Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “variable speed control”

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.

641 records · Page 36
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Exploration Exercise System (EES) Physiology

Exploration class missions will be required to have an exercise device that is lightweight, has a small footprint, and is capable of providing enough physical stimulus and exercise variability to be an effective countermeasure against muscle, bone, aerobic fitness, and sensorimotor loss that results from the microgravity environment. Ground studies, inflight studies, and results analyses are required to inform Moon2Mars Design Reference Missions (DRMs) and vehicle designs. This activity encompasses two related projects, an evaluation study called Zero T2 and a requirements development for an exploration treadmill (ET). Exploration class missions’ mass/power/volume restrictions have resulted in the development of exercise devices that are motorized and flywheel-based to provide both aerobic and resistive training on one platform. These devices provide a variety of full body resistance exercise options as well as rowing and cycling for aerobic exercise, but do not provide ambulatory exercise via a treadmill. Because a treadmill has been available for use on the ISS since 2001, we do not understand the efficacy of exploration exercise modalities on muscle performance, aerobic fitness, bone health, or sensorimotor performance. A retrospective study was performed to quantify the association between total exercise (including specific contributions of treadmill exercise) and functional performance upon landing. Due to the relatively small variation in treadmill usage inflight, there is a need to do a controlled study where inflight crewmembers will not use the ISS treadmill (called T2) for the duration of their flights. There will be 3 arms to the Zero T2 study: 1) participants use all currently available exercise platforms aboard ISS (control group), 2) participants use only ARED and CEVIS, and 3) participants use only European Enhanced Exploration Device (E4D). (Please see the TechPort Entry for Exploration Exercise System Development for further detail on the E4D.) This study started in Oct 2020 and will continue through Sep 2027. In a parallel effort, a team will be developing requirements for an exploration treadmill. This project will be broken into two phases. Phase 1 will develop and implement energy prediction models based on available in-flight exercise data to quantify energy expenditure during 0g treadmill running. Phase 2 will then use the available biomechanical and metabolic evidence from Phase 1 to determine the hardware specification requirements essential to providing the desired exercise stimulus. Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) will then leverage the Standardized Process for Evaluating Exercise Devices (SPEED) developed by the team to 1) assess available technologies for candidate treadmills which meet defined requirements, 2) perform hands-on evaluations of top candidates, 3) provide evaluation outcomes and recommendations to developers. This project will begin in 2025 and continue through Sep 2030.

Kent Lawrence Kalogera↗
NASA NTRS1994

Inner loop flight control for the High-Speed Civil Transport

High-speed aerospace vehicles which employ high strength, light weight, yet deformable materials may exhibit significant interaction between the rigid-body and vibrational dynamics. Preliminary High-Speed Civil Transport (HSCT) configurations are a prime example. Traditionally, separate control systems have been used to augment the rigid-body and vibrational dynamics. In the HSCT arena, the highly coupled motions may not allow this design freedom. The research activity addresses two specific issues associated with the design and development of an integrated flight control system (FCS) for HSCT configurations, which are discussed next. The HSCT is expected to have a short period instability at subsonic speeds. Flight vehicles with this characteristic (i.e., F-16, F-22, X-29, Space Shuttle) are stabilized with what is called a superaugmented pitch rate loop. One concern is 'Will this stability augmentation logic work for a HSCT?' Studies show that an idealized pitch rate design would be acceptable, but is not realistic. Investigations using a contaminated pitch rate design reveal serious hurdles to overcome in the FCS design. Mounting location for the pitch rate sensor is critical. Results indicate a forward location leads to destabilizing pick-up of aeroelastic modes, while aft locations lead to undesirable coupling of the dominate pitch mode with the first aeroelastic mode. Intermediate locations for the sensor may not be acceptable. The source of the problem is the presence of low frequency aeroelastic modes in HSCT configurations, which are not present in vehicles currently using the superaugmented logic. To say the least, a conventional superaugmented pitch rate loop strategy may have undesirable characteristics. An unconventional strategy, which attempts to eliminate the above deficiencies by blending several pitch rate signals, indicates an improvement in the FCS architecture feasibility, but is still lacking in some respects. The HSCT configuration does not have aerodynamic surfaces in the vicinity of the nose (i.e., no canard or vane). A second concern is 'Can the fuselage bending/torsion aeroelastic modes be effectively augmented without sufficient control input near the vehicle nose?' The superaugmented FCS results above may be suggesting the necessity of a secondary feedback loop to achieve an acceptable integrated FCS. Preliminary analysis of HSCT aeroelastic mode shapes indicate the use of existing wing leading edge devices as a second control input may be lacking in control authority for the rigid-body attitude and aeroelastic modes. An effort is underway to incorporate generic wing leading edge devices and canards into a generic HSCT model for the purpose of assessing additional control authority and it's use in candidate FCS designs. A generic HSCT mathematical model was necessary for the studies above. A HSCT category model is available in NASA-CR-172201. This model describes the linear, longitudinal dynamics about the following flight condition: ascent, W = 730,000 lbs, h = 6,500 ft, M = 0.6. The model incorporates the full rigid-body variable set, as well as eighteen aeroelastic modes. Elevator deflection serves as the control input. Modifications to the model include the incorporation of relaxed static stability (i.e., static margin from -7.3% to +10%) and additional control inputs.

Newman, Brett A.↗
DOE OSTI2026

Dominant Controls on Preferential Flow and Their Implications for Future Soil Water Fluxes

Abstract Soil water flow, particularly preferential flow (PF), is a critical control on hydrological and biogeochemical processes, including groundwater recharge, contaminant transport, and carbon cycling. However, it remains challenging to predict PF occurrence across large environmental gradients. Here, we developed a deep learning (DL) model to estimate event‐scale soil water flow velocity and the probability of PF occurrence using high‐frequency soil moisture and precipitation data from 33 sites across the National Ecological Observatory Network. The model demonstrated high skill in predicting the binary occurrence of PF (91% F1‐score; 85% accuracy) but the performance was limited in predicting soil water velocity ( R 2 = 0.31). We found that precipitation characteristics (duration, volume, and intensity) were the most important predictors for soil water velocity. Among the non‐precipitation event variables, sand content showed relatively high predictive skill, though differences among non‐event climate variables were generally modest. Lower sand content was associated with increased predicted soil water velocity, a finding that highlights the role of soil structure in producing more non‐uniform flow, which contrasts with traditional uniform flow models. Projecting a reduced DL model under both moderate and high‐emissions future climate scenarios (2060–2099 Representative Concentration Pathways 4.5 and 8.5), we found ∼7.3% increase under RCP4.5 and ∼15% under RCP8.5 of soil water velocities compared to the historical simulation, while modeled likelihood of PF changed little. These findings suggest climate change is not making PF more frequent, but it is making existing PF pathways more efficient with important consequences for associated nutrient and contaminant transport under climate change. Plain Language Summary Water movement in soil is critical for water quality. While often modeled as a uniform flow process, in reality water moves rapidly through cracks and burrows in what is called “preferential flow” (PF), which limits natural filtration and can transport pollutants. We developed a deep learning model, trained on data from 33 U.S. sites, to predict when and how fast this PF occurs based on precipitation, soil, and climate data. The model showed that precipitation characteristics (duration, intensity, volume) were the most important predictors of PF. Lower soil sand content/higher clay content was associated with faster water flow, likely due to clay soils forming aggregates and cracks that water moves through rather than infiltrating uniformly. Further analyses based on climate projections suggest that the speed at which PF occurs will become more rapid under future climate scenarios compared to historical simulation. This highlights the need to represent PF in soil water models when assessing future water quality. Key Points The effect of precipitation peak intensity on soil water velocities declined with increasing precipitation intensity Antecedent soil moisture failed to predict preferential flow (PF), contrasting the high predictive power of sand content Climate predictions suggest that soil water velocities through PF paths will increase ∼15% by 2099

Li, Bonan↗
NASA NTRS2021

Modeling the Effects of a Backward-Facing Step on Boundary-Layer Transition

We model transition to turbulence in a two-dimensional boundary layer downstream of a backward-facing step (BFS) along a flat plate. With the goal of evaluating the available engineering models for predicting the effects of step excrescences on the transition characteristics, two separate methodologies are used to monitor the streamwise shift in the transition onset location as the step height and the flow speed are varied across the range of a previously reported experiment involving step-height-to-local-displacement-thickness ratios of 0 < h/δ* < 1.6. Unlike the variable N -factor method from the previous literature, both of these methods are general in scope and do not involve any empirical correlations that are specific to step excrescences. The first of these techniques involves an N -factor method that directly accounts for the change in boundary-layer instability characteristics due to the step. Stability computations using the harmonic linearized Navier-Stokes equations (HLNSE), which fully account for the nonparallel-mean-flow effects close to the BFS, indicate that the measured transition locations at nearly all test conditions ( h/δ* < 1.3) correlate well with a computed N -factor of N tr = 7.6, demonstrating a successful stability-based transition criterion related to step excrescences. Linear stability theory, which does not account for nonparallel effects, demonstrates reasonable agreement with the HLNSE results, yielding good predictions for the overall trends, but predicts a somewhat earlier onset of transition than HLNSE. The other methodology used in this work involves transport-equation-based transition models. We first show that the Langtry-Menter y - Re θt transition model cannot accurately predict the location of transition onset for moderate BFS heights because it is unable to accurately account for the flow history effects. Along with the Langtry-Menter transition model, we also show the amplification factor transport model does not produce accurate transition locations for subsonic flow over steps even though it accounts for some flow history effects.

Transition↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Optimization Approach to Support Science Decision Making for Lunar Surface Exploration

Introduction: Scientific exploration is one of the three pillars of NASA’s Moon2Mars architecture, with crew surface extra vehicular activities (EVA) serving a critical enabling function. Development of surface EVA operational planning and execution, specifically integrating science and flight control teams (FCT), is currently being explored through analog scenarios. This integration, exercised, for example, through the Joint EVA and Hu-man Surface Mobility Test Team (JETT), allows for science input on EVA activities in near real-time through a Science Evaluation Room (SER), or Arte-mis science backroom, which integrates with the broader FCT through the Science Officer. The SER works within the FCT to support dynamic EVA planning in response to changes in operational constraints as well as science opportunities and re-prioritization, increasing the mission science return and accelerating the accomplishment of the Moon2Mars science objectives. The SER works within the FCT to provide recommendations to traverse execution in near real-time. One challenge is the requirement to deliver SER inputs to the FCT on operationally relevant timelines. Failure to do so may result in suboptimal execution of science exploration EVAs or even loss of key science objectives. To close this gap, we present a network optimization tool to allow the SER to provide rapid input to the FCT in response to changes in operational constraints or science opportunities. Inputs are predicated on approved science objectives, and clear rationale must be provided to the FCT for any requested change. Accordingly, this tool incorporates the Science Traceability Matrix (STM), SER prioritization scheme, and station characterization and action planning with operational constraints such as duration, traverse speed, and distance to maximize science objectives based on SER priorities, consistent with FCT operational requirements. Method: As a proof of concept, we used an existing linear programing software package used to simulate optimal routes through cellular metabolism. We built a Demonstrative Model with three STM objectives and four stations on a region of the Moon. The objectives were given an arbitrary prioritization and mapped to the stations through four possible crew actions. (Figs. 1 and 2). This station to STM mapping is consistent with the method used by the JETT5 Science Team to develop analog surface EVA science planning. We used a grid system with the landing site at the origin and the four stations placed across the positive x,y quadrant. Actions were assigned to each station and the accomplishment of those actions resulted in a numerical “reward” based on the ability of that action to achieve science objectives. The aggregate reward from each individual STM objective contributes to a global score (Science Yield), weighted by its priority. Operational constraints included a requirement to start and end at the landing site, 5 minutes each for initial station characterization and “clean up,” and variable total EVA time, traverse rate (fixed to 0.5 meters per second in our example), and time to perform each action (10, 5, 7, and 15 min for actions 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively). Additional constraints and variables will be added in the future (e.g., sample mass, number of stations, traverse route constraints, illumination). Optimization. We converted the connections (arcs) between these stations (nodes) into a mixed integer linear programming optimization problem (arcs = constraints, nodes = variables) with the objective to maximize Science Yield. For any action, the Science Yield is equal to the relevance of that action to an STM objective [3, 2, and 1 point(s) for High, Med., and Low relevance, respectively], multiplied by the STM Objective Priority [3, 2, and 1 point(s) for High, Med., and Low priority, respectively]. This resulted in a model that computes the optimal station and action combination to maximize the Science Yield. These weightings can be adjusted by the SER as desired. Results: We explored three test cases for the Demonstrative Model. First, we set the maximum EVA duration to 120 minutes and computed the optimal route (Fig. 3A). The model suggested per-forming Actions 1 and 2 at Station P01, followed by Actions 1 and 2 at Station P02, and finally Actions 1 and 3 at Station P04 before returning to the Landing Site. Second, we adjusted the STM Objective Priori-ty order and computed the new optimal route (Fig. 3B). Under this situation, the model suggested per-forming all Actions at Station P02 followed by all Actions at Station P03. The previous test cases were relevant to SER planning activities. Next, we explored providing mid-EVA replanning input to the FCT. Scenario: While executing the Route in Fig. 3A the crew finishes at Station P01 and FCT decides that the EVA needs to finish in 45 minutes back at the Landing Site. FCT asks SER to recommend changes to the plan to accommodate this operation-al change. Using the model and incorporating these new constraints (start at Station P01, max. time of 45 min), the model suggested performing Actions 2 and 4 at Station P03 (Fig. 4), requiring 41 minutes to complete and return to the Landing Site. Interestingly, Station 3 was not part of the original route. Using the model, we determined the EVA would need 66 minutes, instead of 45, in order for the original Station P04 to yield a larger Science Yield than Station P03. The parametrization and simulation was per-formed in less than a minute, demonstrating the operational relevance of the approach. Future Efforts: The results from the Demonstrative Model suggest this tool can accelerate SER decision making on operationally relevant timelines. Use in analog activities, such as JETT5 or follow-ons, which have over a dozen stations for a crew to explore and over a dozen actions per station, will provide needed validation of the utility of this tool for planning EVAs, replanning mid-EVA, or planning follow-on EVAs based on previous results. Further integration with FCT execution monitoring tools may provide additional efficiency gains, al-lowing rapid and iterative exploration of operation-al and science decision space by the FCT and SER.

Science Operations↗
NASA NTRS2016

NDARC NASA Design and Analysis of Rotorcraft - Input, Appendix 4

The NDARC code performs design and analysis tasks. The design task involves sizing the rotorcraft to satisfy specified design conditions and missions. The analysis tasks can include off-design mission performance analysis, flight performance calculation for point operating conditions, and generation of subsystem or component performance maps. The principal tasks (sizing, mission analysis, flight performance analysis) are shown in the figure as boxes with heavy borders. Heavy arrows show control of subordinate tasks. The aircraft description consists of all the information, input and derived, that denes the aircraft. The aircraft consists of a set of components, including fuselage, rotors, wings, tails, and propulsion. This information can be the result of the sizing task; can come entirely from input, for a fixed model; or can come from the sizing task in a previous case or previous job. The aircraft description information is available to all tasks and all solutions. The sizing task determines the dimensions, power, and weight of a rotorcraft that can perform a specified set of design conditions and missions. The aircraft size is characterized by parameters such as design gross weight, weight empty, rotor radius, and engine power available. The relations between dimensions, power, and weight generally require an iterative solution. From the design flight conditions and missions, the task can determine the total engine power or the rotor radius (or both power and radius can be fixed), as well as the design gross weight, maximum takeoff weight, drive system torque limit, and fuel tank capacity. For each propulsion group, the engine power or the rotor radius can be sized. Missions are defined for the sizing task, and for the mission performance analysis. A mission consists of a number of mission segments, for which time, distance, and fuel burn are evaluated. For the sizing task, certain missions are designated to be used for design gross weight calculations; for transmission sizing; and for fuel tank sizing. The mission parameters include mission takeoff gross weight and useful load. For specified takeoff fuel weight with adjustable segments, the mission time or distance is adjusted so the fuel required for the mission equals the takeoff fuel weight. The mission iteration is on fuel weight or energy. Flight conditions are specified for the sizing task, and for the flight performance analysis. For the sizing task, certain flight conditions are designated to be used for design gross weight calculations; for transmission sizing; for maximum takeoff weight calculations; and for anti-torque or auxiliary thrust rotor sizing. The flight condition parameters include gross weight and useful load. For flight conditions and mission takeoff, the gross weight can be maximized, such that the power required equals the power available. A flight state is defined for each mission segment and each flight condition. The aircraft performance can be analyzed for the specified state, or a maximum effort performance can be identified. The maximum effort is specified in terms of a quantity such as best endurance or best range, and a variable such as speed, rate of climb, or altitude.

Rotorcraft Input↗
DOE OSTI2023

Development of a Novel Magnesium Alloy for Thixomolding® of Automotive Components (Final Report)

Magnesium (Mg) alloy die-castings are increasingly used in the automobile industry to achieve cost effective mass reduction, especially in systems where multiple components can be integrated into a single thin wall die-casting. However, there are several component quality restrictions in thin-walled Mg die castings, including variability in dimensional accuracy, part-to-part variation in mechanical properties, and porosity in the final part, which has limited the continued growth of die-cast components in the automobile industry. An alternative to die-casting is the process of thixomolding®. While the die-casting process relies on filling a mold at high speeds with the alloy in the completely molten state, the thixomolding® process fills a mold with a thixotropic alloy in a semi-solid slurry state at a temperature between the liquidus and solidus temperatures. Ideally, the material should be ~30–65% solid rather than being completely liquid at the beginning of the injection process. Advantages of the thixomolding® process include a finer grain structure, lower porosity, improved dimensional accuracy, improved part-to part consistency, improved mechanical properties, particularly ductility in the component, the ability to reduce wall thickness for mass savings, and longer tool life due to lower process temperatures. The objective of this collaborative project between Oak Ridge National Laboratory, FCA US LLC, and Leggera Technologies was to develop one or more novel Mg alloys more suitable for thixomolding® automotive structural components than the current die-casting alloys used for this process. The primary interest was to improve ductility while maintaining tensile and fatigue strengths, as these are properties that are critical for use in body and chassis structural applications. Since good corrosion resistance is also desirable for this application, this property was also considered when evaluating promising alloy compositions. An initial evaluation of existing components thixomolded® using AM60 was performed and microstructure, and tensile properties were evaluated for the baseline alloy. Targets were established for ease of processing (characterized by the melting range defined as the difference between the liquidus and the solidus), strength, and ductility. Computational modeling was used to identify promising alloys and selected alloys were cast in laboratory scale heats. Properties measured from laboratory scale heats were used to down-select two alloys for further evaluation and component fabrication. Two alloys were prepared in industrial scale heats, cut into small pieces (chips), and thixomolding® trials were initiated. Trial components were successfully fabricated using one alloy composition, but it was concluded that further refinement of the thixomolding® process parameters are required to successfully fabricate component using second alloy. Microstructure and mechanical properties were evaluated on the material removed from the fabricated component and properties were compared to the baseline alloy. Although mechanical properties of the alloys showed improvement over the baseline alloy, it was determined that modifications to the thixomolding® process would result in better microstructure control with further improvement in properties leading to successful commercialization. A provisional patent application has already been filed on the new alloys developed as part of the project.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2022

Development and Validation of Algorithms That Analyze Communicating Thermostat Data to Identify Enclosure Retrofit Opportunities

Annual energy savings of up to $\$ 4$ to $\$ 5$ billion could be achieved nationwide through basic insulation and heating system retrofits of existing homes. However, current utility energy efficiency programs are costly and challenging to scale. Customer acquisition occurs primarily through energy bill mailers, mass media, and online advertising that lack specificity about home-specific retrofit opportunities, expected energy savings, and cost-effectiveness. Specific retrofit opportunities are identified via on-site home energy assessments (HEAs) that are inconvenient to homeowners, expensive, and of variable accuracy. We developed computational algorithms that automatically analyze communicating thermostat (CT) heating data that could be used to increase the customer uptake of insulation and air sealing energy conservation measures (ECMs) by identifying homes with the most significant retrofit opportunities, estimating post-retrofit energy savings, and formulating home-specific outreach. The algorithms are based on an extended second-order grey-box model that characterizes a building’s thermal response using lumped elements, coupled with an empirical model of infiltration that accounts for both wind and stack effects. The basic parameters of the model correspond to actual physical parameters of the home, i.e., the home’s overall R-value of and the building envelope ACH50. Unlike the conventional approach, which estimates model parameters based on the best fit to the observed time-dependent room temperature, our approach derives correlations between the daily heating system runtime and temperature difference (indoor-outdoor) that are more robust to data quality issues in real-world applications. We also used HEA data for algorithm development and validation. With the help of our utility partners, Eversource and National Grid, we obtained data sets for hundreds of Massachusetts homes. For each home, these data sets included three sets of information anonymized by the utility: (1) CT data (HVAC runtime, room temperature, and, for some vendors, outdoor temperature and wind speed) collected by the CT vendor (one of three) over a heating season, (2) HEA report performed by the HEA vendor (same vendor for all homes), (3) Monthly utility gas bills coincident with the CT data (3 to 24 per home, depending on availability). For some homes, we also obtained blower-door test results. Initially, we applied the algorithms developed to homes with a single CT and then extended them to homes with two CTs by using an equivalent home approach. Finally, we developed algorithms for prediction of energy savings and a methodology of comparing our predictions with those generated by HEAs. The main technical results indicate that we can reliably identify homes with insulation and/or air sealing retrofit opportunities and provide accurate savings predictions. Our hypothesis is that the algorithms could be applied to utility energy efficiency programs to identify homes that could realize significant energy savings from insulation and/or air sealing retrofits. This information could then be used to reach out to those homes with highly customized outreach, thereby delivering increased program energy savings and cost-effectiveness. This would: Significantly increase the uptake rate of on-site HEAs, and Significantly increase the fraction of HEAs resulting in ECM implementation. To test these hypotheses, we designed and conducted a randomized controlled trial (RCT). The RCT results suggest that personal messaging leads to a two- to five-fold increase in the HEA uptake rate.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
NASA NTRS2011

Solar Dynamics Observatory Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Overview

The Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) was designed and built at the Goddard Space Flight Center, launched from Cape Canaveral on February 11, 2010, and reached its final geosynchronous science orbit on March 16, 2010. The purpose of SDO is to observe the Sun and continuously relay data to a dedicated ground station. SDO remains Sun-pointing throughout most of its mission for the instruments to take measurements of the Sun. The SDO attitude control system (ACS) is a single-fault tolerant design. Its fully redundant attitude sensor complement includes sixteen coarse Sun sensors (CSSs), a digital Sun sensor (DSS), three two-axis inertial reference units (IRUs), and two star trackers (STs). The ACS also makes use of the four guide telescopes included as a part of one of the science instruments. Attitude actuation is performed using four reaction wheels assemblies (RWAs) and eight thrusters, with a single main engine used to provide velocity-change thrust for orbit raising. The attitude control software has five nominal control modes, three wheel-based modes and two thruster-based modes. A wheel-based Safehold running in the attitude control electronics box improves the robustness of the system as a whole. All six modes are designed on the same basic proportional-integral-derivative attitude error structure, with more robust modes setting their integral gains to zero. This paper details the final overall design of the SDO guidance, navigation, and control (GN&C) system and how it was used in practice during SDO launch, commissioning, and nominal operations. This overview will include the ACS control modes, attitude determination and sensor calibration, the high gain antenna (HGA) calibration, and jitter mitigation operation. The Solar Dynamics Observatory mission is part of the NASA Living With a Star program, which seeks to understand the changing Sun and its effects on the Solar System, life, and society. To this end, the SDO spacecraft carries three Sun-observing instruments: Helioseismic and Magnetic Imager (HMI), led by Stanford University; Atmospheric Imaging Assembly (AIA), led by Lockheed Martin Space and Astrophysics Laboratory; and Extreme Ultraviolet Variability Experiment (EVE), led by the University of Colorado. The basic mission is to observe the Sun for a very high percentage of the 5-year mission (10-year goal) with long stretches of uninterrupted observations and with constant, high-data-rate transmission to a dedicated ground station to be located in White Sands, New Mexico. These goals guided the design of the spacecraft bus that will carry and service the three-instrument payload. Overarching design goals for the bus are geosynchronous orbit, near-constant Sun observations with the ability to fly through eclipses, and constant HGA contact with the dedicated ground station. A three-axis stabilized ACS is needed both to point at the Sun accurately and to keep the roll about the Sun vector correctly positioned with respect to the solar north pole. This roll control is especially important for the magnetic field imaging of HM I. The mission requirements have several general impacts on the ACS design. Both the AIA and HMI instruments are very sensitive to the blurring caused by jitter. Each has an image stabilization system (ISS) with some ability to filter out high frequency motion, but below the bandwidth of the ISS the control system must compensate for disturbances within the ACS bandwidth or avoid exciting jitter at higher frequencies. Within the ACS bandwidth, the control requirement imposed by AIA is to place the center of the solar disk no more than 2 arc sec, 3 , from a body-defined target based on one of the GTs that accompany the instrument. This body-defined target, called the science reference boresight (SRB), was determined from the postlaunch orientation of the GTs by averaging the bounding telescope boresights for pitch to get a pitch SRB coordinate, and by averaging the bounding boresights for yaw toet the yaw SRB coordinate. The location of this SRB in the 0.5-deg field-of-view for each GT then becomes the central target for each telescope; one GT is selected for use as the ACS controlling guide telescope (CGT) at any given time. Fine Sun-pointing is effected based on this SRB for all three instruments when the Sun is within the linear range of the CGT. In addition to limiting jitter, HMI science requires averaging several observations, making the instrument sensitive to low frequency motion that induces differential motion between each observation. This requires the spacecraft attitude to be stable about the roll axis to approximately 10 arcsec over a ten-minute period. Instrument calibrations require that the spacecraft point the SRB up to 2.5 degrees in pitch and yaw away from the center of the Sun, placing the Sun outside the field-of-view of the guide telescopes. In such instances, when the GTs cannot provide the definitive target for the ACS, on-board attitude determination combined with ephemeris prediction of the Sun direction must provide the definitive target. EVE is capable of observing the Sun with less dependence on attitude control. However, the ground data processing needs for calibrations result in the most strict attitude knowledge requirements for the mission: [35,70,70] arcsec, 3 , of knowledge with respect to the center of the solar disk. In addition to driving the ACS sensor selection, the knowledge requirements, which have their effect primarily during Inertial mode calibrations, drive the accuracy requirements for the solar ephemeris. The need to achieve and maintain geosynchronous orbit (GEO) drove the need for high-efficiency propulsive systems and appropriate attitude control. The main engine provided high specific impulse for the maneuvers to attain GEO, while the smaller ACS thrusters managed the disturbance torques of the larger engine and provided the capability for much smaller adjustment burns on orbit. SDO s large solar profile means that solar radiation pressure is a large torque disturbance, and the momentum buildup from this disturbance and the GEO altitude drives the ACS to use thrusters to manage vehicle momentum. The demanding data capture budget for the mission, however, requires SDO to avoid frequent thruster maneuvers, while concerns about on-orbit jitter restrict the maximum desired wheel speeds desired from the RWAs. The plan for on-orbit wheel speed and momentum management will be discussed as well as what is now being done in operation after the jitter environment was characterized. The SDO ACS hardware complement is single-fault tolerant. Two main processors carry virtually identical copies of the command and data handling and ACS software, and two identical attitude control electronics (ACE) boxes carry Coldfire processors with contingency ACS software and other hardware interface cards; the ACE structure allows reaction wheels to be commanded by the Sun-pointing Safehold independent of the Mil Std 1553 data bus. The sixteen Adcole CSSs are grouped into primary and backup sets of eight sensors, each set providing the ability to calculate a sun vector. Each set of eight eyes provides full 4 -steradian coverage. The Adcole DSS comprises an optics head and a separate electronics box providing a 1553 data interface. The electronics box is mounted inside the Faraday cage created by the spacecraft bus module. The DSS head with its 32- deg square FOV is mounted on the instrument module with its boresight along the spacecraft X axis, nearly aligned with the Sun during observations. Adcole has designed the DSS calibration parameters so that the accuracy is 0.24 arcminutes within 10 deg of the boresight, and diminishes to 3 arcminutes as the Sun moves towards the edges of its FOV . This DSS calibration scheme provides higher accuracy attitude determination over the range of the instrument calibration maneuvers.

Morgenstern, Wendy M.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

VALENTInE: A Concept for a New Frontiers Class Long Duration In-Situ Balloon Mission to Venus

Venus and Earth are similar in bulk composition, size, density, and approximate distance from the Sun, yet Venus’s modern-day climate and surface geology is distinctly different [1]. Previous missions to Venus revealed unusual volcanic features, possible continental crust, widespread volcanic plains, a weak magnetic field [2], and insights into the Venusian atmosphere [3,4]. Unfortunately, data from these missions were limited in spatial and temporal resolution and global extent. A future mission to Venus is critical to address fundamental questions surrounding the chemical composition and dynamics of the Venusian atmosphere [5], its geologic history [6,7], its internal structure [8,9], and its habitability throughout time [10,11]. We present the Venus Air and Land Expedition: a Novel Trailblazer for In situ Exploration (VALENTInE) mission to meet this need. VALENTInE is a variable altitude balloon that will passively float in Venus’s atmosphere between 45 and 55 km altitude. VALENTInE will acquire atmospheric data at varying latitudes and longitudes in addition to mapping the surface geomorphology and mineralogy across multiple terrains. Mission Objectives: The VALENTInE mission concept is driven by four main science objectives: 1. Determine whether the driving force of the superrotation of Venus’s atmosphere is caused by horizontal or vertical momentum transport. 2. Determine whether the atmospheric composition and noble gas inventory of the Venusian atmosphere is a product of outgassing from the initial protoplanetary source or if there are significant contributions from exogenic sources. 3. Determine whether the tesserae regions (particularly Aphrodite Terra) are felsic and relatively older than surrounding regions. 4. Determine if there is any evidence of a recent dynamo preserved in the rock record of Venus. Mission Overview: A balloon architecture provides a robust system that can survive long-term in the Venusian environment while taking accurate measurements of the lower cloud deck and surface. Two prior balloon missions to Venus, VEGA 1 and VEGA 2 in 1984, have demonstrated the potential for such planetary exploration; however, these missions were short-lived (46 hr), with limited range (54 km). Our spacecraft concept consists of a battery powered balloon with a gondola and flyby carrier stage (Fig. 1). Our novel design allows for at least 15 days of atmospheric exploration, including multiple ascents and descents in the Venus atmosphere. VALENTInE is baselined to launch in 2032, cruise on solar power for 128 days, enter, descend, and inflate (EDI) into Venus’s atmosphere above Aphrodite Terra, and float in Venus’s atmosphere for a total nominal mission duration of 15 days. The balloon, able to control its altitude by changing its buoyancy, will make one full circumnavigation every 4–8 days and move poleward ~1 o latitude per day; it will be passively directed by the horizontal air currents on Venus. The balloon can only be controlled in the z direction, and the expected latitude range is ±10° from EDI. The balloon itself will be a tracer for atmospheric structures such as zonal winds [5, 12]. During the 15-day operational period, there will be five dips to 45 km for a compositional study of the lower atmosphere and geological and magnetic mapping of the surface. Dips are used to take images and measurements closer to the surface and to obtain in situ vertical atmospheric profiles between 45 and 55 km. Instruments: The VALENTInE instrument payload will allow for extensive study of the geology, atmosphere, and interior of Venus. The instrument suite consists of six instruments. The mission profile for each instrument is shown in Fig. 2. Lower Atmosphere Meteorology Analyzer (LAMA) is an atmospheric structure instrument consisting of a thermometer, barometer, and accelerometer to continuously measure temperature and pressure as a function of altitude, longitude, and latitude. TracE and Noble Gas Investigator (TENGI) is aneutral mass spectrometer used to sample the dense atmosphere. TENGI will operate continuously at 45 km and 55 km and will measure D/H ratios, as well as Ne, Ar, and O isotopic ratios. Kilometer Scale Spectral Imager (KSSI) is amultispectral imager (850-1150 nm) used to resolve surface features on the order of km. Near InfraRed Multispectral Photometer (NIRMP) is an Infrared (IR) photometer used to image the surface through the clouds to characterize mineral assemblages at five different areas of the surface. NIRMP will be operated during dwell. ELevation REConnaissance (ELREC) is a light detection and ranging (LIDAR) instrument used for measuring topography at five different areas of the surface. The ELREC data will be combined with those of NIRMP to determine mineral assemblages and how they correlate to topography. Magnetic Exploration and Interior Detective (MEID) is a magnetometer used to detect any near-surface magnetic anomalies. The magnetometer will continuously operate at all altitudes. Mission Design: The spacecraft’s propulsion system will have a wet mass of 930 kg and will be launched on an Atlas V rocket. The spacecraft will jettison the payload upon arrival in Venus’s atmosphere before decelerating to orbital velocity. Figure 2. Notional power-dip profile while the balloon is on the dayside. Risks and Challenges: Raising and lowering the spacecraft to dip beneath the haze layer require a large amount of energy. This issue was partly compensated by limiting the number of dips over the 15 day prime mission. Power needs for pumping helium are reduced by slowing the descent speed, which consequently increases spatial resolution of in situ measurements between 45 and 55 km. The main limitation for the duration of the mission is the need to carry 15 days’ worth of batteries. The bus experiences external Venusian temperatures ranging from ~27°C at 55 km altitude to ~110°C at 45 km altitude. These high atmospheric temperatures require thermal protection for the bus (instruments, electronics, and flight systems) during its descent, dwell at 45 km, and ascent. The bus is maintained at a mechanically safe temperature range of -10°C to 50°C using white external paint, multi-layer insulation (MLI), mechanical/thermal isolation (e.g. Ti, composites), and ~57 kg of Phase Change Materials (PCM). Images and spectra taken below the haze dominate the available data transmission regardless of the time spent at 45 km. Therefore, less time at the lower altitude mainly reduces the coverage of in situ measurements there. Further, we assumed an unrealistically low-density material for the helium storage tanks on the gondola. However, this issue is partially resolved if we were to jettison 75% of the spent helium storage tanks. After the entry process, the balloon volume remains mostly inflated and storage tanks are required only for reducing balloon volume in dipping to 45 km. This mission was planned against an expected New Frontiers 5 (NF5) cost cap of $1B, as the NF5 call had not yet been released. The mission we describe fits within the predicted cost cap if the flyby carrier stage, responsible for powering the spacecraft during cruise and for relaying in situ measurements back to Earth, can be contributed by another space agency. Acknowledgments: We thank the JPL Planetary Science Summer School, especially A. Nash, J. Scully, K. Mitchell, L. Lowes, and J. Armijo, and our mentors from JPL Team X. Thank you to our review panel for their insightful review. References: [1] Kane, S. et al. (2019) JGR:Ps, 124 , 2015–2028. [2] Phillips, J. L., & Russell, C. T. (1987). JGR: Space Physics , 92 (A3), 2253-2263. [3] Nakamura, M. et al. (2018) Earth Planets Space, 70 (1), 144. [4] Svedhem, H. et al. (2009) JGR:P 114 (E5). [5] Limaye et al. (2009) Decadal Survey White Paper . [6] Ivanov, M. and Head, J. (2011) PSS, 59 (13) , 1559-1600. [7] Smrekar, S. et al. (2018) Space Sci Rev, 214 (5), 88. [8] O’Rourke, J. et al. (2018) EPSL, 502 , 46-56. [9] O’Rourke J. et al. (2019) GRL , (46), 5768–5777 [10] Way, M. et al. (2016) GRL, 43 (16), 8376-8383. [11] Way, M. et al. (2020) JGR:P, 125 (5), e2019JE006276. [12] Preston, R. A. et al. (1986) Science, 231 (4744), 1414-1416.

Mission Concept↗
NASA NTRS2011

Verification of the Solar Dynamics Observatory High Gain Antenna Pointing Algorithm Using Flight Data

The Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) is a NASA spacecraft designed to study the Sun. It was launched on February 11, 2010 into a geosynchronous orbit, and uses a suite of attitude sensors and actuators to finely point the spacecraft at the Sun. SDO has three science instruments: the Atmospheric Imaging Assembly (AIA), the Helioseismic and Magnetic Imager (HMI), and the Extreme Ultraviolet Variability Experiment (EVE). SDO uses two High Gain Antennas (HGAs) to send science data to a dedicated ground station in White Sands, New Mexico. In order to meet the science data capture budget, the HGAs must be able to transmit data to the ground for a very large percentage of the time. Each HGA is a dual-axis antenna driven by stepper motors. Both antennas transmit data at all times, but only a single antenna is required in order to meet the transmission rate requirement. For portions of the year, one antenna or the other has an unobstructed view of the White Sands ground station. During other periods, however, the view from both antennas to the Earth is blocked for different portions of the day. During these times of blockage, the two HGAs take turns pointing to White Sands, with the other antenna pointing out to space. The HGAs handover White Sands transmission responsibilities to the unblocked antenna. There are two handover seasons per year, each lasting about 72 days, where the antennas hand off control every twelve hours. The non-tracking antenna slews back to the ground station by following a ground commanded trajectory and arrives approximately 5 minutes before the formerly tracking antenna slews away to point out into space. The SDO Attitude Control System (ACS) runs at 5 Hz, and the HGA Gimbal Control Electronics (GCE) run at 200 Hz. There are 40 opportunities for the gimbals to step each ACS cycle, with a hardware limitation of no more than one step every three GCE cycles. The ACS calculates the desired gimbal motion for tracking the ground station or for slewing, and sends the command to the GCE at 5 Hz. This command contains the number of gimbals steps for that ACS cycle, the direction of motion, the spacing of the steps, and the delay before taking the first step. The AIA and HMI instruments are sensitive to spacecraft jitter. Pre-flight analysis showed that jitter from the motion of the HGAs was a cause of concern. Three jitter mitigation techniques were developed to overcome the effects of jitter from different sources. The first method is the random step delay, which avoids gimbal steps hitting a cadence on a jitter-critical mode by pseudo-randomly delaying the first gimbal step in an ACS cycle. The second method of jitter mitigation is stagger stepping, which forbids the two antennas from taking steps during the same ACS cycle in order to avoid constructively adding jitter from two antennas. The third method is the inclusion of an instrument No Step Request (NSR), which allows the instruments to request a stoppage in gimbal stepping during the times when they are taking images. During the commissioning phase of the mission, a jitter test was performed onboard the spacecraft. Various sources of jitter, such as the reaction wheels, the High Gain Antenna motors, and the motion of the instrument filter wheels, were examined to determine the level of their effect on the instruments. During the HGA portion of the test, the jitter amplitudes from the single step of a gimbal were examined, as well as the amplitudes due to the execution of various gimbal rates. These jitter levels are compared with the gimbal jitter allocations for each instrument. Additionally, the jitter test provided insight into a readback delay that exists with the GCE. Pre-flight analysis suggested that gimbal steps scheduled to occur during the later portion of an ACS cycle would not be read during that cycle, resulting in a delay in the telemetered current gimbal position. Flight data from the jitter test confirmed this expectation. Analysis is presentehat shows the readback delay does not have a negative impact on gimbal control. The decision was made to consider implementing two of the jitter mitigation techniques on board the spacecraft: stagger stepping and the NSR. Flight data from two sets of handovers, one set without jitter mitigation and the other with mitigation enabled, were examined. The trajectory of the predicted handover was compared with the measured trajectory for the two cases, showing that tracking was not negatively impacted with the addition of the jitter mitigation techniques. Additionally, the individual gimbal steps were examined, and it was confirmed that the stagger stepping and NSRs worked as designed. An Image Quality Test was performed to determine the amount of cumulative jitter from the reaction wheels, HGAs, and instruments during various combinations of typical operations. In this paper, the flight results are examined from a test where the HGAs are following the path of a nominal handover with stagger stepping on and HMI NSRs enabled. In this case, the reaction wheels are moving at low speed and the instruments are taking pictures in their standard sequence. The flight data shows the level of jitter that the instruments see when their shutters are open. The HGA-induced jitter is well within the jitter requirement when the stagger step and NSR mitigation options are enabled. The SDO HGA pointing algorithm was designed to achieve nominal antenna pointing at the ground station, perform slews during handover season, and provide three HGA-induced jitter mitigation options without compromising pointing objectives. During the commissioning phase, flight data sets were collected to verify the HGA pointing algorithm and demonstrate its jitter mitigation capabilities.

Bourkland, Kristin L.↗