. The work described in this report demonstrates an application of RTA and examines the implications for design and analysis of aircraft functions and systems; aircraft safety hazards; safety assurance; development assurance; and pilot tasks and performance. This research effort also seeks to assess the efficacy of the combined application of traditional Functional Hazard Analysis (FHA) and the more modern System Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA) techniques to perform hazard analyses on aircraft with complex automated and autonomous systems and an onboard pilot. During the research effort we developed architectural designs of two alternate eVTOL aircraft, generally following the process characterized in the SAE standards ARP4754 and ARP4761. The design has focused on the control architectures of these aircraft, which are identical except that one incorporates RTA techniques to reduce the criticality of some key software components. Artifacts of this process include a taxonomy of aircraft-level functions, aircraft-level architecture diagrams, aircraft-level functional hazard assessments (AFHA), function allocations onto aircraft systems and subsystems, functional block diagrams for a select set of control-related functions, and system-level functional hazard assessments (SFHA) for those functions. This project has highlighted the notion that DAL D is something of a sweet spot for low-confidence controllers in an RTA-based design. Among the many activities described in DO-178C, the activities related to requirement verifiability, algorithmic accuracy, and test coverage can be the most challenging for the kinds of advanced control techniques that may be desirable in novel UAM designs, such as adaptive control, machine-learning, artificial intelligence, numerical search, and Monte Carlo based algorithms. Moreover, the standard requires that development teams demonstrate that errors leading to unacceptable failure conditions have been removed from the software. The RTA architecture, which cordons off the low-confidence function, makes it much easier to show this for these kinds of algorithms. With regard to the use of STPA and FHA as complementary hazard analysis techniques, our research effort led us to the conclusion that STPA should be used to derive requirements for hardware and software systems and/or components. Also, STPA is a natural complement to other processes in ARP4754A involving design studies and iteration.

Run-time assurance↗
NASA NTRS2020

Highlights of the Mars 2020 Environmental Test Program

Environmental requirements for Mars 2020 (M2020) were established early in the program (due to inheritance from Mars Science Laboratory [MSL]), and a comprehensive test implementation program was developed as the spacecraft design matured. Several design scope changes happened during development (for example, addition of a helicopter), and the test program expanded accordingly. The environmental test program included hundreds of assembly-level mission-qualifying tests, which fed into the system-level environmental test program. This paper describes the highlights of selected portions of the assembly and system level test program.

Dodge, Randy↗
NASA NTRS2020

Icy and Ocean World Exploration Enabled by Radioisotope Power Systems

As the interest in exploring icy and ocean worlds gains increasing traction among scientists and mission communities, there are many potential icy and ocean world targets for in-situ lander missions. Potential targets include Europa, Enceladus, Titan, Triton, Ceres, Pluto, and more, which will allow the scientific community to address icy and ocean world related questions for understanding the distribution of life in the Solar System. Beyond Jupiter, solar power is infeasible for any landed missions and primary batteries are infeasible for long-duration missions. Radioisotope Power Systems (RPS) can be enabling for these long-duration in-situ missions. However, the interaction of RPS waste heat with icy world surfaces must be understood to assure the science and mission communities that RPS are a safe, enabling option to explore the surface of icy bodies. This paper describes a study for the RPS Program that was conducted by the RPS Mission Analysis Team and JPL’s Team X to investigate the system-level impact of a heat rejection system that would be required for RPS-enabled exploration of icy and ocean worlds.

Lee, Young H↗
NASA NTRS2020

Progress on LISA Colloid Microthruster Technology Development

Colloid microthrusters have been operated successfully in flight, providing drag-free and precision control for spacecraft that can be used for future applications such as gravity wave and exoplanet observatories. The Space Technology 7 Disturbance Reduction System (ST7- DRS) technology demonstration payload included eight Busek Colloid Micro-Newton Thrusters (CMNTs) as part of the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA) Pathfinder mission that launched in December of 2015. The CMNTs provided full attitude and precision drag-free control of the spacecraft with <10 nm/√Hz stability along the most sensitive axis during commissioning, nominal, and extended mission phases through April of 2017. Performance requirements (≤0.1 μN/√Hz) were met and models were validated based on on- orbit measurements of test mass motion and actuation during the 60-day nominal and 30-day extended missions. In 2018, the European Space Agency (ESA) selected LISA to be the agency’s next “large-class” mission, currently in Phase A, with a launch scheduled for 2034 and a 12.5-year duration, including the transfer (1.5 years), commissioning (1 year), nominal (4 or 6 years), and extended (6 or 4 years) phases of the mission, which sets the lifetime and consumables requirement. NASA is considering a significant contribution of hardware to the ESA-led mission, potentially including colloid microthrusters. In preparation, NASA is developing five technologies to TRL 5 and 6, including the colloid microthrusters, to be ready for infusion into LISA by the mission adoption review (MAR), currently scheduled for 2024. While ST7-DRS effectively brought the CMNTs to TRL 7, additional lower-TRL flow control components must be developed for full redundancy, reducing the system-level TRL back to 4. Key to the future of the colloid microthruster technology will be to use lessons learned and keep as much of the heritage from the ST7 design as possible while updating the system to support redundancy and lifetime requirements of a flagship-class mission. This paper describes the technology plan and progress to reach TRL 6 by the MAR, focusing on near- term plans to reach TRL 5 by the end of March 2022 for the LISA Colloid Microthrusters (CMTs). Work includes requirements development and sizing studies, breadboard and brassboard hardware developments at Busek, including relevant lifetime and environment testing, and lifetime modeling, verification and validation efforts at JPL, UCLA, and UCI.

Gamero-Castaño, Manuel↗
NASA NTRS2021

Adaptive-Sweep Algorithm for Spacecraft Carrier Acquisition and Tracking: System Analysis and Implementation

This paper presents an adaptive-sweep algorithm that can be used in conjunction with a Phased-Lock Loop to acquire and track the carrier of a Binary Phase-shift Keying signal with residual carrier. This algorithm is useful in proximity links where no Doppler pre-compensation is available at the transmitter, and allows the receiver to acquire the incoming carrier even if the experienced Doppler shift is several orders of magnitude larger than the PLL bandwidth. Other applications for this algorithm include Multiple Uplink per Antenna at the Deep Space Network, and generation of observables (Doppler shift, Doppler rate, range rate) for in-situ navigation purposes. This paper enhances a previously presented adaptive-sweep algorithm and its performance analysis in two fronts. First, the algorithm now uses the direction function to automatically estimate the required frequency jump to achieve PLL lock. This enables a fully adaptive-sweep scheme in which system implementer does not need to manually select thresholds. On the other hand, we study the system performance in the presence of Additive White Gaussian Noise and derive necessary conditions for the system to operate at low signal-to-noise conditions. This allows us to create design rules that specify all parameters of the algorithm given a set of system-level requirements. To test the performance of the proposed algorithm, we implement it in GNU Radio, an open-source Software-Defined Radio that interfaces with several commercial radio peripherals. We use this implementation to demonstrate carrier lock and quantify system performance under different noise conditions. We also test the algorithm using open-loop recordings of two downlinks between the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter and the Deep Space Network. We show that even after large frequency jumps (tens of kHz), the proposed system is able to rapidly reacquire the carrier and continue operation.

Divsalar, Dariush↗
NASA NTRS2021

FRESCO: A Framework for Spacecraft Systems Autonomy

Achieving the science exploration and defense goals of the following decades will require flight systems capable of operations with limited operator contact, system mode changes and retasking based on sensor data, and complex robotic operations. To support these capabilities, increasingly autonomous flight systems are required that can perform dedicated mission functions, e.g. payload targeting and communications, and system-level functions, e.g. planning and goal monitoring. Architecting an autonomous system requires a well-reasoned, self-consistent framework to avoid \textit{ad hoc} design choices that will introduce complexity and risk. The Framework for Robust Execution and Scheduling of Commands On-Board, FRESCO, is the result of lessons learned in developing a software architecture to enable autonomous solar system exploration. FRESCO generalizes this work to offer a modular, software-agnostic approach to developing verifiable architecture for autonomous space systems. FRESCO specifies guiding principles, functions, interfaces, and interactions from which mission-specific autonomous control architectures can be derived. FRESCO is a principled framework relying on explicit, state-based goal definitions, centralized management of state knowledge, clearly separated control boundaries, and hierarchical reasoning. Using components from FRESCO reference architecture, an autonomous decision-making architecture can be designed for spacecraft which can then be mapped to flight software architecture. FRESCO is flexibly defined to enable autonomous control of flight systems built using extensive software and hardware heritage. Finally, FRESCO-derived architectures support a spectrum of operator/spacecraft interactions, ranging from traditional commanding to goal-driven commanding with the ability to change mission goals autonomously. FRESCO has been used in defining the autonomy architectures for the ASTERIA mission and have been demonstrated in laboratory and software simulation for small body rendezvous and in-space servicing missions.

Kolcio, Ksenia↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Quantifying Uncertainty of Landing and Takeoff Noise for Commercial Supersonic Aircraft

Of the many challenges faced by manufacturers attempting to offer supersonic travel to the public, the uncertainty in predicting the noise of these aircraft in airport operations has an immediate impact. No noise regulation exists in FAA or ICAO for certifying such aircraft, as these organization require solid data, usually from existing aircraft. Manufacturers are taking large risks to design a vehicle not knowing whether it will be allowed to fly. A partial solution to this conundrum is to use physics-based simulations to provide the “data” used to calibrate system-level prediction methods, carefully documenting the uncertainty of the method for application to supersonic aircraft. A close look at the accuracy of empirical prediction methods points to areas where improvements need to be made if noise studies of supersonic aircraft are to be useful. As NASA embarks on a focused research program to improve predictions of noise from the noise-dominant propulsion noise of commercial supersonic aircraft, this paper documents the work done to baseline the uncertainties found in today’s noise prediction methods. A relatively simplistic method was developed, summarizing the error of the empirical methods on a component basis and following their impact on the total aircraft during landing and takeoff operations using Monte Carlo analysis. By this method it is found that current empirical noise prediction methods have an uncertainty of 1.5 EPNdB cumulative for propulsion noise of a representative conventional subsonic passenger aircraft. When applied to likely near-term supersonic commercial aircraft, the uncertainty is 7.6 EPNdB cumulative, a difference that must be reduced if the prediction methods are to guide decision makers.

Airport noise↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Overview of NASA ISRU Plans, Priorites, and Activities

Introduction:The National Aeronautics andSpace Administration (NASA) of the United States ofAmerica (US) has initiated the Artemis Moon to Marsprogram to send astronauts (the first woman andperson of color) back to the lunar surface, create asustainable human lunar exploration program, andlead the first human exploration mission to the Marssurface in the 2030’s [1]. A major objective of thisprogram is to characterize the resources that exist onthe Moon and Mars, and learn how to utilize them forsustained and affordable exploration. Commonlyknown as In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU), thesearch for, acquisition, and processing of resources inspace has the potential to greatly reduce thedependency on transporting mission consumables andinfrastructure from Earth, thereby reducing missioncosts, risks, and dependency on Earth.ISRU is Enabling: Through the extraction andprocessing of resources into mission commoditiessuch as rocket propellants, life support consumables,and fuel cell reactants, ISRU enhances and evolvesthe cis-lunar, lander, and surface transportationsystems required for human exploration; expandingand enhancing HOW humans can explore and returnfrom the Moon. Through the extraction andprocessing of resources into metals, silicon, and othermanufacturing and construction feedstock, ISRUenhances and allows for the expansion of criticalinfrastructure using in situ manufacturing andconstruction capabilities that influence WHAT humanscan do on the Moon and in cis-lunar space. Becauseof this, ISRU supports and enables commercialinvolvement beyond NASA and governmentalagencies by both lowering the cost of sustainedtransportation to/from/on the Moon as well assupporting the market required for needing thesetransportation systems. Strategic Framework:To achieve this vision,NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate(STMD) ensures the coordinated development ofISRU and other critical space and surfaceinfrastructure elements such as propulsion, power,manufacturing, construction, and robotics through theStrategic Technology Architecture Roundtable(STAR) process. Through STAR, an integratedframework and process has been created allowing forcapabilities and technologies to be linked andassessed, gaps to be identified, specifications andmetrics to be established, and provide a means toprioritize and implement technology development andmissions. A critical part of the STAR effort has beenthe establishment of the Strategic Framework thatorganizes all work under four major Thrusts (Go,Land, Live, and Explore) and identifies the drivingOutcomes for each of these Thrusts. From the Thrustsand Outcomes, all work can be categorized and linkedbetween Capability Areas, and Technology Gaps canbe identified and addressed (Figure 1.)Figure 1. Strategic Framework and STAR FrameworkISRU Envisioned Future: To drive thedevelopment of technologies and capabilities, theSTAR process starts with establishing a ‘grand vision’of where each Outcome and Capability is aiming tobe considered complete. For ISRU, the EnvisionedFuture is “Scalable ISRU production/utilizationcapabilities including sustainable commodities on thelunar and Mars Surface”. This involves starting with10’s of metric tons of products, but evolves into 100’sto 1000’s of metric tons of water, oxygen, propellants,construction and manufacturing feedstock, andcommodities for habitat and food production andoperations. For ISRU, the ‘Prospect to Product’philosophy starts with Destination Reconnaissance &Resource Assessment, followed by ResourceAcquisition, Isolation, and Preparation, leading intoResource Processing (which is further subdivided intomission consumables and feedstocks for constructionand manufacturing). The ISRU Envisioned Futurealso considers what resources are available andattempts to address what and when these resourceswill be evaluated and harnessed, as well asconsidering which products/commodities can beobtained for early use and which ones require moretime and/or users of refined products.It Takes an Architecture: ISRU does not existon its own. By definition, it requires customers/users SHORT TITLE HERE: A. B. Author and C. D. Authorto use the products/commodities produced by ISRUsystems. Also, for an ISRU capability to exist, itmust obtain products and services from other systemsand infrastructure. An important aspect of the STARprocess and the ISRU Envisioned Futures Prioritiesstrategy is to identify and link all of these systems andcapabilities to achieve the desired end state (Figure2).Figure 2. ISRU as Part of a Larger ArchitectureISRU Capability Drivers: The guidingprinciples for NASA’s Space TechnologyDevelopment for Artemis are to develop criticaltechnologies and capabilities that enable (i) asustainable Lunar surface presence, (ii) the future goalof sending humans to Mars, and (iii) promotingcritical technologies to enable future science andcommercial missions. It is a major goal of theArtemis campaign to establish some sort of base campat the lunar South Pole by approximately the end ofthe decade. The ISRU Envisioned Futures Prioritiesstrategy is aligned with the Artemis campaign todevelop and demonstrate ISRU capabilities in thistimeframe that could lead to sustained surfaceoperations, infrastructure growth, and commercialoperations in the next decade (Figure 3).Figure 3. ISRU Dual Path to Full Implementation and CommercializationState of the Art and Gaps: To achieve theenvisioned future, an extensive effort was performedto understand the State of the Art (SOA) for ISRUgoing back decades, and to assess the SOA against thenear and long-term goals and objectives of the ISRUStrategic Outcome objectives. While the releasedISRU Envisioned Futures Priorities only includes atop-level definition of both the SOA and Gaps, furtherinformation on these for ISRU can be found in theISRU Gap Assessment Study performed for theInternational Space Exploration Coordination Group(ISECG) [2]. To provide further guidance to industryand academia, a top level assessment was performedand provide that divides critical areas of ISRUcapabilities and technologies into 3 categories:Significant Funding, Partially Covered/MoreRequired, and Limited/No Funded Activities.Envisioned Future Priorities- Next Steps forISRU: While a significant amount of work over abroad range of technology areas has been performedover the last several years for lunar ISRU, to reach theenvisioned future for ISRU, a lot more work isrequired at the technology level leading to bothsystems and technology demonstrations in the nearfuture. To guide investments within NASA, industry,and academia, 5 specific areas of high priority wereidentified. These are:1.Complete development of the Water and Oxygen Mining Paths and close technology gaps, with emphasis on oxygen extraction from Highland regolith and parallel paths for polar water mining.2.Expand development of metal extraction and feedstock for manufacturing and construction, with emphasis on aluminum and initial/easy to obtain/make construction feedstocks leading to more refined metals and other regolith resources. Also, evaluate biologically inspired/derived technologies in bio-mining, bio-plastic, and other feedstock commodities.3.Ensure the resource assessment needed for future ISRU commercial operations is coordinated with both near/long-term science objectives as well as Artemis mission locations of interest.4.Initiate NASA and industry-led system-level analyses, integration, and testing activities for ISRU capabilities. While significant work has been performed at the technology and subsystemlevel, it is now important to understand how these technology investments can be leveraged and utilized in actual systems and applications5.Initiate lunar ISRU technology flight demonstrations leading to initial ‘Pilot Plant’ end-to-end production capability demonstrations, led by industry

ISRU↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Automated Airspace Management: Concept, Development, and Testing

For many decades, researchers at NASA Ames Research Center have worked to make the air-transportation system more efficient, predictable, and effective. Since about 2005 one important aspect of this research has been the development of an autonomous system for air-traffic control. This system, known as the Autoresolver, is designed to perform most of the roles that air-traffic controllers perform including ensuring separation between aircraft, creating routes around weather and other avoidance volumes, and sequencing and scheduling aircraft across points in space. The recent, rapid expansion of new aircraft operations and types, including urban air mobility aircraft and small unmanned aerial systems, have only increased the need for highly automated systems to control the predicted traffic demand. This talk will focus on the development of the Autoresolver - from concept to testing. It will also discuss the National Airspace (NAS) Digital Twin simulation platform, created to facilitate rapid testing and improvement of the algorithm and with the hope of proving the automation in a high-fidelity environment. An open question that will be discussed is how to ensure that the system-level emergent behavior of independently developed autonomous algorithms is what is desired.

autonomy↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Overview of Cognitive Communications and AI/ML Applications

This presentation provides an overview of the Cognitive Communications project and several key technology areas that are being developed. Artificial intelligence applications for networking, adaptive and resilient links, RF interference mitigation, and system-level optimization and cognition are discussed.

Rachel Dudukovich↗
NASA NTRS2021

Probabilistic Processing of Asynchronous Geiger-Mode Avalanche Photodiode Arrays for Background Rate Measurements

A system-level performance evaluation of Geiger-mode avalanche photodiode (GmAPD) arrays requires accurate measurement and prediction of the background rate of the device due to dark counts and other spurious detection events. Since a GmAPD detector reports only a binary value and timestamp associated with an avalanche event, dark count rates are typically measured by averaging thousands of frames to support a statistically significant measurement. For both synchronous and asynchronous detector, the Poisson distributed background rates are referenced to the time each pixel is armed. Unlike for synchronous GmAPD imagers where all the pixels are armed to an array-wide arm signal, an asynchronous pixel operates independently from its neighboring pixels; requiring the background rates to be calculated using an interarrival histogram. For both types of imagers, the background rate is typically evaluated by fitting an exponential distribution to a fixed window within a measured histogram of time intervals between detection events However, if the statistics of the background rate are insufficient – whether that is due to low population sizes, saturation, or a large dynamic range of population size across the array, the pixel, or array-wide, performance metrics may report results with varying accuracy. This paper reports on an implementation of an algorithm that evaluates GmAPD background rates based on statistical metrics rather than fixed windows. The algorithm functions by determining the appropriate integration window within the interarrival time histogram based on a per-pixel count rate set by a predetermined tolerable measurement error. The implementation of the algorithm allows us to characterize GmAPD arrays with orders of magnitude spread in background rates across the detector using common statistical parameters.

Mumolo, J.↗
NASA NTRS2022

SpaceVPX Interoperability Assessment

The existing VMEbus (VersaModular Eurocard bus) International Trade Association (VITA)-78 industry standard, also known as SpaceVPX, is an avionics board- and chassis-level standard derived from the OpenVPX standard as defined in VITA-65. While VITA-65 defines backplane and board-level profiles from COTS vendors to ensure interoperability of products used in developing systems and subsystems, the VITA-78 standard defines SpaceVPX to incorporate fault tolerance features that are required by many spaceflight systems. However, VITA-78 allows so much flexibility that interoperability between modules cannot be assured. This assessment provides guidelines on the use of, and extensions to, the VITA-78 standard to enable avionics interoperability for future NASA missions. The assessment team was comprised of subject matter experts (SMEs) from Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), Johnson Space Center (JSC), and Langley Research Center (LaRC). The team included valuable external consulting support from a SME who was a key participant in the development of the VITA-78 standard. The team had extensive collaboration with the NASA Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) High Performance Spaceflight Computing (HPSC) project, specifically in the development of SpaceVPX interconnect findings, observations, and NESC recommendations. To provide an understanding of the breadth of implementations that SpaceVPX must accommodate, multiple NASA use cases were analyzed to assess the requirements for SpaceVPX implementations across a wide range of NASA missions (Appendix C). Applications included crewed missions, science missions, and orbital and surface robotic systems. Product surveys were conducted to assess the level of industry support for SpaceVPX, applications, and the variations in their implementations (Appendix D). In-depth analysis was conducted in the areas of: (a) power management and distribution, (b) form factors and daughtercards, (c) interconnect, and (d) fault tolerance. Leveraging the use cases, product surveys, and SMEs from multiple NASA Centers, these areas were analyzed to determine the range of implementations permitted by the VITA-78 standard and potential interoperability issues. Applicable findings and NESC recommendations were provided for each area. During this assessment, there were multiple opportunities to engage with other agencies to learn about their interest in SpaceVPX, their strategies for implementing SpaceVPX-based systems, and their internal development efforts. These engagements also generated findings and NESC recommendations. Based on this assessment analysis, NESC recommendations were made regarding the feature set and module profiles to support NASA SpaceVPX implementations. This feature set includes restrictions on features in VITA-78, and extensions to the standard. Key recommendations in this area include the use of 10 Gigabit Ethernet and Peripheral Component Interconnect Express (PCIe) as high bandwidth interconnect on the backplane, the retention of SpaceWire interconnect for control functions, and support for 3U (unit) and 6U, form factors for NASA systems. Restrictions were proposed on the usage of user-defined signals to promote interoperability, and specific power managements and distribution schemes for 3U systems. Beyond the technical implementation of SpaceVPX, recommendations were made on areas that warrant further investigation. Primary among these is the recommendation for NASA to collaborate with other space-going agencies and industry to incorporate recommendations into a future ‘dot spec’ of VITA-78. This would ensure wide adoption and availability of the modules that comply with the specification. The assessment includes appendices with candidate module profiles that can be considered as a starting point for this activity, and example systems based on the recommendations. Follow-on studies are recommended for architectures beyond SpaceVPX to address potential enhancements including condensed set of interconnect, software required to implement protocol layers on the interconnect (and other features), alternative power architectures, and system-level testability.

SpaceVPX↗
NASA NTRS2022

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

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

Commercial-Off-The-Shelf↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

JANNAF Guidelines for the Application of Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) to Micro-Propulsion Systems, 2022 Edition

Spacecraft developers place considerable emphasis on stated Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) to establish system-level maturity; however, the methodology for determining TRL is often inconsistent across various technologies. In 2019, the MicroPropulsion Panel of the JANNAF Spacecraft Propulsion Subcommittee developed a set of TRL guidelines for the micro-propulsion community. That work expanded on the general guidance provided by Department of Defense (DoD) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) documentation and sought to provide a consistent metric by which TRLs may be assigned to spacecraft micro-propulsion systems. Since the release of the 2019 guide, community feedback is motivating an updated edition of the guidelines to provide clarifications on critical TRL entry and exit criteria as well as to facilitate continued usage of the TRL guidelines.

Thomas Liu↗
NASA NTRS2021

Mission Concept Design for Autonomous Space Missions using Mission-Level Modeling and Simulation

NASA’s Europa Lander mission is to search for biosignatures on Europa based on in-situ science using a lander architecture. This mission presents a set of challenges that requires a high level of autonomy on the lander system, leading to the need for a new operational paradigm that supports better collaboration and coordination between the lander and the ground operations team. M\&S is used for both designing the onboard system-level autonomy and the ground operations paradigm that allows effective and efficient collaboration and coordination between the lander and the ground operations team. In this paper, M\&S as applied to the design of new mission and operational concepts will be discussed. At its current early stage of the mission development for Europa Lander, the M\&S is used to explore different mission concepts and gain insights for design (formative) rather than to verify and validate fully designed mission concepts quantitatively (summative). Organically, we established a new approach to mission and operational concept exploration using high-fidelity modeling and simulation. M\&S has been an integral part of the approach of defining constraints and assertions, designing mission concepts, assessing (i.e., simulating them), and discovering insights, which feeds back to the definition an design steps. This organically-established approach provided important benefits to the project at its early phase of the development by enabling the project team to be able to build shared understanding of impacts from design characteristics, constraints, and their interactions on the mission performance.

Ye, Sean↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Artemis I Orion ESM Propulsion System Engine Performance

NASA's Orion spacecraft transports humans and cargo into cislunar space for the Artemis program. The European Service Module (ESM), supplied by ESA and its European industry partners, provides Orion with power and in-space propulsion. The Orion-ESM propulsion system is a bipropellant hypergolic propulsion system using monomethyl hydrazine (MMH) and nitrogen tetroxide (MON-3). Primary translational propulsion is provided by the Orbital Maneuvering System Engine(OMS-E), with backup translational propulsion provided by eight Auxiliary thrusters (AUX). Attitude control and small translational maneuvers are provided by twenty four Reaction Control System (RCS) engines. The 2022 Artemis I mission was the first integrated flight test of the Orion-ESM spacecraft and its propulsion system. The OMS-E used on Artemis I was a refurbished Space Shuttle OMS-E that previously flew on nineteen missions ranging f rom STS-41G in 1984 to STS-112 in 2002. The Auxiliary engines are modified Aerojet Rocketdyne R4D-11 engines produced specifically for the Orion program. The RCS engines are Ariane Group engines originally used for the Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV) program. This paper will discuss the unique operational requirements for each engine on Orion and the development and qualification effort sat both the engine and system-level that were completed to enable a successful Artemis I mission. Next the paper will evaluate the in-f light performance of the engines during the Artemis I mission showing nominal performance as expected. Additionally, comparisons to models will be presented showing very good correlation. Finally, the paper will address the plan for the engines on future Orion missions and the evolution of the system operation.

liquid propulsion systems↗
NASA NTRS2022

Impact of Future Low-Emissions Combustor Technology on Acoustic Scaling Laws

A first-of-its-kind examination of broadband noise associated with a far-term advanced low-emission aero-combustor concept is presented. Due to design trends and expected cycle changes for future aircraft propulsion systems, noise generated by sources in the combustor are expected to become of increasing significance for airport-community noise. The paper assesses the impact on legacy semi-empirical noise-prediction methods from the expected radical departures from current combustor operating conditions and designs, such as fuel-air distribution and flame anchoring techniques. Such methods are essential in system-level noise assessments at the preliminary design stage for advanced air transports to assure that overall environmental goals are met. Detailed unsteady pressure measurements, obtained in a fundamental combustion noise experiment utilizing a combustor rig at relevant pressures and temperatures, are analyzed. In addition to an advanced far-term low-emissions concept, a reference configuration with the test section arranged to model a modern combustor sector was also studied. For the test rig in the current-generation configuration, the measured broadband acoustic data are reasonably well described by the acoustic-power scaling laws used in legacy semi-empirical noise-prediction methods. For the future-advanced configuration, the legacy scaling laws, with some notable exceptions, provide correct trends, but with much less accuracy

aeroacoustics↗
NASA NTRS2026

Spacecraft Disposal Rosetta Stone: Parametric Tool for Orbital Lifetime, Disposal, and Cost Assessment

This Technical Memorandum documents a simplified, parametric method for evaluating spacecraft orbital lifetime, disposal compliance, and disposal-related cost impacts during early mission formulation and preliminary design. The method captures the dominant drivers of orbital decay—effective ballistic coefficient, operating altitude, and solar-cycle variability—using conservative bounding assumptions. Solar maximum conditions are used to bound achievable mission lifetime, while solar minimum conditions are used to bound disposal timelines and compliance with orbital debris requirements. A single tabulated dataset provides orbital lifetime under both solar-cycle extremes together with representative disposal ΔV required to ensure compliant disposal, enabling rapid assessment of disposal feasibility, cost sensitivity, and system-level impacts prior to committing to higher-fidelity analyses.

Orbital debris mitigation↗