Results for “Robotic Spacecraft Operations” — Page 4

NASA NTRS1993

Spatial operator algebra for flexible multibody dynamics

This paper presents an approach to modeling the dynamics of flexible multibody systems such as flexible spacecraft and limber space robotic systems. A large number of degrees of freedom and complex dynamic interactions are typical in these systems. This paper uses spatial operators to develop efficient recursive algorithms for the dynamics of these systems. This approach very efficiently manages complexity by means of a hierarchy of mathematical operations.

Jain, A.↗

NASA NTRS2013

Smart SPHERES: A Telerobotic Free-Flyer for Intravehicular Activities in Space

Smart SPHERES is a prototype free-flying space robot based on the SPHERES platform. Smart SPHERES can be remotely operated by astronauts inside a spacecraft, or by mission controllers on the ground. We developed Smart SPHERES to perform a variety of intravehicular activities (IVA), such as operations inside the International Space Station (ISS). These IVA tasks include environmental monitoring surveys (radiation, sound levels, etc.), inventory, and mobile camera work. In this paper, we first discuss the motivation for free- flying space robots. We then describe the development of the Smart SPHERES prototype, including avionics, software, and data communications. Finally, we present results of initial flight tests on-board the ISS.

Fong, Terrence↗

NASA NTRS2013

Smart SPHERES: A Telerobotic Free-Flyer for Intravehicular Activities in Space

Smart SPHERES is a prototype free-flying space robot based on the SPHERES platform. Smart SPHERES can be remotely operated by astronauts inside a spacecraft, or by mission controllers on the ground. We developed Smart SPHERES to perform a variety of intravehicular activities (IVA), such as operations inside the International Space Station (ISS). These IVA tasks include environmental monitoring surveys (radiation, sound levels, etc.), inventory, and mobile camera work. In this paper, we first discuss the motivation for free-flying space robots. We then describe the development of the Smart SPHERES prototype, including avionics, software, and data communications. Finally, we present results of initial flight tests on-board the ISS.

Fong, Terrence↗

NASA NTRS2010

Human and Robotic Exploration of Near-Earth Objects

A study in late 2006 was sponsored by the Advanced Projects Office within NASA's Constellation Program to examine the feasibility of sending the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle to a near-Earth object (NEO). The ideal mission profile would involve two or three astronauts on a 90 to 180 day flight, which would include a 7 to 14 day stay for proximity operations at the target NEO. More recently U.S. President Obama stated on April 15, 2010 that the next goal for human spaceflight will be to send human beings to a near-Earth asteroid by 2025. Given this direction from the White House, NASA has been involved in studying various strategies for NEO exploration in order to follow U.S. space exploration policy. Prior to sending a human mission, a series of robotic spacecraft would be launched to reduce the risk to crew, and enhance the planning for the proximity and surface operations at the NEO. The human mission would ideally follow five or more years later. This mission would be the first human expedition to an interplanetary body beyond the Earth-Moon system and would prove useful for testing technologies required for human missions to Mars and other solar system destinations. Piloted missions to NEOs would undoubtedly provide a great deal of technical and engineering data on spacecraft operations for future human space exploration while conducting in-depth scientific investigations of these primitive objects. The main scientific advantage of sending piloted missions to NEOs would be the flexibility of the crew to perform tasks and to adapt to situations in real time. A crewed vehicle would be able to test several different sample collection techniques and target specific areas of interest via extra-vehicular activities (EVAs) more efficiently than robotic spacecraft. Such capabilities greatly enhance the scientific return from these missions to NEOs, destinations vital to understanding the evolution and thermal histories of primitive bodies during the formation of the early solar system. Data collected from these missions would help constrain the suite of materials possibly delivered to the early Earth, and would identify potential source regions from which NEOs originate. In addition, the resulting scientific investigations would refine designs for future extraterrestrial resource extraction and utilization, and assist in the development of hazard mitigation techniques for planetary defense.

Abell, Paul A.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Gateway at the Crossroads of Sustainable Lunar Exploration

The Gateway Program has made substantial design and development progress toward delivering a small, human-tended lunar space station purposefully designed to enable sustainable human exploration. The Program integrates partners and providers organizationally and physically as part of the spacecraft. The Power and Propulsion Element (PPE) and the Habitation and Logistics Outpost (HALO) with the European System Providing Refueling, Infrastructure and Telecommunications (ESPRIT) HALO Lunar Communications System (HLCS) have begun manufacturing the long lead components and will be launched first as a Co-Manifested Vehicle (CMV). The International Habitat (I-Hab) and ESPRIT Refueling Module (ERM) are passing life cycle milestones and include capabilities key for human crewmembers, such as windows, private sleeping quarters, and galley functions. The Logistics Module (LM) may provide a variety of services to Gateway depending on each mission. Requirements for the airlock have been developed, including requests that it support the integrated spacecraft with functions like augmenting heat rejection capabilities, and interfaces with new spacesuits will soon be developed in more detail. As a critical element of the architecture for solar system exploration, Gateway implements key tenets and features of international interoperability standards necessary to operate with multiple visiting vehicles and lunar assets, especially avionics, communications, and docking. Specific choices such as software architecture and standards, power standards, and robotics standards make it possible to utilize heritage or proprietary technology, yet still operate as one spacecraft. Engineering teams are evaluating many possible future missions to be executed at or utilizing the Gateway. The system architecture protects for an evolvable, extensible, and flexible capability. Designing systems robust enough to serve as a cornerstone of exploration activities for decades while remaining adaptable is not without its challenges. The detailed integration activities have revealed challenges and the need to mature key technologies. Refueling is a key component of achieving long life for Gateway, with unique operations to plan, safety concerns to mitigate, and risk reduction activities to conduct to better understand the system. The constraints and impacts of the design of visiting vehicles is also an important concern, with orientation constraints, control of attitude and orbit of the Gateway with docked visiting vehicles. Tradeoffs between robust maintainable systems and lightweight, compact systems must be balanced. Opportunities still exist for adding additional advanced capabilities to increase and extend Gateway’s benefits, such as intravehicular robotics, autonomous Guidance Navigation and Control (GN&C), and augmented control propulsion, heat rejection, or other services.

Molly S Anderson↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Gateway at the Crossroads of Sustainable Lunar Exploration

The Gateway Program has made substantial design and development progress toward delivering a small, human-tended lunar space station purposefully designed to enable sustainable human exploration. The Program integrates partners and providers organizationally and physically as part of the spacecraft. The Power and Propulsion Element (PPE) and the Habitation and Logistics Outpost (HALO) with the European System Providing Refueling, Infrastructure and Telecommunications (ESPRIT) HALO Lunar Communications System (HLCS) have begun manufacturing the long lead components and will be launched first as a Co-Manifested Vehicle (CMV). The International Habitat (I-Hab) and ESPRIT Refueling Module (ERM) are passing life cycle milestones and include capabilities key for human crewmembers, such as windows, private sleeping quarters, and galley functions. The Logistics Module (LM) may provide a variety of services to Gateway depending on each mission. Requirements for the airlock have been developed, including requests that it support the integrated spacecraft with functions like augmenting heat rejection capabilities, and interfaces with new spacesuits will soon be developed in more detail. As a critical element of the architecture for solar system exploration, Gateway implements key tenets and features of international interoperability standards necessary to operate with multiple visiting vehicles and lunar assets, especially avionics, communications, and docking. Specific choices such as software architecture and standards, power standards, and robotics standards make it possible to utilize heritage or proprietary technology, yet still operate as one spacecraft. Engineering teams are evaluating many possible future missions to be executed at or utilizing the Gateway. The system architecture protects for an evolvable, extensible, and flexible capability. Designing systems robust enough to serve as a cornerstone of exploration activities for decades while remaining adaptable is not without its challenges. The detailed integration activities have revealed challenges and the need to mature key technologies. Refueling is a key component of achieving long life for Gateway, with unique operations to plan, safety concerns to mitigate, and risk reduction activities to conduct to better understand the system. The constraints and impacts of the design of visiting vehicles is also an important concern, with orientation constraints, control of attitude and orbit of the Gateway with docked visiting vehicles. Tradeoffs between robust maintainable systems and lightweight, compact systems must be balanced. Opportunities still exist for adding additional advanced capabilities to increase and extend Gateway’s benefits, such as intravehicular robotics, autonomous Guidance Navigation and Control (GN&C), and augmented control propulsion, heat rejection, or other services.

Molly S Anderson↗

NASA NTRS2006

Autonomic Management of Space Missions

With NASA s renewed commitment to outer space exploration, greater emphasis is being placed on both human and robotic exploration. Even when humans are involved in the exploration, human tending of assets becomes cost-prohibitive or in many cases is simply not feasible. In addition, certain exploration missions will require spacecraft that will be capable of venturing where humans cannot be sent. Early space missions were operated manually from ground control centers with little or no automated operations. In the mid-l980s, the high costs of satellite operations prompted NASA, and others, to begin automating as many functions as possible. In our context, a system is autonomous if it can achieve its goals without human intervention. A number of more-or-less automated ground systems exist today, but work continues with the goal being to reduce operations costs to even lower levels. Cost reductions can be achieved in a number of areas. Ground control and spacecraft operations are two such areas where greater autonomy can reduce costs. As a consequence, autonomy is increasingly seen as a critical approach for robotic missions and for some aspects of manned missions. Although autonomy will be critical for the success of future missions (and indeed will enable certain kinds of science data gathering approaches), missions imbued with autonomy must also exhibit autonomic properties. Exploitation of autonomy alone, without emphasis on autonomic properties, will leave spacecraft vulnerable to the dangerous environments in which they must operate. Without autonomic properties, a spacecraft may be unable to recognize negative environmental effects on its components and subsystems, or may be unable to take any action to ameliorate the effects. The spacecraft, though operating autonomously, may then sustain a degradation of performance of components or subsystems, and consequently may have a reduced potential for achieving mission objectives. In extreme cases, lack of autonomic properties could leave the spacecraft unable to recover from faults. Ensuring that exploration spacecraft have autonomic properties will increase the survivability and therefore the likelihood of success of these missions. In fact, over time, as mission requirements increased demands on spacecraft capabilities and longevity, designers have gradually built more autonomicity into spacecraft. For example, a spacecraft in low-earth orbit may experience an out-of-bounds perturbation of its attitude (orientation) due to increased drag caused by increased atmospheric density at its altitude as a result of a sufficiently large solar flare. If the spacecraft was designed to recognize the excessive attitude perturbation, it could decide to protect itself by going into a safe-hold mode where its internal configuration and operation are altered to conserve power and its coarse attitude is adjusted to point its solar panels toward the Sun to maximize power generation. This is an example of a simple type of autonomic behavior that has actually occurred. Future mission concepts will be increasingly dependent on space system survivability enabled by more advanced types of autonomic behaviors

Hinchey, Michael G.↗

NASA NTRS2007

Multi-Sensor Testing for Automated Rendezvous and Docking Sensor Testing at the Flight Robotics Laboratory

The Exploration Systems Architecture defines missions that require rendezvous, proximity operations, and docking (RPOD) of two spacecraft both in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and in Low Lunar Orbit (LLO). Uncrewed spacecraft must perform automated and/or autonomous rendezvous, proximity operations and docking operations (commonly known as AR&D). The crewed missions may also perform rendezvous and docking operations and may require different levels of automation and/or autonomy, and must provide the crew with relative navigation information for manual piloting. The capabilities of the RPOD sensors are critical to the success of the Exploration Program. NASA has the responsibility to determine whether the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) contractor proposed relative navigation sensor suite will meet the requirements. The relatively low technology readiness level of AR&D relative navigation sensors has been carried as one of the CEV Project's top risks. The AR&D Sensor Technology Project seeks to reduce the risk by the testing and analysis of selected relative navigation sensor technologies through hardware-in-the-loop testing and simulation. These activities will provide the CEV Project information to assess the relative navigation sensors maturity as well as demonstrate test methods and capabilities. The first year of this project focused on a series of"pathfinder" testing tasks to develop the test plans, test facility requirements, trajectories, math model architecture, simulation platform, and processes that will be used to evaluate the Contractor-proposed sensors. Four candidate sensors were used in the first phase of the testing. The second phase of testing used four sensors simultaneously: two Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Advanced Video Guidance Sensors (AVGS), a laser-based video sensor that uses retroreflectors attached to the target vehicle, and two commercial laser range finders. The multi-sensor testing was conducted at MSFC's Flight Robotics Laboratory (FRL) using the FRL's 6-DOF gantry system, called the Dynamic Overhead Target System (DOTS). The target vehicle for "docking" in the laboratory was a mockup that was representative of the proposed CEV docking system, with added retroreflectors for the AVGS. The multi-sensor test configuration used 35 open-loop test trajectories covering three major objectives: (1) sensor characterization trajectories designed to test a wide range of performance parameters; (2) CEV-specific trajectories designed to test performance during CEV-like approach and departure profiles; and (3) sensor characterization tests designed for evaluating sensor performance under more extreme conditions as might be induced during a spacecraft failure or during contingency situations. This paper describes the test development, test facility, test preparations, test execution, and test results of the multi-sensor series of trajectories.

Brewster, L.↗

NASA NTRS2008

Multi-Sensor Testing for Automated Rendezvous and Docking Sensor Testing at the Flight Robotics Lab

The Exploration Systems Architecture defines missions that require rendezvous, proximity operations, and docking (RPOD) of two spacecraft both in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and in Low Lunar Orbit (LLO). Uncrewed spacecraft must perform automated and/or autonomous rendezvous, proximity operations and docking operations (commonly known as AR&D). The crewed missions may also perform rendezvous and docking operations and may require different levels of automation and/or autonomy, and must provide the crew with relative navigation information for manual piloting. The capabilities of the RPOD sensors are critical to the success ofthe Exploration Program. NASA has the responsibility to determine whether the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) contractor-proposed relative navigation sensor suite will meet the requirements. The relatively low technology readiness level of AR&D relative navigation sensors has been carried as one of the CEV Project's top risks. The AR&D Sensor Technology Project seeks to reduce the risk by the testing and analysis of selected relative navigation sensor technologies through hardware-in-the-Ioop testing and simulation. These activities will provide the CEV Project information to assess the relative navigation sensors maturity as well as demonstrate test methods and capabilities. The first year of this project focused on a series of "pathfinder" testing tasks to develop the test plans, test facility requirements, trajectories, math model architecture, simulation platform, and processes that will be used to evaluate the Contractor-proposed sensors. Four candidate sensors were used in the first phase of the testing. The second phase of testing used four sensors simultaneously: two Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Advanced Video Guidance Sensors (AVGS), a laser-based video sensor that uses retroreflectors attached to the target vehicle, and two commercial laser range finders. The multi-sensor testing was conducted at MSFC's Flight Robotics Laboratory (FRL) using the FRL's 6-DOF gantry system, called the Dynamic Overhead Target System (DOTS). The target vehicle for "docking" in the laboratory was a mockup that was representative of the proposed CEV docking system, with added retroreflectors for the AVGS.' The multi-sensor test configuration used 35 open-loop test trajectories covering three major objectives: (l) sensor characterization trajectories designed to test a wide range of performance parameters; (2) CEV-specific trajectories designed to test performance during CEV-like approach and departure profiles; and (3) sensor characterization tests designed for evaluating sensor performance under more extreme conditions as might be induced during a spacecraft failure or during contingency situations. This paper describes the test development, test facility, test preparations, test execution, and test results of the multisensor series oftrajectories

Brewster, Linda L.↗

NASA NTRS2018

EVA Swab Tool to Support Planetary Protection and Astrobiology Evaluations

When we send humans to search for life on other planets, we'll need to know what we brought with us versus what may already be there. To ensure our crewed systems meet planetary protection requirements-and to protect our science from human contamination-we'll need to assess whether microorganisms may be leaking or venting from our spacecraft. Microbial sample collection outside of a pressurized spacecraft is complicated by temperature extremes, low pressures that preclude the use of laboratory standard (wetted) swabs, and operation either in bulky spacesuits or with robotic assistance. Engineers at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) recently developed a swab kit for use in collecting microbial samples from the external surfaces of crewed spacecraft, including spacesuits. The Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Swab Kit consists of a single swab tool handle and an eight-canister sample caddy. The design team minimized development cost by re-purposing a heritage Space Shuttle tile repair handle that was designed to quickly snap into different tool attachments by engaging a mating device in each attachment. This allowed the tool handle to snap onto a fresh swab attachment much like popular shaving razor handles can snap onto a disposable blade cartridge. To disengage the handle from a swab, the user performs two independent functions, which can be done with a single hand. This dual operation mitigates the risk that a swab will be inadvertently released and lost in microgravity. Each swab attachment is fitted with commercially available foam swab tips, vendor-certified to be sterile for Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA). A microbial filter installed in the bottom of each sample container allows the container to outgas and repressurize without introducing microbial contaminants to internal void spaces. Extensive ground testing, post-test handling, and sample analysis confirmed the design is able to maintain sterile conditions as the canister moves between various pressure environments. To further minimize cost, the design team acquired extensive ground test experience in a relevant flight environment by piggy-backing onto suited crew training runs. These training runs allowed the project to validate tool interfaces with pressurized EVA gloves and collect user feedback on the tool design and function, as well as characterize baseline microbial data for different types of spacesuits. In general, test subjects found the EVA Swab Kit relatively straightforward to operate, but identified a number of design improvements that will be incorporated into the final design. Although originally intended to help characterize human forward contaminants, this tool has other potential applications, such as for collecting and preserving space-exposed materials to support astrobiology experiments.

Rucker, Michelle A.↗

NASA NTRS2013

Precursor Asteroid Missions and Synergies to Human Exploration of Phobos and Deimos

U.S. President Obama stated on April 15, 2010 that the next goal for human spaceflight will be to send human beings to a near-Earth asteroid by 2025 and then on to the Martian system in the 2030s. Given this direction from the White House, NASA has been involved in studying various strategies for near-Earth object (NEO) exploration in order to follow U.S. space exploration policy. These missions would be the first human expeditions to interplanetary bodies beyond the Earth-Moon system and would prove useful for testing technologies required for human missions to Mars and its moons, as well as other Solar System destinations. Robotic precursor missions to NEOs would undoubtedly provide a great deal of technical and engineering data on spacecraft operations for future human space exploration while conducting in-depth scientific investigations of these primitive objects. In addition, the resulting scientific investigations would refine designs for future extraterrestrial resource extraction and utilization, which may play a vital role in leveraging potential resources from the Martian moons that in turn could enable robotic and human exploration of Mars.

Abell, Paul↗

NASA NTRS2018

EVA Swab Tool to Support Planetary Protection and Astrobiology Evaluations

When we send humans to search for life on other planets, we'll need to know what we brought with us versus what may already be there. To ensure our crewed systems meet planetary protection requirements-and to protect our science from human contamination-we'll need to assess whether microorganisms may be leaking or venting from our spacecraft. Microbial sample collection outside of a pressurized spacecraft is complicated by temperature extremes, low pressures that preclude the use of laboratory standard (wetted) swabs, and operation either in bulky spacesuits or with robotic assistance. A team at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) recently developed a swab kit for use in collecting microbial samples from the external surfaces of crewed spacecraft, including spacesuits. The Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Swab Kit consists of a single swab tool handle and an eight-canister sample caddy. The design team minimized development cost by re-purposing a heritage Space Shuttle tile repair handle that was designed to quickly snap into different tool attachments by engaging a mating device in each end effector. This allowed the tool handle to snap onto a fresh swab end effector much like popular shaving razor handles can snap onto a disposable blade cartridge. To disengage the handle from a swab, the user performs two independent functions, which can be done with a single hand. This dual operation mitigates the risk that a swab will be inadvertently released and lost in microgravity. Each swab end effector is fitted with commercially available foam swab tips, vendor-certified to be sterile for Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA). A microbial filter installed in the bottom of each sample container allows the container to outgas and re-pressurize without introducing microbial contaminants to internal void spaces. Extensive ground testing, post-test handling, and sample analysis confirmed the design is able to maintain sterile conditions as the canister moves between various pressure environments. To further minimize cost, the design team acquired extensive ground test experience in a relevant flight environment by piggy-backing onto suited crew training runs. These training runs allowed the project to validate tool interfaces with pressurized EVA gloves and collect user feedback on the tool design and function, as well as characterize baseline microbial data for different types of spacesuits. In general, test subjects found the EVA Swab Kit relatively straightforward to operate, but identified a number of design improvements that will be incorporated into the final design. Although originally intended to help characterize human forward contaminants, this tool has other potential applications, such as for collecting and preserving space-exposed materials to support astrobiology experiments.

Rucker, Michelle A.↗

NASA NTRS2018

EVA Swab Tool to Support Planetary Protection and Astrobiology Evaluations

When we send humans to search for life on other planets, we'll need to know what we brought with us versus what may already be there. To ensure our crewed systems meet planetary protection requirements?and to protect our science from human contamination?we'll need to assess whether microorganisms may be leaking or venting from our spacecraft. Microbial sample collection outside of a pressurized spacecraft is complicated by temperature extremes, low pressures that preclude the use of laboratory standard (wetted) swabs, and operation either in bulky spacesuits or with robotic assistance. A team at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) recently developed a swab kit for use in collecting microbial samples from the external surfaces of crewed spacecraft, including spacesuits. The Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Swab Kit consists of a single swab tool handle and an eight-canister sample caddy. The design team minimized development cost by re-purposing a heritage Space Shuttle tile repair handle that was designed to quickly snap into different tool attachments by engaging a mating device in each end effector. This allowed the tool handle to snap onto a fresh swab end effector much like popular shaving razor handles can snap onto a disposable blade cartridge. To disengage the handle from a swab, the user performs two independent functions, which can be done with a single hand. This dual operation mitigates the risk that a swab will be inadvertently released and lost in microgravity. Each swab end effector is fitted with commercially available foam swab tips, vendor-certified to be sterile for Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA). A microbial filter installed in the bottom of each sample container allows the container to outgas and re-pressurize without introducing microbial contaminants to internal void spaces. Extensive ground testing, post-test handling, and sample analysis confirmed the design is able to maintain sterile conditions as the canister moves between various pressure environments. To further minimize cost, the design team acquired extensive ground test experience in a relevant flight environment by piggy-backing onto suited crew training runs. These training runs allowed the project to validate tool interfaces with pressurized EVA gloves and collect user feedback on the tool design and function, as well as characterize baseline microbial data for different types of spacesuits. In general, test subjects found the EVA Swab Kit relatively straightforward to operate, but identified a number of design improvements that will be incorporated into the final design. Although originally intended to help characterize human forward contaminants, this tool has other potential applications, such as for collecting and preserving space-exposed materials to support astrobiology experiments.

planetary protection↗

NASA NTRS1990

A robot end effector exchange mechanism for space applications

Efficient robot operation requires the use of specialized end effectors or tools for tasks. In spacecraft applications, the microgravity environment precludes the use of gravitational forces to retain the tools in holding fixture. As a result of this, a retention mechanism which forms a part of the tool storage container is required. A unique approach to this problem has resulted in the development of an end effector exchange mechanism that meets the requirements for spaceflight applications while avoiding the complexity usually involved. This mechanism uses multiple latching cams both on the manipulator and in the tool storage container, combined with a system of catch rings to provide retention in both locations and the required failure tolerance. Because of the cam configuration the mechanism operates passively, requiring no electrical commands except those needed to move the manipulator into position. Similarly, it inherently provides interlocks to prevent the release of one cam before its opposite number is engaged.

Gorin, Barney F.↗

NASA NTRS1992

Force-reflection and shared compliant control in operating telemanipulators with time delay

The performance of an advanced telemanipulation system in the presence of a wide range of time delays between a master control station and a slave robot is quantified. The contemplated applications include multiple satellite links to LEO, geosynchronous operation, spacecraft local area networks, and general-purpose computer-based short-distance designs. The results of high-precision peg-in-hole tasks performed by six test operators indicate that task performance decreased linearly with introduced time delays for both kinesthetic force feedback (KFF) and shared compliant control (SCC). The rate of this decrease was substantially improved with SCC compared to KFF. Task performance at delays above 1 s was not possible using KFF. SCC enabled task performance for such delays, which are realistic values for ground-controlled remote manipulation of telerobots in space.

Kim, Won S.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Multi-Functional, Two-Chamber Airlock Node for a Common Habitat Architecture

An airlock is generally considered a necessity for any large, habitable spacecraft. While suitports, docked rovers, and external robotics can reduce the need for airlock operations, at some point it is necessary to move both crew and equipment from a habitat interior to the exterior environment. The Common Habitat is a large, long-duration habitat that uses the Space Launch System (SLS) Core Stage Liquid Oxygen tank as the primary structure (similar to Skylab) and has an internal architecture compatible with microgravity, lunar gravity, and Mars gravity, such that identical versions of the same design can be used in all three environments. It needs an airlock that is similarly appropriate for both surface and microgravity environments. After a brief survey of prior airlocks, the two-chamber node airlock concept applied to the Common Habitat architecture is described. This includes benefits of the dual chamber and node approaches, dimensions, hatches and docking ports, utilities connections, hatch covers, suit storage, EVA stowage, subsystems, and gravity-specific external attachments. Additionally, the functions of each chamber and reconfiguration capabilities are explained. Finally, conclusions and follow-on work are discussed.

Robert L Howard↗

NASA NTRS2014

Evolution of the Scope and Capabilities of Uplink Support Software for Mars Surface Operations

In January of 2004 both of the Mars Exploration Rover spacecraft landed safely, initiating daily surface operations at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory for what was anticipated to be approximately three months of mobile exploration. The longevity of this mission, still ongoing after ten years, has provided not only a tremendous return of scientific data but also the opportunity to refine and improve the methodology by which robotic Mars surface missions are commanded. Since the landing of the Mars Science Laboratory spacecraft in August of 2012, this methodology has been successfully applied to operate a Martian rover which is both similar to, and quite different from, its predecessors. For MER and MSL, daily uplink operations can be most broadly viewed as converting the combined interests of both the science and engineering teams into a spacecraft-safe set of transmittable command files. In order to accomplish these ends a discrete set of mission-critical software tools were developed which not only allowed for conformation to established JPL standards and practices but also enabled innovative technologies specific to each mission. Although these primary programs provided the requisite capabilities for meeting the high-level goals of each distinct phase of the uplink process, there was little in the way of secondary software to support the smooth flow of data from one phase to the next. In order to address this shortcoming a suite of small software tools was developed to aid in phase transitions, as well as to automate some of the more laborious and error-prone aspects of uplink operations. This paper describes the evolution of this software suite, from its initial attempts to merely shorten the duration of the operator's shift, to its current role as an indispensable tool enforcing workflow of the uplink operations process and agilely responding to the new and unexpected challenges of missions which can, and have, lasted many years longer than originally anticipated.

CoUGAR↗

NASA NTRS2007

Automated Rendezvous and Docking Sensor Testing at the Flight Robotics Laboratory

The Exploration Systems Architecture defines missions that require rendezvous, proximity operations, and docking (RPOD) of two spacecraft both in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and in Low Lunar Orbit (LLO). Uncrewed spacecraft must perform automated and/or autonomous rendezvous, proximity operations and docking operations (commonly known as Automated Rendezvous and Docking, AR&D). The crewed versions may also perform AR&D, possibly with a different level of automation and/or autonomy, and must also provide the crew with relative navigation information for manual piloting. The capabilities of the RPOD sensors are critical to the success of the Exploration Program. NASA has the responsibility to determine whether the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) contractor-proposed relative navigation sensor suite will meet the CEV requirements. The relatively low technology readiness of relative navigation sensors for AR&D has been carried as one of the CEV Projects top risks. The AR&D Sensor Technology Project seeks to reduce this risk by increasing technology maturation of selected relative navigation sensor technologies through testing and simulation, and to allow the CEV Project to assess the relative navigation sensors.

Mitchell, J.↗